need a little more advice please

[ave321]

thanks for the info

Yep your right. the oders when we divorce did not specifically mention that he pay half of the childcare. i paid something like 18,000 dollars over three years that's why i wont work full time any more not worth it, and he had the nerve to ask for the recipts for one of the kids so he could claim it i told hell no if he pays i would give the reciepts he decided not to pay. and i wish the judge would have put my income at full time rather that include my new spouse it would have reflected an accurate picture of my wages, not sure what i can do about or even if i want to the experience i had in that court room with that judge left me never wanting to go back i would rather do with out. thanks for the time and info.

 

[ave321]

because he was never paying quideline, suport is also calculated by how much time the ncp has them and he wasn't up to par. Lets say that he gets 50% and i have 50% time with the kids and in reality its more like 15% dad and 85% for mom well mom has to feed cloth and shelter the kids and the order should relfect that doesn't that make sense he can say he'll have them 50% in court to reduce his payments but will he have them for that time no. I let it go the first couple of year is told myself it wasn't worth the trouble....I should have just left it at that.

 

[ave321]

how was income calculated

When i went to court i was told to provide 2 years of tax returns and current months worth of paychecks for myself and new husband, i was a little confused by this but none the less submitted the information along with expense declation. if they bother to ask about other children in the house not belonging to that particular case and the judge has the discretion to deny the other child then why even ask? Federal franchise tax board, the stat of california recognizes the other child as a dependent so why not the court?...Because I live with the father?...

 

[rmet4nzkx]

When i went to court i was told to provide 2 years of tax returns and current months worth of paychecks for myself and new husband, i was a little confused by this but none the less submitted the information along with expense declation. if they bother to ask about other children in the house not belonging to that particular case and the judge has the discretion to deny the other child then why even ask? Federal franchise tax board, the stat of california recognizes the other child as a dependent so why not the court?...Because I live with the father?...

I received your PM, I am familiar with CA law and did some research. I asked you some specific questions and you didn't answer them, for example the ocunty makes a difference in local rules, judges and commisonors may tend to rule a certain way, all within their discression. You and others here can speculate about how it should be, what's fair or unfair but it is going to be impossible for me to explain to you wht the judge ordered as they did, without the facts, something whichyour attorney has aviailable to them. You and your attorney should have run the numbers BEFORE you petitioned the court and they should have explained the various possible outcomes. The problem is that you are lumping together support issues for children from two different fathers, one of which you currently live with but are complaining that you can't work full time because of child care costs which are attributable to the child with your husband rather than your ex. So even though you make very good money working part time and have minimal child care expenses for your ex's children, you do or would have greater expenses with your child with your husband.

Please ask your attorney to explain all of this to you based on the facts of your case. Remember, your ex is entitiled to calculations based on the amount of parenting time ordered, not what he uses and there is little difference if you feed and cloth the children 180 or 300 days, you have to buy the clothing and you in fact work at Costco and have employee discounts. Next time you go for a modification in support, run the numbers first and be able to separate the issues between the children, if you have an appeal, you and your attorney can discuss that.

 

[stealth2]

The reason the court can manipulate the numbers is so that an unemployed or underemployed persons income can be imputed based on how much THAT person could make working FT. Say mom works pt at wal-mart for $8/hr, her income would be figured using the $8/hr X 40hrs. Hubby could be a rocket scientist that earn $250K per year. Obviously if mom was working full time at her job, shes not going to make as much as the hubby.

Not necessarily. If she was capable of earning, say, $20/hr FT, yet chose to work PT for only $10/hr, the court could impute her income at the $20/hr rate.

 

[ceara19]

Not necessarily. If she was capable of earning, say, $20/hr FT, yet chose to work PT for only $10/hr, the court could impute her income at the $20/hr rate.

That's true, but it still has NOTHING to do with her current HUSBAND'S income.

 

[haiku]

I think RMET may have hit the nail on the head in her last post.

 

[ave321]

thanks for the info

So Sorry to forget the county, but you hit the nail on the head the court or the judge has the discretion to decide what it does and it did. whether or not I think it to be fair is irrelevant even though ...I provided detailed accounts of how much father actually has them, ....I still don't see how 52 days out of 365 equals 32% The judge did the math, did he throw his weight to the father kind of looks like it because the actual time that he has them is 15% that extra 17% he gave dad cost me anywhere up to 200 maybe he did that in the hopes that dad might take his kids some more in the future. who the hell knows. Does it seem fair no. But again that does not matter. Maybe if i had married a millionair he might not be paying any child support now!!...Will I go back to court? Not likely, because next time i might wind up paying him child support even though i have the kids 85% of the time...My advice to any one looking to modify child support thinking they are in the right for doing so...is think of the worst possible scenario that could happen and rethink the game plan because the judge can decide what ever he wants consider if he's having a bad day thinks women are money hungry or that a ncp is a dead beat parent, we are at their mercy and a judge is just like the rest of us ...forming opinions about people based on little knowledge of them, is a judge impartial all the time? Thanks to all who read and took the ime to put their 2 cents worth it was interesting reading the replies the most interesting on is the one where it was assumed i was on drugs...Does cold medicine count? And i will visit back a few more times to see what "opinions" were formed after reading this......less visits because i have my family to tend to and giving any more time to what happened in coutrt with the ex isn't worth anymore of my time...Thanks to all