U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-15-2014, 02:42 PM
 
18 posts, read 65,814 times
Reputation: 16

Advertisements

Retired Colonel Jerry Shiles said, “This is really harmful to the family. He said it tells injured service members they do not have a duty to care for their children. “To me, they’re anti-family,” Shiles said of SBs 917 and 528.

It appears Colonel Shiles believes a disabled veteran, having no child support issues has to be subject to an unfair court rulings. As is applied by state court judges ruling in violation of “separation of powers” doctrine. It does not have to be a child support issue, but state courts will, when they run into trouble, bring in, Rose v Rose. This issue is not about anti-family, it’s about the law.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2015, 08:07 AM
 
18 posts, read 65,814 times
Reputation: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
But I do not see why a veteran receiving disability payments from the VA should be exempt
Observance to law and our disabled veterans.

Oregon and the United States Supreme Court observance to law and our disabled veterans.

Oregon’s statutes clearly offer many references, in compliance, observance, and their adherence to both state and federal law and protecting veterans benefits.

18.600 Definitions. As used in ORS 18.600 to 18.850:
(6) “Federal benefit payment” means:
(b) A benefit payment from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs that is protected under 38 U.S.C. 5301(a);

34 § 411.837¹ Compliance with state and federal laws required
10 § 409.040¹ Federal law supersedes state law.
26 § 279A.030¹ Federal law prevails in case of conflict

ORS 18.345 Exempt personal property generally. (1) All property, including franchises, or rights or interest therein, of the judgment debtor, shall be liable to an execution, except as provided in this section and in other statutes granting exemptions from execution. The following property, or rights or interest therein of the judgment debtor, except as provided in ORS 18.305, shall be exempt from execution:
(m) Veterans’ benefits and loans.
(ORS 18.305 [Property not exempt from execution for purchase price])

ORS 18.845 Notice of exemptions form; instructions for challenge to garnishment.
State and federal law specify that certain property may not be taken.
(21) Veterans’ benefits and loans.
(22) Medical assistance benefits.
YOU MAY USE THE CHALLENGE TO GARNISHMENT FORM ONLY FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
(1) To claim such exemptions from garnishment as are permitted by law.

Compliance to federal law starts here. 38 USC 5301 Nonassignability and exempt status of benefits, is the Oregon state and federal protection of the disabled veteran’s VA disability compensation. “(a)(1) shall not be assignable… shall be exempt from taxation, .. creditors, ..attachment, levy, or seizure by or under any legal or equitable process whatever, either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.”

Yet, Oregon courts, rather than comply with State or federal law (38 USC 5301) in protecting veterans benefits, offer in response, Landis v Landis, Oregon 6/1/2005, “.. benefits are divisible … because there is no conflict.” The United States Supreme Court concurs. Disabled veterans need not apply!

After costly legal expense, it wasn’t disabled Air Force veteran Oregon resident Peter James Barclay, or the thousands of other disabled veterans that received any benefit of these state and federal laws, involved in protecting VA disability compensation from State court ordered spousal support, and then, adding insult, denied his Constitution rights by Oregon’s State Supreme Court. And further, the unforgivable refusal of the United States Supreme Court to consider his May 2, 2012 petition, requesting, “The Court Should Grant Review to Determine Whether State Courts Are Erring as a Matter of Law By Preempting Federal Law with State Law Federal Law, by Considering VA Disability Pay Divisible Under State Community or Equitable Distribution Laws.” (Oct 1 2012) Petition DENIED.

As a Korean era veteran, I am neither disabled, or in any divorce action. Because of the Supreme Court of the United States and Oregon’s indefensible and unconscionable treatment of disabled veterans, reflects the unforgivable uncaring of most States, and it’s legislators towards their disabled veterans. Something that is happening now, in your state! Happening... because of Oregon’s rulings. The practice by State courts nationwide reliance on forum shopping and the false notion of ‘stare decisis’ “to stand by things decided.” (However, not happening in the only state that has not forgotten about the sacrifice disabled veterans gave to their country, IOWA).

