What Financial Situations Are Considered for Modification of Support

My question involves child support in the State of: California


I am asking the following questions on behalf of my fiancée. Currently, he has a court order to pay child support to the mother of his 9 yr. old son, but the amount that is has been ordered to pay is creating a hardship in our current household.

My question is this: What financial situations of both the non-custodial and custodial parents do the courts take into account when determining the amount of support that is paid the custodial parent? If there was financial evidence that was not taken into account during the original child support hearing, can a modification of child support be filed?

Facts to consider:

a) non-custodial parent was unexpectedly laid off from work for 5 months
b) non-custodial parent filed a motion for support modification at the time of unemployment
c) while waiting for modification hearing, arrears were accrued based on previous child support order
d) non-custodial parent pays child support arrears to ex-wife for children 20+ years old
e) non-custodial parent became employed shortly before hearing for modification of child support
f) non-custodial parent wants more visitation
g) custodial parent earns self employment wages
h) custodial parent receives disability payments for herself and child


Let me give some background in this situation. His ex filed for child support in 2011 at which time she was living in CA. and my fiancée was living in another state. At that time because he was not made of aware of court procedures he was not allowed to present his case to the court and a support order was put in place that had 0% visitation. That order had a set amount for child support and ordered that half of all medical costs be paid as well. To this he did not disagree and paid everything that was asked of him. His ex also asked him to pay above and beyond that amount on things such as school clothes, birthday party expenses and items for the child that were only used in her household and which were purchased separately for our own household at our own expense (car seat, stroller, etc.) And although it wasn't ordered and some of these things should have been paid with the child support being received, he still paid for half.

A few months later he moved back to CA. He still paid the ordered child support, even though his wages had decreased with his new job. He also resumed visitation with his son. In the beginning of 2013 he was laid off from his job with no warning. At that time he talked with his ex about lowering the child support payment, as he was unable to pay the amount she was accustomed to, until he could find employment. She was not agreeable to this, stating that he owed her that money and didn't care what sacrifices he had to make. With little options, he filed a motion to modify the existing order through DCSS. When reviewed by DCSS, they said he had grounds for doing so and gave the estimation the new support payments would be. It took him several months to find gainful employment and by the time he did the motion still had not went to court yet. So after speaking with his ex, they had agreed since he now had employment there was no need to go back to court to have the amount changed and that the old amount was agreeable to both. Unfortunately, after contacting DCSS to have the motion stopped he was informed that it was too late and they would have to go to court anyway, but said if both parties were in agreement that the original amount of support was sufficient that the court would take that into consideration.

The following is where my questions stem from. Even though outside of court they had agreed to stick to the old child support amount, once in front of the judge his ex decided not to follow through with it and to let the court decide the amount of support to be paid. At which time he was penalized for not having as much visitation as he wanted as there was a 0% visitation order and due to the fact the months proceeding the hearing his income was so limited it was a hardship to afford the 40+ round trip drive to visit his son, especially when his ex wouldn't meet him half way and bare some of the cost of transportation. The judge didn't look at the fact that he had spent several months unemployed and all that time while waiting for the motion to modify the support arrears were piling up. On top of which he also has an order to pay arrears to his first wife for children from that marriage, even though those children are older than 18. He had evidence that his ex had self employment wages that she did not claim when filling out her financial paperwork. The judge took none of these things into account, nor the fact that now that he was employed he would see his son more regularly since he could afford the cost of driving the 40+ miles round trip. He was not given the opportunity to tell the his side of things at all.

In the end a much higher support amount was put into effect and arrears were assessed and made to be paid. Currently, even though we lead a very meager lifestyle, after child support and arrearages are paid to both previous relationships there isn't even enough money to pay rent. And even though I have a job, all of my money goes to support the rest of the living expenses with none left over for my own children from my previous marriage. There are times when it's necessary to visit a food bank just to put food on the table.

All of these things are why I am so frustrated at this point. I have a very amicable relationship with my ex-spouse and he is very understanding about the hardship I am facing right now making me unable support my own children better. Yes, I believe my fiancée's exes should get the child support they rightfully deserve. I do, however, think that the arrears he pays his ex-wife, the self employment wages his ex (mother of his 9 year old) receives, and the fact that visitation is more than was led to be believed should be taken into account when calculating the child support order.

