How could this be prevented?

[MrsK]

What is the name of your state? Louisiana

Even though I usually know the laws of La well, I dont know how to answer this question someone has asked me, and I havent been able to get help in answering it yet, so I am hoping you guys can help.

Ok, the situation-

CP & NCP have one child. NCP pays basic support, there are currently no extras (daycare, medical, etc)

The CP works occasionally, for maybe 1-2 months at a time, gets fired or quits, then stays at home for 3-4 months before returning to work, CP never works for more than half of a year. She didnt work more than 4 months in 2006. She has the child in daycare, 8 hrs a day and 5 days a week. The child is in daycare year round, whether the CP is working or not, and has been happening for about 2 years.

The case with SES is up for review this year. NCP doesnt know if CP will request for it to be reviewed or not, but suspects it will be. NCP doesnt expect the support to go up, it could possibly lower, but if it does go up, it wont be much. No big deal. BUT- He thinks CP will request that daycare costs be added in addition to the basic support award.

NCP does not think he should have to pay for child care for the CP to put the child in daycare while she is not working.

He also thinks she may request daycare costs, and upon being awarded these, pull the child out so she can pocket the extra money.

So- what does he do? How can he prevent either of these scenarios from happening? How does he protect himself?

What he would LIKE to have happen (although I dont think this is really all that likely) is that he can pay the daycare directly at the end of the month, after the mother shows proof that she is still working and the child has been in daycare on a regular basis. Then, if she isnt working, or the child is pulled from daycare, he would not be responsible for paying.

In addition- he believes she has lied to the OFS and never reported that she is not working and that the childcare is covered in part (possibly up to 40%) by a program called CCA- she used to receive it when she WAS working, and he is pretty sure she still receives it b/c it would be hard for her to pay for child care otherwise, esp since she actually has another out of wedlock child (not his kid) she has placed in daycare. Without CCA, she would be paying $800 a month for childcare and she only receives about $900 a month (combined) total in support from both fathers. With CCA, she only pays about $480. If the CP receives this, he would owe less if daycare IS awarded. For example, if daycare is $400 a month, his portion would be $200. If daycare is $400 but CCA pays 40%, daycare is now $240, his share being $120 a month. He thinks she may not be honest about receiving this so that he will pay $200, which leaves only $40 for her to pay. How can he make sure this is factored into the equation? Does he have to ask the judge to call the OFS and look up her file?What is the name of your state?What is the name of your state?

 

[fairisfair]

I seriously doubt that the court would consider the part about the mother proving she is working on a monthly basis. How would she be expected to FIND a job?
Why is he not paying anything towards daycare now? Why does he expect that mom will request that it be added, if she has not done so before?

PS of course the request that he be allowed to pay the daycare directly (and that it should be a licensed facility) is a good one.

 

[MrsK]

I seriously doubt that the court would consider the part about the mother proving she is working on a monthly basis. How would she be expected to FIND a job?
Why is he not paying anything towards daycare now? Why does he expect that mom will request that it be added, if she has not done so before?

PS of course the request that he be allowed to pay the daycare directly (and that it should be a licensed facility) is a good one.

When the last order was done, there were no daycare expenses, CP was home at that time and did not have kids in daycare. I believe SES told her they would not modify for daycare when she originally went to work (months after the last order, the job only lasted a short time), she had to wait 3 yrs OR for a 25% mod. NCP was informed from someone else (not CP) that she was working & he called to tell her that he knew she was working & she needed to call SES and tell them so that they could determine if a mod needed to be made, and CP told him she HAD called & they told her they would not modify at that time. I'm guessing she probably DID call to have daycare added in but between what wouldve been added for daycare, minus what wouldve been subtracted due to her income, did not meet a 25% change in circumstance.

He thinks mom will try to get daycare added in b/c he thinks she tried that when she first went and got a job.

I didnt know the NCP could request that it be a licensed facility. Is there a reason that is important that I am missing?

I know he will definetly want request that he pay the daycare directly, so at least if she pulls the child out he wont have to pay. What does he do in that case, call SES and request a review because the child isnt in daycare? That's what I think but I just want to be sure. BUT- will they change the order even if subtracting the daycare means a change of less than 25%, or does he have to pay it for 3 years even if the child will not need daycare in 3 years (at most this will be for about a year, to less than 2 yrs). Is it illegal for SES to require an NCP to pay for childcare for an additional 1-2 yrs if she is not going? In other words, will they tell him he has to continue paying even if that isnt true?

Let me also ask this- she could put the child into Headstart, she definetly qualifies income wise. It would be free as well. Since he has joint legal custody, could he argue in court that the child could be placed into HS for free, and the courts consider that, and tell mom to place the child into HS or continue to pay for daycare herself, since she is not working? Or is it probably going to be a case of "CP is in control no matter how the NCP feels".

I personally do not agree that he should have to pay for child care if she isnt working but have no idea if SES will feel the same way, and since I find they tend to screw over NCP's, at least here in LA, & I wouldnt be surprised if this did happen. I could just imagine the look on my ex's face if I demanded he pay for 1/2 of a daycare bill when I was staying at home.

Would it matter at all if he has someone to testify in court that CP has been doing this for for almost 2 yrs, and as a matter of habit keeps the kids in daycare and isnt working by choice and doesnt particularily intend to work? CP actually admitted all of that to someone NCP knows and says she keeps the kids with the daycare so she can "have free time to herself". Apparently she brings them 8 hrs a day, 5 days a week, and then goes home & sits around or goes to see her friends.

PS- Thanks for the help. Its much appreciated.