Ok ladies I knew I could get help here! H and I do not have c with oc, he does pay cs, and has been ordered to pay back cs for the nine months he supposedly didn't know about oc. The court ordered documents regarding visitation and cs, state he is to pay x amount of cs per month, plus x amount of money by December 31 of each year for 5 years until back cs is paid for. This will be our third year. Previously he had the last two years in the form of a savings bond made out to oc, and his name was on the bottom as a signer. Ow cannot sign these and cash them. She has been trying for several months to get H to sign them. Recently she bought a new car and went way upside down with a huge note, it was conviently stolen, now I think she needs a new car, and it's christmas and we think she just watns the money for herself. H said he would sign them if she put them toward a college program, she said she wanted it in an open saving acct, he said no b/c the money was for oc., her reply, no it's for us! as in her and oc. HA! Anyway we live in TX yesterday she called and said she went to the attorney general's office, and they told her that a savings bond was not a form of payment and they could garnish his wages even more to collect all of back cs, asap. My questionis can they do this if he has a court ordered document stating the payments are to be arranged yearly? The montlhy cs is taken directly form his check each month and the back cs has been paid by DEc 15 every year, he has held up his obligation, can they take more? She said all she had to do was sign a paper and they would do it. So she is holding htis over his head! By the way he had her signa piece of paper in her handwriting stating she accepted the savings bond as form of back cs. Does anyone know of a way, if not savings bond, that we can prevent her from using the money to by herself items?
Yelo

yel,
she can't do it.
as long as he is meeting the court order, she can yell and kick her feet all she wants. nada for her.

As a matter of fact, you can have harassment charges brought up on her.

The courts decide when, how much, without her influence at all.

Let her kick and scream.

Have you talked to an attorney to make sure you're paying the appropriate amount ?

I don't have OC, but I have children, and am pretty familiar with the whole CS thing.

On another note, do not rely on any document she signs.

They don't hold much water in the courts.

The arrangements for his back child support are handled through the court. PERIOD. Not through her.

Don't deal with her. Make her go through the courts, they will get tired of her soon enough.

Think of it this way, the contract of cs is a legal contract with the family court.

If you get into an accident, and you are ticketed for failure to yield the right of way, do you pay the fine to the driver of the other car ?

Same principal applies. Stop letting her think she has all this control.

She'll hate the fact she isn't bothering you, and she isn't holding anything over anyone's head.

In Texas, there is a form that can be signed in the CSO office and notarized by them if she wants to give the non custodial parent credit for additional payments. I have done this several times throughout the year.

As far as the saving bonds, the court probably won't allow this because child support is paid to the custodial parent so that the parent can use that money to provide clothing, housing and other items for the child AT THAT TIME. With a saving bond, you usually can't cash it in right then and there so its not viewed as available cash which is what child support is supposed to be used for.

Whose idea was it to give a savings bond?

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FA/content/htm/fa.005.00.000154.00.htm#154.001.00

§ 154.003. MANNER OF PAYMENT. The court may order that
child support be paid by:
(1) periodic payments;
(2) a lump-sum payment;
(3) an annuity purchase;
(4) the setting aside of property to be administered
for the support of the child as specified in the order; or
(5) any combination of periodic payments, lump-sum
payments, annuity purchases, or setting aside of property.

Added by Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 20, § 1, eff. April 20, 1995.

Just did some quick research and there is another issue with the savings bond because he made it out to the OC, then this will probably be viewed as a "gift" to the OC and not as child support to the OW.

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/child/qa_ncp.shtml

What if I directly pay for things that my child needs, such as diapers, instead of paying the money through the child support agency as required by the court order?

It is unlikely that any payments other than those required by the court will count as payment of child support. If you give the child or the other parent something directly, you will still owe the full amount of court-ordered child support. The court will likely consider what you give to the custodial parent to be a gift to the child.

Perhaps its best to contact your lawyer and explain that you didn't quite understand that the savings bond wouldn't be considered as a payment and see if he can't reason with the OW. That is probably your best shot.

