What do think????

In article , The Dave© says...

P.Fritz wrote:
It can be modified, but at least not retroactively. In theory, of
course.

Of course they can raise it retroactrively, just never decrease it
:-)

Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is done,
it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively. For
example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo, the CP
can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002, but the
judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional money prior to
the modification request, prior to July 2002. In general
circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by judge's
decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.
=====
=====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)

In article , The Dave© says...

P.Fritz wrote:
It can be modified, but at least not retroactively. In theory, of
course.

Of course they can raise it retroactrively, just never decrease it
:-)

Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is done,
it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively. For
example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo, the CP
can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002, but the
judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional money prior to
the modification request, prior to July 2002. In general
circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by judge's
decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.
=====
=====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)

In article , The Dave© says...

P.Fritz wrote:
It can be modified, but at least not retroactively. In theory, of
course.

Of course they can raise it retroactrively, just never decrease it
:-)

Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is done,
it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively. For
example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo, the CP
can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002, but the
judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional money prior to
the modification request, prior to July 2002. In general
circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by judge's
decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.
=====
=====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

In article , The Dave© says...

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.
====
And I can't remember how many times I've told NCPs that "notorized" does not a
formal agreement make. The judge can take it or leave it, usually depending on
the mood he/she is in. A lot of NCPs have fallen into this trap so it bears
mentioning again. So we did :-)
====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)

In article , The Dave© says...

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.
====
And I can't remember how many times I've told NCPs that "notorized" does not a
formal agreement make. The judge can take it or leave it, usually depending on
the mood he/she is in. A lot of NCPs have fallen into this trap so it bears
mentioning again. So we did :-)
====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)

In article , The Dave© says...

Gini52 wrote:
Ok, now wait. I was under the impression that once an order is
done, it can be modified later, but not increased retroactively.
For example, if an order is established in June 1995 for $200/mo,
the CP can go back and ask for an increase to $350/mo in July 2002,
but the judge cannot order a retroactive increase for additional
money prior to the modification request, prior to July 2002. In
general circumstances, not instances of fraud, or withholding income
information, etc.
=====
Generally true--However, the key is that the "first" order is by
judge's decree--not an agreement between parents, even if notorized.

Right. That's what I was trying to get at. It need's to be "judge
approved", not 'informal' between the two parties.
====
And I can't remember how many times I've told NCPs that "notorized" does not a
formal agreement make. The judge can take it or leave it, usually depending on
the mood he/she is in. A lot of NCPs have fallen into this trap so it bears
mentioning again. So we did :-)
====

--
Always borrow money from a pessimist, he doesn't expect to be paid back.
~Author Unknown

(PLEASE NOTE: I never bottom-sign my posts.
Check Headers to Verify the Authenticity of This Post)