If anyone that has insight in this matter that could be useful in lowering the current child support order it would be greatly appreciated.

Very simply, it would appear that nothing untoward has happened. Mom was allowed to change her mind in court, and quite honestly it looks like the judge did do a pretty good job. The lack of visitation isn't Mom's problem unless she's withheld court-ordered visitation.

The only thing which may be a valid reason to modify might be Mom's income. Given that she's on disability though, the court is more likely to take that as her only solid form of income. Then again, the court might do something about it.

Dad has to take some blame here. His lack of parenting time falls down to him, not Mom. At any point, he could have (and still can) filed for more parenting time.

There really isn't much of a side to tell - as cold as it might sound, the court basically doesn't care too much about his prior obligations, his lack of visitation, or Mom being disabled. It's not that the court didn't take these things into account - it's simply that they're almost meaningless.

As I mentioned, the ONLY thing he might have is Mom's income.

As I explained, in 2011 there was 0% visitation in the order due to not being able to present a case at that time. During that time period he was naïve to many court procedures and he was not given the opportunity to be connected via phone, as he was living out of state. If he had been privy to the court hearing in 2011 he would have established a visitation schedule with the custodial parent.
But, shortly there after he moved back to CA., and visitation was established on a regular basis. Until the unemployment, at which time there was a hardship making it difficult to have visitation. The times he did try to visit his son, his ex had other activities that would interfere. So, when presented in court, the ex neglected to tell the judge that some of the times there could have been visitation she simply did not allow it. She also failed to tell the judge that up to the point of unemployment there was regular visitation. Given a choice he would have seen his son every single day. I was at this hearing, it was very one-sided. She was given ample time to talk, he on the other hand was asked simple questions that required a yes or no answer and was not allowed to elaborate on any answer or subject.
Currently he is in the process of filing for visitation with his son.
The "Mom" makes considerable wages as a notary public on top of the disability she collects. But that is not her only source of income, she is married as well and her husband has a very lucrative job. From the research I have done, her husband's income has no bearing in this matter, but I am mentioning so you know she lives a very comfortable life.
The basis of his child support was simply his net wages (before any adjustments) + 0% visitation. His net wages have the arrears for his ex-wife taken out, my whole contention here is, why is the support not based off the net wages AFTER the other support is taken out? He is being made to pay support based from money that doesn't even go in his pocket.

- - - Updated - - -

I still sit here as frustrated as when I posted this thread. And to add to it, now I have a complete lack of faith in our judicial system. If it can be so cold as to not take into account the financial hardships that people encounter. Every child deserves to be taken care of with the means their parents have to support them. But what kind of world do we live in when a court system would rather see a parent not be able to afford to live just to enforce some mathematical equation that doesn't account all deductions from a persons net worth before calculating a figure.

Quote:

---

Quoting Frustrated in CA.

---

As I explained, in 2011 there was 0% visitation in the order due to not being able to present a case at that time. During that time period he was naïve to many court procedures and he was not given the opportunity to be connected via phone, as he was living out of state. If he had been privy to the court hearing in 2011 he would have established a visitation schedule with the custodial parent.
But, shortly there after he moved back to CA., and visitation was established on a regular basis. Until the unemployment, at which time there was a hardship making it difficult to have visitation. The times he did try to visit his son, his ex had other activities that would interfere. So, when presented in court, the ex neglected to tell the judge that some of the times there could have been visitation she simply did not allow it. She also failed to tell the judge that up to the point of unemployment there was regular visitation. Given a choice he would have seen his son every single day. I was at this hearing, it was very one-sided. She was given ample time to talk, he on the other hand was asked simple questions that required a yes or no answer and was not allowed to elaborate on any answer or subject.
Currently he is in the process of filing for visitation with his son.
The "Mom" makes considerable wages as a notary public on top of the disability she collects. But that is not her only source of income, she is married as well and her husband has a very lucrative job. From the research I have done, her husband's income has no bearing in this matter, but I am mentioning so you know she lives a very comfortable life.
The basis of his child support was simply his net wages (before any adjustments) + 0% visitation. His net wages have the arrears for his ex-wife taken out, my whole contention here is, why is the support not based off the net wages AFTER the other support is taken out? He is being made to pay support based from money that doesn't even go in his pocket.