I agree with Stormy. Although it's a nice thing your doing for oc with the savings bond. Cs is for the help with living expenses for oc. Which as much as you see it's not fair is housing, clothing, food, and even her car. As long as she is providing for the child she can do what she wants with the money she gives you. It took me awhile to get this, but before I started getting cs from xmm I felt bad because I was using money from my other kids cs to pay for her needs. It took me awhile to figure out okay.....this is family budget and we are a family and we have to have this and this and this. Which it's more important to provide food for oc than put the kids in dance right now. She needs a car to go to work and take kids to doctor etc. I'm not saying that it's your place to give her MORE money for this, but that what she spends it on is of no concern of yours as long as the oc is being taken care of correctly and he's not doing without. The savings bond is not cs. It's just that a savings bond. I agree with Storm again that you need to contact your attorney and see if you can grab those savings bond and have husband sign them and give her a cashiers check for them. If you think of it this way.......I think it's a great idea to think of oc's future. But as a single mother think of it this way.......she is providing for that child now....not in the future. If you guys are concerned about his future then get the savings bonds for him but keep them yourself until he turns 18 and give them directly to him not her. The back cs your paying on that oc she has already paid out. You are basically paying her back. I know it does not seem fair, but it's not fair all the way around. Hopefully your attorney can intersep with any action she plans on doing and she will be fair as well. That is what is best and least expensive. It sounds to me that you were thinking of oc with the savings bond and all. Good luck to you.

Ok guys, I knew I could count on you for info. Here's the scoop, she wants H to sign the savings bonds. H thought he was doing well by doing this, thanks for hte info whoever provided the tx oag info, we do have a paper that says she accepts this in the form of back cs. He is planning on signing or cashing them in himdelf on Monday, how do we prevent her from saying we didn't pay her each year if we give her a lump sum Monday? We don't have an attorney, whoever said it is her money to do what she wants b/c it was what she missed in the beginning, you are right. Thanks again.
Yelo

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">But as a single mother think of it this way.......she is providing for that child now....not in the future </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">And as with any other woman, be it OW or not, if your a single mother, you should be concerned how to care for your own child now. If you can't provide your child's basic needs, single or not, one probably shouldn't having said child.

Sore subject, sorry. The whole CS thing burns me up. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Mad]" src="images/icons/mad.gif" />

Yelodazee, do not give her cash. Either get a cashier's check or money order and make it out to her. ALSO invest in a receipt book as a backup in which both of you will sign regarding the receipt of the money.

Or in the future, see if you could make arrangements to do a wire transfer directly into her bank account so that a third party (the bank) will have an electronic trail of the transaction.

If you can't provide your child's basic needs, single or not, one probably shouldn't having said child.

Betrayed, I'm not really familiar with your story. But even the most well off parents or single parent can go through a time period in which finances are disrupted and providing for the children becomes even harder. Most people aren't financially secure their whole lives. Based on that, then I suppose logically most of us would never be ready to have kids until we were close to retirement age. I mean, there have been several stories in the news about women in their late 50's having babies.

I'm just rambling but I suppose you are upset with your H having to pay CS for an OC.

Stormy,
Actually my H doesn't have an OC. That's why the conversation isn't very appropriate for this board, so I limit myself to cs advice.


I was a single mother for 10 years. Didn't start off that way, was married. Then domestic violence over a period of a couple years left me divorced with a 3 year old and a 9 month old. I guess you could say I was pretty unstable financially, I was making barely over minimum wage.

It was that point in life that I took my butt back to college, I knew I'd have to push a little harder, to support them alone. Why should my children go without in life because of a choice I made ?

I didn't get child support until 3 years ago. My daughter was 15, and needing braces. I asked my xH for $300, which was 50% of my out of pocket expense. He flatly said no. So I took him to court, and got $75 dollars a week. Incidently, the judge and XH attorney asked me what I wanted by way of "back cs".... guess what my request was....the $300 I originally asked for.... it was so ordered.

Some one could argue that not seeking child support was something I was robbing my children of, something they were entitled to. I just didn't see it that way.

There's a profound difference between being financially secure, and being able to provide basic needs for your child. I'm just a firm believer in the fact if one is not prepared to provide those needs, no matter what life throws at them, they shouldn't have children to begin with.

My mother died @ 46, leaving my dad with my sister who was 16, and my brother who had just turned 13, there was no life insurance, and their survivor benefits were like $125 a month.. until they turned 19. There was no cs for my dad to seek...he had to do what he had to do.

