To I AM ALWAYS LIABLE - Attorney's Fees

[VeronicaGia]

I was told by someone on another board to post this question to you. Thank you in advance for any help you can give me and I apoligize for the length of the post. Also, I have copied and pasted this post, so you probably already know the "legalities!"

Child born 1988. Father had no idea until November 1997. In 1991, child was taken from mother and was ward of the state. Court appointed an attorney from end of 1991 until May 1997. In November 1997, paternity was established.

Father is getting attorney's bills from collection agency. Father has never paid…a few years ago a different collection agency tried to collect, Father sent copy of DNA, we have never heard from them again. Someone (mother) has been paying these bills since 1999. Bill went from $4,000+ to about $1,200. Statute of limitations in CA for filing lawsuit for debt is 4 years after debt goes 180 days past due. We had to send collection agency 3 letters and threaten them with filing a formal complaint before they would “validate” debt. Agency sent list of payments that have been made (not by us). According to the U.S. Fed, they had 90 days to reply. It took them 120. The U.S. Fed (just got off the phone with them) says that they don't enforce the 90 day rule. They gave me the phone numbers to CA and MI Bureau of Consumer Affairs and to CA and MI Attorney General. Both people I spoke to today in the Fed mentioned the 'stupid deadbeat dad laws' and had no idea how to respond to my legal questions. Debt collector is threatening lawsuit on father, even though monthly payments are being made. Contacted Dept. of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Consumer affairs, they seem to think since debt is being paid, no lawsuit can be brought, but they are unsure. They do not know statute of limitations on this, quoting lack of knowledge in 'deadbeat dad' area. They don't know if a creditor can even try to collect for 6 years and then consider debt late. Have 10 days to reply to latest demand for payment.

CA Law States: 3153. (a) If the court appoints counsel under this chapter to represent the child, counsel shall receive a reasonable sum for compensation and expenses, the amount of which shall be determined by the court. Except as provided in subdivision (b), this amount shall be paid by the parties in the proportions the court deems just.

(b) Upon its own motion or that of a party, the court shall determine whether both parties together are financially unable to pay all or a portion of the cost of counsel appointed pursuant to this chapter, and the portion of the cost of that counsel which the court finds the parties are unable to pay shall be paid by the county. The Judicial Council shall adopt guidelines to assist in determining financial eligibility for county payment of counsel appointed by the court pursuant to this chapter.


Court papers (support & automatic arrears) make no mention of court costs, attorney fees, etc. Nothing. We have nothing in writing that says H has to pay this debt.

If I could get SOMETHING that shows when this debt went to collection originally, we may have a chance that it is too old for them to even sue.

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

 

[Agent Orange]

Just wanted to bring this to the top... would like to see answer.

AO

 

[VeronicaGia]

Agent Orange

Are you having a similar problem?

Hopefully, IAAL will respond.

If anyone else has input, it would be appreciated!

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

I was told by someone on another board to post this question to you. Thank you in advance for any help you can give me and I apoligize for the length of the post. Also, I have copied and pasted this post, so you probably already know the "legalities!"

Child born 1988. Father had no idea until November 1997. In 1991, child was taken from mother and was ward of the state. Court appointed an attorney from end of 1991 until May 1997. In November 1997, paternity was established.

Father is getting attorney's bills from collection agency. Father has never paid…a few years ago a different collection agency tried to collect, Father sent copy of DNA, we have never heard from them again. Someone (mother) has been paying these bills since 1999. Bill went from $4,000+ to about $1,200. Statute of limitations in CA for filing lawsuit for debt is 4 years after debt goes 180 days past due. We had to send collection agency 3 letters and threaten them with filing a formal complaint before they would “validate” debt. Agency sent list of payments that have been made (not by us). According to the U.S. Fed, they had 90 days to reply. It took them 120. The U.S. Fed (just got off the phone with them) says that they don't enforce the 90 day rule. They gave me the phone numbers to CA and MI Bureau of Consumer Affairs and to CA and MI Attorney General. Both people I spoke to today in the Fed mentioned the 'stupid deadbeat dad laws' and had no idea how to respond to my legal questions. Debt collector is threatening lawsuit on father, even though monthly payments are being made. Contacted Dept. of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Consumer affairs, they seem to think since debt is being paid, no lawsuit can be brought, but they are unsure. They do not know statute of limitations on this, quoting lack of knowledge in 'deadbeat dad' area. They don't know if a creditor can even try to collect for 6 years and then consider debt late. Have 10 days to reply to latest demand for payment.