- - - Updated - - -

I still sit here as frustrated as when I posted this thread. And to add to it, now I have a complete lack of faith in our judicial system. If it can be so cold as to not take into account the financial hardships that people encounter. Every child deserves to be taken care of with the means their parents have to support them. But what kind of world do we live in when a court system would rather see a parent not be able to afford to live just to enforce some mathematical equation that doesn't account all deductions from a persons net worth before calculating a figure.

---

How much money do you think notaries earn? Unless she is somehow notarizing dozens of things a day, its not going to be much.

Thanks to the social media networks, I was able to view one check she posted worth over $600.00 for work she had done as a notary public..... It takes my fiancée 2 weeks to earn $600.00 after all support is deducted.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll put it to you this way, the child support agency has the maximum 1/2 of my fiancée's earnings garnished.... and even with that much being garnished he is still not paying the full amount of child support that was ordered. So in the end he keeps having more arrears added on.

Quote:

---

Quoting Frustrated in CA.

---

Thanks to the social media networks, I was able to view one check she posted worth over $600.00 for work she had done as a notary public..... It takes my fiancée 2 weeks to earn $600.00 after all support is deducted.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll put it to you this way, the child support agency has the maximum 1/2 of my fiancée's earnings garnished.... and even with that much being garnished he is still not paying the full amount of child support that was ordered. So in the end he keeps having more arrears added on.

---

Your fiancé has not been doing what needs to be done. He is in arrears for support for his grown children.
He is in arrears for his other child.
He doesn't take care of business. Not knowing what to do when you are taken to court is no excuse at all. He had every opportunity to get on the internet or call the courthouse where his case was being heard to figure out what he needed to do.
The fact that he doesn't make that much in two weeks because support is taken out is not he ex's fault.
I appreciate the fact that you are trying to help him, but honestly, he needs to take control of this for himself.
He wasn't willing to do it in the past, and I doubt he's willing to put in the work now to do it. You really can't force him to straighten out his financial issues as frustrating as that is.

Am I here to say he is the Father of the year? Not even close. But don't be quick to assume anything about the money he owes to his ex-wife. That money is owed from over 15 years ago when she willingly moved out of state and did not let anyone know where she was going. He had no way to pay her the child support money. He was on very good terms with his ex Mother in law at the time who was shocked that her daughter flew the coup. In later years it was learned she had moved to pursue a relationship and didn't want anyone to know. So for the time she was out of contact with everyone his child support wasn't being paid.

He has dutifully been paying it ever since, even while he was in the relationship with the "Mother" in question now. And for the years I have been with him he has paid every penny, without question, even above and beyond his child support ordered amounts. That is until he lost his job and we went into financial ruin.

This is NOT about NOT wanting to pay child support. This is about finding out what is taken into consideration when calculating child support payments, so everyone can lead a comfortable life.

Quote:

---

Quoting Frustrated in CA.

---

Thanks to the social media networks, I was able to view one check she posted worth over $600.00 for work she had done as a notary public..... It takes my fiancée 2 weeks to earn $600.00 after all support is deducted.

- - - Updated - - -

I'll put it to you this way, the child support agency has the maximum 1/2 of my fiancée's earnings garnished.... and even with that much being garnished he is still not paying the full amount of child support that was ordered. So in the end he keeps having more arrears added on.

---

That must have been some heck of a lot of signatures to notarize, considering that notaries in CA are only permitted to charge 10.00 per notarization.

Quote:

---

Quoting Frustrated in CA.

---

Am I here to say he is the Father of the year? Not even close. But don't be quick to assume anything about the money he owes to his ex-wife. That money is owed from over 15 years ago when she willingly moved out of state and did not let anyone know where she was going. He had no way to pay her the child support money. He was on very good terms with his ex Mother in law at the time who was shocked that her daughter flew the coup. In later years it was learned she had moved to pursue a relationship and didn't want anyone to know. So for the time she was out of contact with everyone his child support wasn't being paid.