Maybe this is just the way I was raised, my belief system, which may be unlike the norm. I see a lot of men abused by the CS system. Again, nobody personal, not my dad, brothers, husband, friends, coworkers, neighbors, that sort of thing....just an observation on my part of course.

betryatedinjersery: I see what your saying, but as you well know life throws us curve balls. When I said that I was saying it from a legal stand point. Until I started receiving my cs I was provding for my children all of them. And yes now that I'm getting cs is providing more for my child. It's her right not mine. she reaps the benifits from it not me. It makes life easier for me with her though and helps pay for her daycare and other things she demands in life. I think it's great that you were able to do what you did and especially get out of the abusive relationship and I'm sure it was some hard times at first but you got where you needed to go it sounds like it. You would be a great advocat to let people who are in your past situation know that YES IT CAN BE DONE!!!! You don't have to put up with that kids or no kids. YES IT DOES GET BETTER. I have a hard seeing someone just take it when there is so much help out there now and places to go. No one should have to live like that.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by yelodazee:
<strong> Ok guys, I knew I could count on you for info. Here's the scoop, she wants H to sign the savings bonds. H thought he was doing well by doing this, thanks for hte info whoever provided the tx oag info, we do have a paper that says she accepts this in the form of back cs. He is planning on signing or cashing them in himdelf on Monday, how do we prevent her from saying we didn't pay her each year if we give her a lump sum Monday? We don't have an attorney, whoever said it is her money to do what she wants b/c it was what she missed in the beginning, you are right. Thanks again.
Yelo </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Do NOT give her cash. Give her a check or something that says in writing ON IT that it is towards back support and keep copies of EVERYTHING. That way if she tries to say that it never happened, or she didn't get it - you have proof. Document... document... document...

And as much as it may burn you to see her use that on a car or whatever - it's true - as long as the child's basic needs are being met, to use that towards home, food, car to drive around in - it all indirectly benefits the child. If she was using it for manicures, etc. then I'd find another way to go around it - but as long as it's directly or indirectly used towards the child you really can't say anything.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by betrayedinjersey:
<strong> </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">And as with any other woman, be it OW or not, if your a single mother, you should be concerned how to care for your own child now. If you can't provide your child's basic needs, single or not, one probably shouldn't having said child.

Sore subject, sorry. The whole CS thing burns me up. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Mad]" src="images/icons/mad.gif" /> </strong>[/QUOTE]


So, let me get this straight (and I'll use JT as an example).

JT just D her husband and won about $2300 per month in CS. (If I remember correctly)
Because she is a single mother now, she should give up her CS and raise her children without their father's help because you did it? She needs to provide a home, clothing, food, entertainment, medical, child care, etc. all on her own, even though their father helped create the children? Since JT chose to be a single mom by D her H, she needs to do it all without CS because you did it that way? OR should she give up her "said" children for adoption because she can't afford to do it on her own? (according to you she shouldn't have her children if she can't do it on her own)


Is it so terrible that the childrens' father financially helps provide these things that they deserve?

JT is getting the CS she deserves in order to raise her children WITHOUT STRUGGLING. She can continue living to her already accustomed arrangement/standards and she can provide for her children. Their father, through CS, is helping to provide for the children he created with her.


What exactly "burns you up" about Child Support???

That's nice that you did it all on your own and let a man walk away from his obligation. Not all women are willing to let a man walk away from their responsibility. It's the child's right to be supported by both people who created them.


And Yelodazee,
When your H gives OW the check, please make the transaction through an attorney or court, otherwise it may also be considered a gift like the savings bonds will be.
Always make payments through the court or an attorney.

<small>[ December 04, 2004, 05:27 PM: Message edited by: CheerfulLittleOne ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> And as much as it may burn you to see her use that on a car or whatever - it's true - as long as the child's basic needs are being met, to use that towards home, food, car to drive around in - it all indirectly benefits the child. If she was using it for manicures, etc. then I'd find another way to go around it - but as long as it's directly or indirectly used towards the child you really can't say anything. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I was about to say the same thing. She can use that money for any living expenses- including a car payment.

<small>[ December 04, 2004, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: CheerfulLittleOne ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> getting the CS she deserves </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Is CS a reward ?
Is CS something you work for ?
Is CS a merit badge for higher achievement ?

And what happens to the lifestyle to which everyone has grown accustomed to living if the XH loses him income next week ?

If you can tell me what happens to the $2300 a month if XH is downsized, loses him job, loses his income period......NOW WHAT ?