CA Law States: 3153. (a) If the court appoints counsel under this chapter to represent the child, counsel shall receive a reasonable sum for compensation and expenses, the amount of which shall be determined by the court. Except as provided in subdivision (b), this amount shall be paid by the parties in the proportions the court deems just.

(b) Upon its own motion or that of a party, the court shall determine whether both parties together are financially unable to pay all or a portion of the cost of counsel appointed pursuant to this chapter, and the portion of the cost of that counsel which the court finds the parties are unable to pay shall be paid by the county. The Judicial Council shall adopt guidelines to assist in determining financial eligibility for county payment of counsel appointed by the court pursuant to this chapter.


Court papers (support & automatic arrears) make no mention of court costs, attorney fees, etc. Nothing. We have nothing in writing that says H has to pay this debt.

If I could get SOMETHING that shows when this debt went to collection originally, we may have a chance that it is too old for them to even sue.

Any help would be appreciated. Thank you.

My response:

The debt is still valid - - I will explain.

You have to remember that "child support" inurs to the benefit of the child, not the custodial parent or any State or County agency. Child support is defined, basically, as money paid for the benefit of the child, to include health, welfare and well-being. Since attorney's fees and it's concommittant legal representation can be construed for the "welfare and well-being" of the child, then the Statute of Limitations runs with the child and the child's age - - not the parent or agency; i.e., the Statute of Limitations of 4 years does not begin to run until the child reaches age 18, and continues for 4 years thereafter.

While it is the parent's or the agencies obligation to collect on behalf of the child, again, and since the benefits "inur" to the child, there is no defense of the Statute of Limitations or of Laches, or even Estoppel. The Limitations period for a debt that inurs for the benefit of a child, runs with the child, not the parent or any State or County agencies involved.

In Comer, the California Supreme Court addressed issues that it left unanswered in Marriage of Damico. [In re Marriage of Comer (1996) 14 Cal.4th 504, 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 155, 927 P.2d 265] In Comer, the mother, in addition to concealing the children, had been an AFDC recipient. The concealment ended while the children were still minors. The Supreme court held that the father could not use an estoppel defense arising from the concealment because (a) since the children were still minors, they, rather than the mother alone as in Damico, would benefit from the payment of support arrearages, (b) estoppel cannot be raised against a county because to do so would violate the strong public policy requiring a parent who is obligated to support his or her children to reimburse the county for AFDC payments made to the children, (c) nothing in the record indicated that the county had failed in its official duty to attempt to locate the father or that the county in any way affirmatively induced reliance by the father thereby excusing his obligation to reimburse for the AFDC payments, and (d) the father made no diligent efforts to locate the children.

Expenses incurred by the district attorney in carrying out the actions described above, including expenses in another state, may be advanced by the county subject to reimbursement by the state. [Fam C §3134(a)] However, the court must, if it is appropriate, require either or both parties to the custody proceeding to reimburse the district attorney’s actual expenses, and the county must take "reasonable action" to enforce that liability. [Fam C §3134(b)]

Because your huband's debt is for the benefit of the child, and since the taxpayers are not to be saddled with his debts, I will tell you that there is only one way out of these debts - - but, because the debts are for the welfare and well-being of a child, I will make no further comment in this regard.

Good luck to you.

IAAL

 

[VeronicaGia]

IAAL

Thank you for your response. Still a little confused, but this helps.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Re: IAAL

Thank you for your response. Still a little confused, but this helps.

My response:

I don't know where your confusion lies, but like I mentioned to you before, my responses frequently engender more questions.

However, my responses are meant to "spark" writers to take the information received here, and to seek further assistance from their own attorney for further clarifications in conjunction with other specific and personal information not written on this forum - - i.e., not to rely only on what is said here.

I know my response will give you "food for thought" and give you the impetus to seek assistance in this matter as soon as possible.

Thanks for writing.

IAAL