Opinion: CS during Long Visits
Another poster got me thinking about this, and I'm curious what you all would think or do.
If you were a NCP paying CS and had the kids for a visit for a week or longer (this is assuming you don't have 50/50 custody already) would you prefer to have the CS you pay be stopped or reduced during that time OR calculated across the entire year (i.e. pay the same amount each week but have the overall amount adjusted based on your longer visits)?
If you were a CP receiving CS, which would you prefer?
Additionally, should CPs pay CS when kids are with the NCP for an extended time? If so, at what time frame (e.g. kids gone for a week, two weeks, etc) and what amount should they pay?
- lieutenant_dad's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
I still question whether that
I still question whether that poster actually has what she thinks she has. Last she posted about the agreements, the BM had not yet signed nor has it been signed off by the judge and filed.
The poster's SO has his kids EWOE, 6 weeks in the summer and supposedly/hopefully a week or so at Christmas.
I can't picture how well running CS through the state processing center will work under what she said. They will get a CO of CS which will be enter in his name. Each time a payment comes in it will be credited to his name and released to BM. I doubt they will stop and read his CO each week/month to see if he is suppose to have his kids and if so for how long nor will they be calling him to see if BM really let him keep the kids/have the kids.
And the first time he tells his boss to not take x amount out this check because he has his kids a week or two, ok, but I bet the CS processing center enters an arrear amount in payment.
But to answer your question, I think it's silly unless the NCP is getting the children for the entire summer. Part of child support is to go for providing shelter, the CP still has to provide that shelter even if Daddy is keeping the kids a week or two.
I think the only way it might possibly work is if it's a direct pay no processing center CS pay.
I always see the reasoning of
I always see the reasoning of "CP has to maintain shelter" as a reason for CS, but it's never a valid excuse for a NCP.
DH and I have a 3 bedroom home specifically because of the SSs. They visit and stay, and we have to have room for them whether they are in our home or not. Plus, we choose to live in a good school system in case they ever have to live with us full-time.
Why does that not get considered? And please don't take this as me attacking you, because I'm not. It has just always puzzled me about why housing is part of CS since both parents have to provide enough space and beds for the kids in order for them to live there or visit. Basically, the expense should be a wash.
Because I've seen too many
Because I've seen too many post over the years about how the skids could just sleep on the floor or how no room should be kept open for a skid that only comes a few nights a month. Or the skid gets a room until the new baby comes then gets booted to the basement. lol.
I understand your thoughts, but I've also read way too many post suggesting NCP can just waive their time and let's not forget the post on 'send that kid back to his/her BM until they learn to behave'
Actually I think it's like anything else, it's based on general generic and not customized to individual families and situations.
I have the visitation
I have the visitation agreement as it stands and clearly states that when he has the children for a time period he pays half. It is considered standard here and over all the tiny things she has fought about that's one she hasn't touched. Even in them figuring out what he owes in back child support she's agreed to it.
Sounds too good to be true but it's in what will be their CO.
Since my SO is "voluntarily" having the money pulled from his check each payday he could in theory go in at any moment and stop it. He has "approved" x amount gets taken out. The state's system doesn't care how much he pays it just tracks the payments that are made and the total. It's up to BM to ensure it's the correct amount because yes they won't look at his CO every other week.
She'd have to argue that he didn't pay as he should of she wants to try and vlaim je owes the full amount during the 2 week time, at which point he can present their CO to a judge and be done.
So how about you just accept that I understand the paperwork I'm reading because I'm not a child instead of saying I'm wrong because it's different. I get that it's different but every one is.
Our state also doesn't factor total nights spent with the NCP which alot do. He could have the kids 1 night a year or 3 nights a week and the initial amount of CS would be the same. They look at what his pay is and CS is set accourding to that. His ex can request tax information once a year so if he gets a raise she will know and can request an adjustment to the CO. If he were to try and fight it he'd lose in court and have to pay her court cost because its her right accourding to their CO.
If I were an NCP, I'd prefer
If I were an NCP, I'd prefer to pay higher amounts when the kids are with the CP and keep the extra funds when they were with me, simply because of increased grocery bills with the kids are actually with me. However if you are going through the state (and I always recommend that despite personal preference) it's easier to calculate the total for the year that you should be paying, and spread it out. Because from my experience as an employer, it takes the CS office at least a month to respond to changes and YOU are responsible for getting them the proper paperwork to do it. And following up to make sure it happens is on you as well.
I believe most court
I believe most court orders/support orders are figured out based on how many overnights the NCP has. For instance the CS amount for 0% overnights is $100/month, but $60 since you have 40% overnights; therefore, the amount shouldn't change for long visits if they are already figured in your amount of overnights. Now, if these longer visits are not figured into the amount and happened regularly, then the support order should be modified.
I think that factoring in the
I think that factoring in the CS based on CO overnights then dividing by 12 is probably the easiest way for most people to deal with it.
Michigan used to have the
Michigan used to have the parental time abatement, but switched to the straight over night system many years ago.
Asshat was very unhappy when that happened -he used to take the kids to Colorado for an entire month in the summer...
Well it gets tricky in
Well it gets tricky in regards to CS being for shelter if CP lives with other people (parents, siblings, boyfriends, girlfriends) in their houses and don't actually pay rent/mortgage/utility or pay very little. They can't really claim that CS is for shelter if someone else (whoever pays mortgage or rent etc) pays for it.