Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance
 [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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-18-2012, 01:58 PM
 
711 posts, read 1,512,605 times
Reputation: 740

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
see if you can get the child to return some of the money that wasnt given to him to aid in his upbringing. see if you can get him to suspend his needs going forward until your husband is in a better financial position.
I here children may become available for janitorial/custodial work in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-18-2012, 02:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,726,528 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerseygal4u View Post
Wow. But I do see what you are saying.
yeah, i probably shouldnt have said it but men not paying child support is something that really bothers me. now you have all these guys who lost their jobs or are having other issues and then they feel like they shouldnt still be obligated to pay the same level of support. so who is supposed to make up the difference for the child that you had?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 03:56 PM
 
2,654 posts, read 5,468,807 times
Reputation: 1946
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
yeah, i probably shouldnt have said it but men not paying child support is something that really bothers me. now you have all these guys who lost their jobs or are having other issues and then they feel like they shouldnt still be obligated to pay the same level of support. so who is supposed to make up the difference for the child that you had?
If someone who is paying support has a decline in income, the support payments should go down.

Just because a child's needs are met by child support payments does'nt mean they should be insulated from the financial pain of the provider. If I lose my job my kids (who live with me and my SAHM wife in an intact family) are going to have less resources. Why should a child whose needs are covered by child support payments be any different?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 04:30 PM
 
643 posts, read 2,386,808 times
Reputation: 535
OC Investor2, CapitainNJ,

I agree with both of you. I didn't mention that point earlier because I didn't know the financial resources of the other family where the child is living. Sometimes these child support payments are purely statutory and all the child is losing is designer clothes, new video games, new cars, and things like that. Other times they are for basic necessities like food and clothing.

And as OC Investor2 said, as much as some parents love their kids, when they loose their jobs they do the best they can to keep them fed and clothed. That might be less dining out and less designer clothes, but the basics are still provided.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 05:29 PM
 
15,642 posts, read 26,275,966 times
Reputation: 30952
Quote:
Originally Posted by md21722 View Post
I think if you screw over the bank, they will black list you which will limit your ability to open a new bank account. They may also file a judgement against you.
And the bank would LOSE in court.

A bank does not have the right to pay out what you do not have. Look at it this way -- if the OP had written a check out of that account for 8K to pay off the child support and she only had 150 bucks in the account, the bank would have bounced that check, and taken their fees.

A judgement is a requirement to pay -- YES -- but the requirement is for the OP to pay... NOT the bank. It's not up to the bank to make the plaintiff whole.

The bank is not required to pay every judgement that comes over their threshold. It's only required to pay those judgements where the defendant listed has accounts that monies can be taken from, and that there is money available. AND we get our fee off the top.

We used to get blanket judgements/levies where the plaintiffs would send copies to every single bank in the area, just trying to find cash. We would open them, look for accounts, and send them back as no accounts available.

Which is why I am saying -- if her bank did something so obviously stupid as to pay out that money they know they won't get back (and they have her banking history, so they know what has been going on) they deserve to be screwed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 05:32 PM
 
643 posts, read 2,386,808 times
Reputation: 535
With losing the court case, will the bank be required to take them off the black list and pay for damages while all of that was going on?

I agree, what they did was wrong, but I think your advice could give them more headaches, at least in the short term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-18-2012, 08:40 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,726,528 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by OC Investor2 View Post
If someone who is paying support has a decline in income, the support payments should go down.
i wonder how much they are looking to pay each month.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2012, 11:06 AM
 
2,719 posts, read 5,361,538 times
Reputation: 6257
The OP won't want to hear this but many courts believe that the first obligation is to the original child(ren) that the guy created. If his income goes down due to a job loss and he's single and on his own, they may reduce payments due to hardship or offer some alternative.

If, however he goes off and makes another family and gets himself into arrears because he is expending funds to take care of the new family, they may not be very sympathetic because the original child(ren) suffer from a reduction in support while the new family benefits from an increase in available funds.

I didn't even know a bank account could be garnished. I thought paychecks were the only thing subject to that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2012, 12:16 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,477,048 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ View Post
yeah, i probably shouldnt have said it but men not paying child support is something that really bothers me. now you have all these guys who lost their jobs or are having other issues and then they feel like they shouldnt still be obligated to pay the same level of support. so who is supposed to make up the difference for the child that you had?

There is also an issue of whether the formula and required payments are fair.

Let's say a parent has 1 child and rents a 2BR apartment. Let's say the 2BR costs $800/mo and a 1BR costs $600/mo.

For child support, the parent is credited with providing $400/mo housing support ($800 divided by 2) even though the marginal cost of the child's bedroom is only $200. This artificially inflates the payment required of the non-custodial parent.

So sometimes the system is rigged in ways that might not be fair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-19-2012, 01:22 PM
 
Location: NJ
31,771 posts, read 40,726,528 times
Reputation: 24590
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
For child support, the parent is credited with providing $400/mo housing support ($800 divided by 2) even though the marginal cost of the child's bedroom is only $200. This artificially inflates the payment required of the non-custodial parent.

So sometimes the system is rigged in ways that might not be fair.
im not fully aware of the calculation of child support but in this example i think its fair to use the $400 figure. i dont see why you would use the difference between a 1 br and a 2 br to find the marginal cost of the extra bedroom. i think you take the cost per person of the apartment. if the person took on a roommate instead of a child, they would probably charge half the rent, not the marginal increase between a 1br and 2br.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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 $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Personal Finance

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top