Child Support Question

[WittyUserName]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ID

I think I may know the answer to this, but as I am one of the principals it's possible my judgement is clouded.

This relates to an interstate case, CA (where Dad lives) and ID, (Mom's home state). October was unusual for Dad in that he had 3 paydays at work based on the way the dates lined up. Dad's employer withheld CS money out of the first two paychecks but did not do so for the third. This meant that for November, Mom only received half the court-ordered CS amount, as the withholding skipped the last paycheck in October.

Dad claims that since it was not his fault ("CA has a garnishment process that's entirely out of my control") he does not, in fact, owe the normal court-ordered amount of CS for November. "If they only took $400, that's how much I owe", despite the court order setting CS at $800/month. Mom is under the impression that Dad is ultimately responsible to make sure the full court-ordered amount is paid each month, or Dad risks eventually being found in contempt of court. Granted, this was not necessarily a willful move on Dad's part - but does an employer mistake negate a court order?

CA often has rules that surprise me, so maybe I'm missing something.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? ID

I think I may know the answer to this, but as I am one of the principals it's possible my judgement is clouded.

This relates to an interstate case, CA (where Dad lives) and ID, (Mom's home state). October was unusual for Dad in that he had 3 paydays at work based on the way the dates lined up. Dad's employer withheld CS money out of the first two paychecks but did not do so for the third. This meant that for November, Mom only received half the court-ordered CS amount, as the withholding skipped the last paycheck in October.

Dad claims that since it was not his fault ("CA has a garnishment process that's entirely out of my control") he does not, in fact, owe the normal court-ordered amount of CS for November. "If they only took $400, that's how much I owe", despite the court order setting CS at $800/month. Mom is under the impression that Dad is ultimately responsible to make sure the full court-ordered amount is paid each month, or Dad risks eventually being found in contempt of court. Granted, this was not necessarily a willful move on Dad's part - but does an employer mistake negate a court order?

CA often has rules that surprise me, so maybe I'm missing something.

The only way that dad could have gotten 3 paychecks in November is if he is paid every other week and received a paycheck on the 1st, 15th, and 29th.

Therefore, he would still have two paychecks coming in November, the 12th and the 26th, so mom should still get her full child support for November...maybe not a soon as she was expecting it, but she should still get it.

 

[CSO286]

I get this question a lot. we have a fairly big employer in the area who opts to pay 1/2 of the obligor's support amt from the first and second paydays. That way the employees kind of get a bit of a "bonus" in the three pyacheck months.

This does confuse the CP's a bit, espcially when they are used to getting the support e/o week.

If Dad were paid e/o week, then it's possible he had a three payday month in October, and a later 1st payday on November.

What day of the week is payday?

But, ultimately, Dad is responsible for making sure that his court ordered obligation is paid each month.

 

[Zigner]

This has already been said, but I want to be perfectly clear.

The full amount of child support is due every month. How it is withheld from the paycheck(s) doesn't affect the underlying obligation.

 

[nextwife]

Unless I am mistaken, November is not over. Could there not yet be another Nov. paycheck?

 

[WittyUserName]

This is confusing as all get-out for me too. That's the thing. Dad is paid e/o Friday, and LdiJ was correct on the dates for October. There's about a 10-day gap between Dad's paycheck and when it's disbursed from ID CSEA.

Dad's paychecks were withheld Oct 1 & Oct 15. The check for the 29th was not withheld.

So I received CS in October on Oct 11 & 25, but nothing in November as yet. (If the last paycheck had been withheld, I would have received something about the 8th or 9th.) ID CSEA contacted Dad's employer and says I am on track to receive CS from Dad's 11/12 paycheck (should arrive this week) but that it will only be half since it's from a single paycheck. Any other garnishment for Nov will be disbursed in Dec and will count toward his December CS.

I'm wondering if part of this may be a misunderstanding on Dad's part. Dad does not track CS, and will not pay voluntarily. He's under the impression that if the employer is garnishing his wages, that's the limit of his responsibility. I'm not going to die without the money, but as we are likely going to be headed back to court for some outstanding child care & medical reimbursements I'd thought about just throwing this in as well. I get that Dad's not being malicious. But I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that he follows the court order.

 

[ecmst12]

There was nothing withheld from the 3rd October check because the full amount for October had already been withheld. When he gets his 2nd November check, you'll get the other half of the November payment.