They can't encumber the title to someone's property just because some ELSE....even a family member...has a debt to them. Anticipating the inheritance of an estate does not give the government or anyone else (not even the all-powerful and intrusive IRS) the legal right to place a lien on a 3rd party's property. Under what authority, or what court, was this alleged lien excercised?
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
can't find deadbeat dad
- Thread starter wyldfyr
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
dallas702 said:They can't encumber the title to someone's property just because some ELSE....even a family member...has a debt to them. Anticipating the inheritance of an estate does not give the government or anyone else (not even the all-powerful and intrusive IRS) the legal right to place a lien on a 3rd party's property. Under what authority, or what court, was this alleged lien excercised?
I'm thinking the op has some terminology mixed up, maybe they flagged dad's ssn, so any significant assests that come into his name are immediately liened?
justmom611
Member
WANNACRY said:I'm thinking the op has some terminology mixed up, maybe they flagged dad's ssn, so any significant assests that come into his name are immediately liened?
They seem to be property liens, according to the papers that I have (they have APNs). I went to the online searchable records for the Clerk-Recorder's Office this morning. I found the Abstract of Judgement online, filed 1/5/2001 and it notes that there are 2 pages (2 entries) under my ex's name but doesn't give any other info. My ex has never lived in my county. I moved back here prior to our divorce. There isn't much chance that there would be another judgement against him here. I will call the DCSS on Monday and ask them about this and then post back here whatever it is that they tell me.
Hopefully, I am not just really stupid and he owns property that I don't know about. But...the DCSS worker did tell me at the time that they were on the parents/grandparents properties.
OP ~ If his girlfriend tracked you down, why didn't you ask her some information on where he is? Did she say when her due date was? You could google birth announcements from papers around that state around the time she is due. I am sure she will list the proud father in the announcement. It may take a lot of work on your part, but if you are really wanting to put the time in, I bet you can find him.
Personally, I had an ex who paid one support payment in 9 years, and that was only because he went to work for a family member. I turned him in and they sent a notice of garnishment. He quit after that. When my new husband wanted to adopt my children, we had to contact the state and it had been so long since any activity was done on that account that it was in archives. They never did find the information I needed, but fortunately the adoption went through without it. I made it without the child support, and it was very difficult. Sometimes I only had $25 a week left for groceries for me and the 3 kids. It built character in me and looking back at the experience now, I believe it was worth it. It made me realize that I was a tough cookie. I just never felt it was worth it to pursue him for the support. It was easier on me mentally, physically, emotionally to go it on my own. But every person is different and if you want to invest that time then more power to you and I hope you get what you are looking for.
Personally, I had an ex who paid one support payment in 9 years, and that was only because he went to work for a family member. I turned him in and they sent a notice of garnishment. He quit after that. When my new husband wanted to adopt my children, we had to contact the state and it had been so long since any activity was done on that account that it was in archives. They never did find the information I needed, but fortunately the adoption went through without it. I made it without the child support, and it was very difficult. Sometimes I only had $25 a week left for groceries for me and the 3 kids. It built character in me and looking back at the experience now, I believe it was worth it. It made me realize that I was a tough cookie. I just never felt it was worth it to pursue him for the support. It was easier on me mentally, physically, emotionally to go it on my own. But every person is different and if you want to invest that time then more power to you and I hope you get what you are looking for.
nextwife said:If a woman chooses to have children with a man who they know or suspect cannot or will not be able to provide support, they are JUST as irresponsible as the "deadbeat dad" for burdening the taxpayors.
I see both sides of this. On the one hand, unless he TELLS you he has 7 kids how would you know? Beleive me you cannot always guess which guys will end up being deadbeat dads. I never would have guessed that my ex-husband, a great dad to my 7yo and religiously paid CS via Dir Dep would stiff me for CS on our twins and then quit CS for the 7yo right before they were born. I couldn't have dreamed he would have a girlfriend while trying to get me pregnant. Didn't find out til after we were married that he had another daughter many years ago.
