Retroactive arrearage?

[CuckoosNest]

What is the name of your state? CT

I'm in the process of taking my ex back to court to expand my visitation. There will likely be a recalculation of my monthly child support done at the same time.

There hasn't been a recalculation since the divorce decree in 1999 and my ex has never formally requested one. Since that time, my pay has gone up (although not as drastically as my ex seems to think it has) and I have begun sharing a home with someone in an unmarried relationship. My ex has stated that she feels she should be paid "arrearage" retroactively... in other words, as if a recalculation was done each time I received a raise and the "increase" was never paid to her. She has also hinted at going after my domestic partner's income.

Are there any validity to her claims? And just so you all know: I'm not trying to be cheap or deprive my kids... the ex insists that she needs to be a "stay-at-home mom" (although we never encouraged such a thing when we were married) for the kids, who are now age 12, 17 and 18 (yes, the 18-year-old is still in high school.) Essentially, she doesn't want to work and feels I should be picking up the slack.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Tell the ex she's an idiot. But make sure you tell her she has every right to look the fool if she wants to waste the court's time filing such a motion.

 

[GrowUp!]

And when you file a Motion to Dismiss, also file a Motion for Sanctions for her filing a frivolous motion.

 

[ceara19]

And when you file a Motion to Dismiss, also file a Motion for Sanctions for her filing a frivolous motion.

The OP is the one initiating the court action. He wants more visitation. It sounds like mom is blowing smoke to try and scare him out of it.

 

[LdiJ]

I agree 100%...however a child support recalculation will most like end up being done, and even with more parenting time, its possible that child support will increase.

However it won't be retroactive beyond the date that the CP (or the NCP) asks for the recalculation.

 

[CuckoosNest]

It sounds like mom is blowing smoke to try and scare him out of it.

No, she really is that greedy. And that stupid, too. Thanks for the info, everyone.

 

[fairisfair]

No, she really is that greedy. And that stupid, too. Thanks for the info, everyone.

weren't you greedy in not advising her of your increased salary??

 

[GrowUp!]

weren't you greedy in not advising her of your increased salary??

I don't see how that is any of the other parent's business anyway. Until it's time for a modification or unless state statutes/court order specifies such.

 

[CuckoosNest]

I don't see how that is any of the other parent's business anyway. Until it's time for a modification or unless state statutes/court order specifies such.

Agreed. To be honest, to afford a place of my own I had to use every bit of the 2% I got on a biennial basis. These weren't huge increases, and perhaps I would have been in a better situation if I hadn't just turned over my equity in our home to the ex upon divorcing her. Hopefully, that's enough evidence of non-greed.

If not, here's another: last November I met with her to see if we could update the visitation and the amount of child support without taking the whole thing to court (i.e. be adults and see if we couldn't save us the hassle and expense.) She agreed to allow me one weekend per month with the kids, and I volunteered a 20% increase in the child support. Everything was fine until last June when my brother's ex (can you believe that???) gave her the notion that she could be getting even more from me. She broke the verbal agreement and has been harassing me since to give her more cash, well above what the child support would be recalculated at according to the State. And all the while, she isn't working or bringing in income.

Nice, huh? Of course, the kids are the ones who really lose out here, and that's what bothers me most.

 

[fairisfair]

I don't see how that is any of the other parent's business anyway. Until it's time for a modification or unless state statutes/court order specifies such.

My point exactly. Not her business until then, but certainly her business at that time.

My problem was with him calling her greedy for asking for a modification. And yet not seeing himself as greedy for not just willy nilly offering one.

 

[CuckoosNest]

My problem was with him calling her greedy for asking for a modification. And yet not seeing himself as greedy for not just willy nilly offering one.

I don't find a request for a modification greedy at all, and I don't believe I accused her of being greedy for requesting one. There are guidelines set up by the State which dictate what I should be paying and I'm more than happy to live up to them.

What I do find greedy is:

1. Trying to go back in time as per the beginning of this thread;
2. Trying to get a lot more from me than such a modification would dictate, and using my kids as a weapon to get it; and
3. Doing all this while stubbornly refusing to get/keep a job and bring in income of her own.

If I'm greedy for not going to court (and incurring the cost) to raise the child support by about $20 every two years, then fine, I'm greedy. Believe me, I made it up to the children in other ways.

 

[fairisfair]

I don't find a request for a modification greedy at all, and I don't believe I accused her of being greedy for requesting one. There are guidelines set up by the State which dictate what I should be paying and I'm more than happy to live up to them.

What I do find greedy is:

1. Trying to go back in time as per the beginning of this thread;
2. Trying to get a lot more from me than such a modification would dictate, and using my kids as a weapon to get it; and
3. Doing all this while stubbornly refusing to get/keep a job and bring in income of her own.

If I'm greedy for not going to court (and incurring the cost) to raise the child support by about $20 every two years, then fine, I'm greedy. Believe me, I made it up to the children in other ways.

Actually, you said
"No, she really is that greedy. And that stupid, too. Thanks for the info, everyone."
I am not trying to start an argument with you, in fact, the contrary. I don't think either one of you is being unreasonable, her for fighting for what she believes is the correct support for the children. Or you, for trying to keep things fair for yourself.

I think all parents should work, but apparently, she doesn't and either you live in a state that doesn't take that into consideration, or she has been imputed an income, or she provides her portion of the expenses in some way other than employment.

I am glad to hear that you make it up to the children in other ways. Just be sure that includes not giving them the impression that you think their mom is stupid and greedy