He has dutifully been paying it ever since, even while he was in the relationship with the "Mother" in question now. And for the years I have been with him he has paid every penny, without question, even above and beyond his child support ordered amounts. That is until he lost his job and we went into financial ruin.

This is NOT about NOT wanting to pay child support. This is about finding out what is taken into consideration when calculating child support payments, so everyone can lead a comfortable life.

---

The law does not guarantee a comfortable life for everyone. The law does, however, provide that children are legally entitled to be supported by both parents.

Dad HAS messed up - twice, it would appear.

You don't have to like it, but that's really the bottom line. Given that you're alleging that Mom makes a huge amount of money being a notary, I'd bet dollars to donuts that when it comes down to the wire, Dad won't be able to prove it at all....which makes the whole thing moot.

Quote:

---

Quoting llworking

---

That must have been some heck of a lot of signatures to notarize, considering that notaries in CA are only permitted to charge 10.00 per notarization.

---

Unless she's doing real estate or something else that warrants a larger fee.... but still, even $600 A WEEK isn't a lot of money when you have 2 people to support.

And I'm going to call hogwash on what appears to be the OP's want to have us feel sorry for her boo thang. Here's the deal. He was served with legal documents. The SUMMONS has ALL THE INFORMATION he needs to know about what to do next. What appears to have happened when he was "not allowed to present his case" is that he ignored those instructions and a default judgment was entered against him. That's not his ex's problem, nor is the fact that he apparently went some time without supporting his first set of children so he has to pay arrears for them too. Seriously, if he has children that are in their 20's, then he has a child who is circa 9, he didn't seem to learn the lesson from the first decade of parenthood. He's not going to learn it (so don't have children with him or you'll be chick #3 being owed support).

He became unemployed, he filed for modification (good), he apparently didn't wander into a courthouse to see how he could do that on his own, instead he went to the government agency that does EVERYTHING slow and waited on them to do it. In the meantime, he became employed and a DOWNWARD modification wasn't necessary anymore, but it appears (since the order was modified) a modification WAS warranted and granted. Again, NOT the ex's problem. In all that time, your honey didn't think that since he was NOW in the same state as his child AND under a support order that is tied to the amount of visitation he has, he should use the same court system he used to file for child support to file for joint custody and visitation AND USE the visitation (has that been done thus far now that he should know the ropes having had to play this game twice already). If not, that again is NOT the ex's problem. The ex appears to be using the system that is in place and available for BOTH parents while your boyfriend seems to be sitting on his hands while having his girlfriend say you poor man you're just being railroaded right and left, aren't you????

Your boyfriend created this problem TWICE and I will add that if YOU, a parent of children NOT related to him is using money that you are given to feed and support that GROWN MAN who can't support himself and then want to whine about it, you need your head examined. LEAVE HIM. If you can't afford to support him, then DON'T. You have no obligation to do so, however, you DO have the obligation to take care of your children and not divert YOUR income to some dude who has created his own problems. WHAT IS WRONG WITH WOMEN THESE DAYS????:wallbang:

The court cares NOT that he "wants" more visitation if he hasn't moved his damn feet to do anything about it. The court cares not that he's paying arrears for his grown children. He should have thought about that when he made a new child. The court cares not that he's struggling to live with his new girlfriend. The new girlfriend and her kids are so far down the line in the list of priorities, they don't even show up on the paper. Does your ex husband know you're having his children eat food bank food so that you can support your boyfriend? Is that the example you want to set for your children???? Is this the type of spouse you'd like for THEM to choose for themselves? As for your mathematical equation yadda yadda yadda... you aren't part of his equation, nor are your children. The relationship he has with you is optional and obviously he's had enough time/money to date you, propose to you and all that jazz... but not enough time/money to bail himself out of the mess HE created on his own.

THINK.
and before you say I don't know what I'm talkin' bout...

Signed,
L.A. County Child Support Officer - 3 yrs.
L.A. County Superior Court employee - 10 yrs.