Also, no birthcontrol is foolproof but only one person gets pregnant.
When someone dies an estate has to be probated. Whoever is probating the estate knows who is going to inherit what (by will or next of kin however) . Who ever is probating the estate has to sign a waver saying no one owes more then one thousand dollars in child support. If they do the CS is paid first.
My Uncle just probated a relatives will in NJ and he had to sign this waiver that came from the county probate dept. The lawyer had to research if anyone on the list to recieve money was a deadbeat.
So now I am staying on top of the X-wife who owes over $10,000.00, her parents have money. Some day I may be gone but maybe my kids will get her share of their money instead of her.
My Uncle just probated a relatives will in NJ and he had to sign this waiver that came from the county probate dept. The lawyer had to research if anyone on the list to recieve money was a deadbeat.
So now I am staying on top of the X-wife who owes over $10,000.00, her parents have money. Some day I may be gone but maybe my kids will get her share of their money instead of her.
betterthanher said:How would they know he could inherit anything? Wouldn't they have to subpeoena or whatever the records of the relatives? I(unless legal proceedings have already taken place).
The problem is, the OP doesn't even know for sure. The OP is going on what s/he's been told. And we all know how accurate the people at Support enforcement agencies are LOL.
justmom611
Member
nextwife said:I have never heard of creditors going around liening the holdings of parties that have no obligation to the creditor, and owe no debt to the debtor, just because IF they predecease the NCP, and if they "will" something to their debtor, the lien will be there. So, the state is going around liening parents, grandparents, maybe siblings, significant others, aunt, uncles, because they will die someday and they are related to the debtor? I agree that sounds rather draconian. I certainly see liening an actual inheritance, but liening the property of a living person just because they are a relative of the debtor? It sure doesn't sound legal to me IF the NCP has no legal interest in the properties liened and there is no actual probate.
I just wanted to follow up with this. Today I spoke with the DCSS (California), explained my understanding of the liens on the properties of my ex's parents and grandparents and asked how this works. The caseworker said that yes, these liens are still in place on the properties. I asked her how they could do this. She said that with the liens there, if the property is sold, it gives them a chance to look at the title and see if the ex's name is on it. Since it's likely that you will inherit from your parents, they place the lien for that purpose. If the parents were to sell the house it wouldn't affect them (as long as the ex's name is not on the title). I guess any property he would receive in inheritance wouldn't be on the DCSS radar unless it were marked in some way and apparently that's how they mark it.
It still should not be appropriate to lien someone's property IN CASE a NON-owner MAY possibly come into the chain of title!
Don't they have a computerized system that establishes a CS lien on ANY real estate the owing NCP may be titled in? I'm only in WI, but here the title companiesmust check a CS lien computerized data base when running the name checks done on OWNERS when a property sells. That way tCSE is not legally encumbering properies of people for the crime of merly being related to a party who owes CS! Guilt by who you are related to?
A lien can delay a closing and result in lose of a buyer, or cost a buyer their rate lock, if that closing must be delayed because of a lien. A party who themselves owes nothing should not have to be burdened with ANY lien. A lien should apply if and when the debtor comes into the chain of title.
Don't they have a computerized system that establishes a CS lien on ANY real estate the owing NCP may be titled in? I'm only in WI, but here the title companiesmust check a CS lien computerized data base when running the name checks done on OWNERS when a property sells. That way tCSE is not legally encumbering properies of people for the crime of merly being related to a party who owes CS! Guilt by who you are related to?
A lien can delay a closing and result in lose of a buyer, or cost a buyer their rate lock, if that closing must be delayed because of a lien. A party who themselves owes nothing should not have to be burdened with ANY lien. A lien should apply if and when the debtor comes into the chain of title.
saintkbsmom67
Member
dallas702 said:As much as I dislike the ACLU, I'd like to see what they'd do with this abuse of innocent person's rights.
what abuse and who is the innocent persons you refer to?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.