Last edited by Poncho_NM; 01-09-2015 at 08:18 AM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2015, 05:53 PM
 
1 posts, read 776 times
Reputation: 10
Default Vets get screwed, were always seen wrong

I have no children and all I hear from my adult children is how the ex will never stop coming after me. I was in four IED attacks, cancer 3 times and she flies things like this, a motion to make my spousal support payments tax free for her, then to have my pay garnished. My pay is only Disability Retirements due to combat. The law, mostly they try to use rose v rose, but that is only if you chose to give up retirement for disability, the supreme court clearly said courts cannot touch disability pay but courts like in NM are doing it and dragging people like me to court two years later and it seems every few months. She could get a job but thinks going after me is more important, then thinks a family judge should dictake IRS laws and say I can't declare as the law says, that Im paying her.
Fighting a judge who only sees the spouses side of things is wrong but NM. She got 40 mins to go after me, had hit me when I was recovering from Cancer, screamed at me for hours everyday because she wanted credit for my deployment. I have never been allowed to prove she was abusive. She even said I put things in her mail, yet I was 900 miles away in surgery but judge still gave a restraining order against me, the paper was a motion to hold her in contempt. The system see vets as the bad guy, no matter what we do
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2015, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
1,384 posts, read 584,077 times
Reputation: 1635
Quote:
Originally Posted by sargandbetsy View Post
I have no children and all I hear from my adult children is how the ex will never stop coming after me. I was in four IED attacks, cancer 3 times and she flies things like this, a motion to make my spousal support payments tax free for her, then to have my pay garnished. My pay is only Disability Retirements due to combat. The law, mostly they try to use rose v rose, but that is only if you chose to give up retirement for disability, the supreme court clearly said courts cannot touch disability pay but courts like in NM are doing it and dragging people like me to court two years later and it seems every few months. She could get a job but thinks going after me is more important, then thinks a family judge should dictake IRS laws and say I can't declare as the law says, that Im paying her.
Fighting a judge who only sees the spouses side of things is wrong but NM. She got 40 mins to go after me, had hit me when I was recovering from Cancer, screamed at me for hours everyday because she wanted credit for my deployment. I have never been allowed to prove she was abusive. She even said I put things in her mail, yet I was 900 miles away in surgery but judge still gave a restraining order against me, the paper was a motion to hold her in contempt. The system see vets as the bad guy, no matter what we do
I don't think your situation has as much to do with being a vet as it does with being a man.

The courts are after men, not specifically those with military service.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-30-2015, 09:30 PM
 
18 posts, read 65,814 times
Reputation: 16
For decades, a flawed federal agency directive have cost disabled veterans their benefits.

September 25, 1998.
TO STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTRERING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PLANS UNDER TITLE IV-D OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT AND OTHER INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS.
SUBJECT: Obtaining financial support for children from benefits paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
BACKGROUND: Section 459 [42 USC 659] “Consent By The United States to income withholding, garnishment.. for enforcement of child support.. ], of the Social Security Act, as amended provides for the garnishment of certain Federal payments for the enforcement of child support and alimony obligations…”

Directive enforcement based on Example #2. Department of veterans Affairs… Pursuant to 38 USC 5307 [Apportionment], and 38 CFR 3.450(a)(1)(ii), “provide that, if the veteran is not residing with his or her spouse, or if the veteran's children are not residing with the veteran and the veteran is not reasonably discharging his or her responsibility for the spouse's or children's support.”

The Department of Health and Human Services Child Support Enforcement agency reasoned, 38 USC 5307 “apportionment” as an enforcement issue under their directive to State agencies. SUBJECT: “Obtaining financial support for children from benefits paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs.”

38 USC 5307 is a Dept. of Veterans Affairs internal administrative law. Apportionment is “as may be prescribed by the Secretary,” having absolutely nothing what-so-ever of being in a court room, or an issue of garnishment. Administrative law adjudications are not part of enforcement. Under the “apportionment” statute “as maybe prescribed by the Secretary” since there is no divorce there is no enforcement, only administration.

As anybody taking the time reading the statute, 38 USC Sec. 5307 Apportionment of Benefits, it concerns a disabled veteran that is institutionalized, hospitalized, incompetent or unable for what-ever reason to make decisions personally. The inability to function, restricted in discharging his or her normal personal business, household, daily responsibilities. Therefore, any pension, compensation, or dependency and indemnity compensation may be apportioned, not by any court, but as “prescribed by the Secretary.”

