Question about CS
So DH wants to go back to court. He's sick of having to provide all transportation, her withholding visitation, her expecting he fork out cash left and right, and just the all around baloney. He's in the process of switching to a different position within his company, it will be less money, but it's for the best. Right now he is in sales and the stress/hours are just not a good fit for us. So he wants to wait until after he is in the new position officially. Which makes sense, then they won't raise the CS. However, I'm just wondering, can they penalize him in any way for not having it raised before? I'm sure some of you remember he has a huge issue with giving her extra money that is easily double the regular CS because he didn't want to have it officially raised. I'm just wondering if they could make him "pay the difference" from the past two years.
does he have proof and paper
does he have proof and paper trail of all additional monies he gave her? she might be able to go for back child pay, btu if he can prove he was giving her more then he might have already met what the official obligation would be if they find he needs to pay back pay.
and yes, id wait until he has the new job. but as vdarmv said, they look at potential earnings too and they may think he is taking the lower paying job in an effort to skirt CS.
That makes sense. He's
That makes sense. He's definitely not trying to skirt CS. He's tried out car sales for the past two years and he's rocked at it and made good money. But his days are half 7:30-8:30/half 7:30-6:30, and the pay is EXTREMELY inconsistent because it's solely commission. It's just not good for our family or marriage. Or his sanity really. I hope a judge would understand that. I'd hate for him to have to switch back just so we could afford CS.
Absolutely not. He's
Absolutely not. He's complied with the ordered amount. End of subject.
Why go back to court? Once in court he, his records and his employment records can be subpoenaed and he can be put on the stand. Just quit forking over. Give the lower paying position as an excuse and don't volunteer that he volunteered. No pun intended. The next time she asks for money that he doesn't want to pay he tells her that he got downsized to a lower paying position and can't afford all that stuff now. Play for sympathy saying he's not sure he can even pay his mortgage.
Never go to court - nobody leaves happy.
That's what I thought also,
That's what I thought also, but I wasn't sure. I hope that's the situation.
This is correct in the US,
This is correct in the US, at least.
No. The BM would have to file
No. The BM would have to file for another modification.
Does the CO state who does
Does the CO state who does the driving? If it's not covered and it were me, I'd pick the child up, and call BM and tell her if she wants the child back, she should start driving
And the money needs to stop. I say this because I agree with OC and he should avoid court at all costs.
We would like to avoid that
We would like to avoid that also, but if we do that BM will definitely bring us over it. I think it would be better to do it on out terms.
Granted it would backfire for her. I have zero doubts the judge will tell her to start sharing transportation, she was the one that moved away after all, and I know for a fact that the judge doesn't like BMs who try and get extra money out of BD. DH and I both feel that if he starts bring confrontational with her (meaning not bowing to her whim) it's just setting him up for huge fight that won't solve anything and then it still won't be in writing at all so she can flake whenever she wants.
Yeah, DH's CS amount has
Yeah, DH's CS amount has changed several times and it's always been backdated to day of filing but no further. (That being said, I don't know that a judge CAN'T do that. They have pretty broad authority from what I can see.)
I don't know that his new job *necessarily* helps get CS lowered though. Unless it's a temporary thing (like he lost his job), any CS modification made in DH's case they both had to provide federal tax returns for the last 3 years and the judge based CS off that. Each state is different though on how they figure it, so I'd look into how they do it in your state.