Then this statement, was really unnecessary,

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">OR should she give up her "said" chilren for adoption because she can't afford to do it on her own? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">And I for one have never advocated that a custodial parent (mother OR father) should not receive child support, but what I DO have a problem with, is the women of the world...and believe me they're OUT there..... that use the threat of child support, returning to court to get more money as a manipulative weapon...AND THAT'S WHAT BURNS ME UP.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">And do you really think she should give the $2300 to her children to spend on whatever they want that month because CS is "For The Child" or do you think this goes to help pay for the roof they sleep under, the heat that warms their house, the food that they eat, the clothes that they wear, the medical care they need and to help pay for the car that drives them to and from school? Is it so terrible that the childrens' father financially helps provide these things that they deserve?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I never said one way or another what CS should or shouldn't be spent on, you must be confusing me with someone else posting.

You're taking something I said and applying it universally across the board, and I think that's a bit unfair don't you think ?

In this specific case, we're talking about an OW, who conceived a child with a MM, and continues to muscle him in every way she can to get more money out of him. He's NOT an ATM. THAT is what burns me up.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by betrayedinjersey:
And as with any other woman,<strong>be it OW or not</strong> , if your a single mother, you should be concerned how to care for your own child now. <strong>If you can't provide your child's basic needs, single or not, one probably shouldn't having said child</strong>
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"><img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

<small>[ December 04, 2004, 06:33 PM: Message edited by: CheerfulLittleOne ]</small>

cheerful,

I know this is probably a sore subject for you....but because you used JT as an example, I'd like to bring up something that I think is applicable. What is the difference between CS for children born of a marriage, and OC born illegitimately? In some ways.....nothing. They are both beautiful and innocent and worthy as precious human souls. They both may have the same father. They both deserve to be loved and provided for. CS can be used to directly(food clothing water) or indirectly (school, transportation etc) to support that child as their custodial parent sees fit, but there IS a difference (at least financially). Let me explain.

In a marriage...the assets of that union are earned jointlythrough time and energy (not so in an affair) whether one parent stays at home or not. All of the things that were accumulated both in terms of debt and earnings are a shared in most states.

That may not seem like much of a distinction to you, however, the children of that marriage share in the combined finances of that marriage and like it or not...the OC has only ONE parent in the marriage who has earned income that should be assigned in part to the OC. Even a sahm who is married....is entitled to half of the marital assets because she supports the H, promotes his career, raises the children of the marriage, cares for him, etc. An OP is peripherially and questionably supportive......legally is entitled to nothing of those assets...except CS for any child born of that union. I'm only describing the laws...I did write them and mean no insult.

No matter how much anyone might wish that the financial rights be "equal" for all children of the world and as much as the courts can provide equal treatment for children they try...they simply aren't treated equally in reality...it would be unfair if they were because BOTH husband and wife EARN the finances that provide for their family in one way or another and only one member of that union engages in an affair. How has the OW "earned" the marital assets? Having a child doesn't entitle an OP to any more than the specific portion of one half of the father's assets that is equally assigned to any child of his....and NONE of the wife's assets.

One of the reasons marriage exists at ALL is to provide safety and security for children...when children are born outside of that legal protection, they suffer...and they suffer because of the selfish decisions made by both OP and WP. It is one of the tragedies of this situation.

You want to maintain the same rights for your child under the law that the children of a marriage enjoy.....and sadly...it simply doesn't happen. It doesn't happen because we created a society that sanctioned marriage as a legal form of child protection, and your child was selfishly concieved outside of that umbrella. That makes your child no less precious, no less worthy, just simply compromised by your decisions and the MM who broke his marriage vows to sleep with you.

it all indirectly benefits the child. If she was using it for manicures, etc. then I'd find another way to go around it - but as long as it's directly or indirectly used towards the child you really can't say anything.

Until they are finished paying off the arrears, the OW can use the money given to her on really anything including manicures. Since technically she has already paid their part and the are reimbursing her the arrears, she can easily say that this is the money should would have originally used for this purpose had she not to double up into the reimbursement.

My ex tried to accuse me of this and he's the one that still owes me almost $7,000 in arrears. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Mad]" src="images/icons/mad.gif" />

When your H gives OW the check, please make the transaction through an attorney or court, otherwise it may also be considered a gift like the savings bonds will be.

They would probably have to go back to court to get that added to the agreement. It probably already states that the arrears are to be given directly to her which is why they were already doing it this way. Some people chose not to go through an attorney or the AG here which when they would definitely garnish his wages.

Both my exs have to directly reimburse me for medical expenses and they hate it. But if its added to the agreement and taken out of their check, if they get behind then interest could be added as well. So they both chose not to go this route.