Since 1998, and most likely, beyond, lawyers, activist state court judges, and plaintiffs refer to this United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support Enforcement directive for guidance and preparation. A directive based on a purposely false, sloppy, inaccurate information (apportionment), deliberately to mislead disabled veterans and their attorneys, and setting the stage to partnership with every overbearing activist state court judge in the country to administer their justice.


Disabled veteran, Charlie Wayne Rose (1987) was done in by the United States Supreme Court, State of Tennessee, Dept. of Health and Human Services Office of Child Support agency, and Congressional Act 38 CFR 3.450 (a)(1)(ii) “The regulations broadly authorize apportionment if "the veteran is not reasonably discharging his or her responsibility for the . . . children's support." Rose, a disabled veteran, triple amputee, blind in one eye, requiring constant care, was jailed, lost his appeal in 38 USC 5301 protections of his VA disability compensation claim. It was this agency, Office of Child Support Enforcement, that provided highly inaccurate, false, and misleading information in a very questionable and inaccurate directive. “Apportionment” was used in the U.S. Supreme Court argument Rose v Rose 37 times. And it worked!

If this directive wasn’t a sloppy careless preparation of regulation law, it was then intentional, in order to mislead. Lost forever is veterans rights in protection of VA disability benefits, to fair and equal justice, by a regulation rewritten to falsely accuse and irresponsibly suggesting, “the veteran is not reasonably discharging his or her responsibility for the spouse’s or children’s support .”

Although “apportionment” has only one special meaning through the Congressional legislative intent in United States Code (38 USC 5307), however, the court in redefining it‘s special specific purpose, in order to force judgment, lacking was the compulsory constitutionally required legislative intent by Congress! Due process requires judicial review.Invoking 38 USC 7292, review by United States Court of Appeals.



Regretfully, it took this issue of a groundless, manufactured directive to reveal another means of the further undoing of veterans benefits by clever creative regulatory writing. This is not about child support, as there are other legal remedies available. It’s about the illegal expropriation of VA benefits and protections of the 14th Amendment.

As a veteran of the Korean conflict era, I am neither disabled nor divorced.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2017, 04:10 PM
 
1 posts, read 201 times
Reputation: 10
I receive a VA Non-Service-Connected Pension that meets the same requirements as Supplemental Security Income (SSI) which is a means-tested benefit based on need, Family Court openly admitted that under federal law they cannot attach or garnish my VA Pension but you owe money so pay it from your VA Pension so what I did was file a violation of my civil rights complaint under 42 U S C 1983 and also filed a motion to challenge the jurisdiction of family court over my VA Pension in the US District Court. My son's mother file an apportionment claim for my Va Pension and was denied and family court violated 38 U S C §511.the decision of the Secretary as to any such question shall be final and conclusive and may not be reviewed by any other official or by any court, whether by an action in the nature of mandamus or otherwise. So Challenging jurisdiction is my best defenses I can make, when I use the right argument I make impossible for me to loose!

OLD WAYNE MUT. L. ASSOC. v. McDonough, 204 U. S. 8, 27 S. Ct. 236 (1907). “A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid. It is clear and well established law that a void order can be challenged in any court”

Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026. "Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action."

Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416. "The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction."

I will be using the Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, div. A, 102 Stat.4105 (1988) ("VJRA") as my main argument and also the US Supreme court and varies Us Courts of Appeals have confirmed that 38 U S C §511. do precludes courts of any jurisdiction over VA Benefits and exclusive jurisdiction is granted by Congress only to US Court of Appeals Veterans Claims and the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
We Veterans are trained soldiers we are train to overcome, to improvise, and to adapt and lets stop bitchin and take the fight to these theiven ass family court systems,start by filing a violation of your civil rights complaint under 42 U S C 1983 and also filed a motion to challenge the jurisdiction of family court over your VA Benefits in the US District Court. You see if the decision of the district court is not in your favor you can appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in which Congress granted it with exclusive appellate jurisdiction over VA Benefits
Make these courts follow the VA apportionment claims Process pursuant to the Federal Office of Child Support Enforcement Financial Support for Children from Benefits Paid by Veterans Affairs IM-98-03.and the revise version of IM-98-03. Income Withholding and Medical Support for Department of Veterans Affairs Benefits
Published: February 28, 2017

Questions & Answers:
How to determine whether a parent paying child support is receiving VA benefits
How to decide whether to send an Income Withholding for Support (IWO) for VA benefits
How to apply for an apportionment
How to secure health care coverage for children of a VA beneficiary
Additional Questions?

How to determine whether a parent paying child support is receiving VA benefits
Child support workers need to get locate information from the Federal Parent Locator Service's (FPLS)
external locate sources. The VA provides information about pensions, compensation, and educational
benefits, as well as the address of the parent paying support.

How to decide whether to send an Income Withholding for
Support (IWO) for VA benefits
Section 459 of the Social Security Act , as amended, and the statutes governing benefit payments by
the VA provide for withholding of child and spousal support from some federal payments, but child
support agencies cannot garnish most benefits paid by the VA. The exception is disability compensation
paid in lieu of waived military retired or retainer pay, as discussed in example #1 below.
Example #1:
5 CFR 581.103 (c)(7) provides that if a veteran who is eligible to receive military retired or retainer
pay has waived a portion of retired or retainer pay in order to receive disability compensation from
the VA, that portion of the VA benefit is subject to garnishment for child and spousal support
obligations. Regulations clarify that where the former member has waived the entire amount of his
or her military retirement pay, that individual's disability compensation is not subject to income
withholding for child support.
For help in determining whether a veteran waived any portion of retired or retainer pay in order to receive
VA benefits, contact the VA Regional Office Inquiry Line: 1-800-827-1000.
Sending or terminating an IWO for a VA benefit payment
Send the IWO to the VA regional office serving the veteran. To determine the servicing regional office,
contact the VA Regional Office Inquiry Line: 1-800-827-1000.
How to apply for an apportionment
In addition to the garnishment of benefits discussed above, statutes and regulations also provide for the
apportionment of VA benefits to provide spouses and dependents with financial support under certain
circumstances. Examples #2 and 3 below explain this option further:

Example #2:
38 U.S.C. § 5307 and VA regulation 38 CFR 3.450 (a)(1)(ii) provide that if the veteran is not
residing with a spouse or children and the veteran is not reasonably discharging a responsibility for
the spouse's or children's support, then the veteran's pension, compensation, or emergency officer's
retirement pay may be apportioned. An apportionment is not made if it would cause undue hardship
to the veteran or in certain other circumstances specified by statute or regulation. The VA
determines whether to apportion VA benefits according to regulations found at 38 CFR 3.450-
3.461 .
Example #3:
VA regulation 38 CFR 3.451 authorizes a special apportionment of a veteran's pension,
compensation, emergency officer's retirement pay, or dependency and indemnity compensation
between the veteran and spouse or children when the spouse or children demonstrate a need for
the benefit. The VA bases an apportionment on the facts in the individual case, such as amount of
VA benefits payable, other resources and income of the veteran, spouse and children, and special
needs of the veteran, spouse, or children. The VA does not make an apportionment if it might cause
undue hardship to the veteran or in certain other circumstances.
Follow these steps to request an apportionment:
1. The child support agency should write to the VA using agency letterhead to request an
apportionment review. Both the appropriate agency official and the parent receiving support
should sign the letter.
2. After receiving an apportionment application, the VA usually requests a completed VA Form 21-
0788, "Information Regarding Apportionment of Beneficiary's Award." The child support
agency provides information regarding the parent receiving support income and net worth on the
form. A child support office can save time by submitting the form as part of the first step.
3. Attach a copy of the current support order to assist the VA in reviewing the request for the
apportionment award.
4. Attach a copy of the arrearage determination, payment ledger, payment records, etc.
5. Send the documents to the VA Regional Office servicing that veteran's benefits. Use the Inquiry
Line to determine which VA office is appropriate.
How to secure health care coverage for children of a VA
beneficiary
The VA does not provide health care coverage for beneficiaries. Do not send the National Medical
Support Notice to the VA.
My case in the US District Court is still ongoing [URL="http://www.city-data.com/forum/reputation.php?p=47686635"]http://pics3.city-data.com/images/ratepost.png[/URL]
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $99,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top