My question involves a child custody case from the State of: California and North Carolina
My question involves a child custody case from the State of: California & North Carolina
First, I am asking for help on behalf of my brother-in-law. He has 4 children, 3 of which are with one woman, and one with another. He was married to both women (at separate times), with the first, with whom he has a 16 year old daughter, he is ordered to pay a little over $1300 per month. This order is through the state of California, where his ex-wife and daughter reside. The other order is through North Carolina, where his second ex-wife, and three children reside. He is ordered through North Carolina to pay $800 per month for all three children combined. He is also required to carry health insurance on all 4 children, despite that they are covered on their mother's or step-father's insurance. As a result, he is tapped out. He resides in Missouri with my sister. Missouri garnishes his child-support, and allocates that money to the States of California, and North Carolina who then distribute it to the mothers. In Missouri, from my understanding, they are supposed to garnish no more than 50% of your gross pay; however, he is having 60% garnished, and the health insurance premiums for all 4 as well. Because 60% of his gross is less than the dollar amounts that he is ordered to pay, he gets further and further behind each month. His would like for Missouri to handle the garnishment, and distribution of funds for both cases. Is this something that's possible because one of the moms is married to a man who is in the military, so they move a lot, which means the process of getting her money is delayed each time. The garnishments still takes place, but she doesn't get the support for months. Also, is there a way to ensure that no less than 50% of his wages are being garnished? Is it possible for an individual to be ordered to pay more support than 50% of their wages? Aren't ordered amounts supposed to be based on what an individual's income is? He is tens of thousands of dollars behind, and it's having a negative effect on my sister's financial stability. I am by no means an advocate for father's not adequately supporting their children, as I'm a single mother myself. He would like for the support, if not reduced to at least be spread more evenly between all 4 children, instead of 1 receiving 62% of the support, while 3 receive the other 38%. It should also be noted that he has very little contact with the 16 year old daughter (her mother's choice), and has seen her only once in the last 7 years (not sure the full situation there). Any insight would be extremely helpful, as he can't afford a lawyer, for all of the reasons listed above.
My question involves a child custody case from the State of: California & North Carolina
First, I am asking for help on behalf of my brother-in-law. He has 4 children, 3 of which are with one woman, and one with another. He was married to both women (at separate times), with the first, with whom he has a 16 year old daughter, he is ordered to pay a little over $1300 per month. This order is through the state of California, where his ex-wife and daughter reside. The other order is through North Carolina, where his second ex-wife, and three children reside. He is ordered through North Carolina to pay $800 per month for all three children combined. He is also required to carry health insurance on all 4 children, despite that they are covered on their mother's or step-father's insurance. As a result, he is tapped out. He resides in Missouri with my sister. Missouri garnishes his child-support, and allocates that money to the States of California, and North Carolina who then distribute it to the mothers. In Missouri, from my understanding, they are supposed to garnish no more than 50% of your gross pay; however, he is having 60% garnished, and the health insurance premiums for all 4 as well. Because 60% of his gross is less than the dollar amounts that he is ordered to pay, he gets further and further behind each month. His would like for Missouri to handle the garnishment, and distribution of funds for both cases. Is this something that's possible because one of the moms is married to a man who is in the military, so they move a lot, which means the process of getting her money is delayed each time. The garnishments still takes place, but she doesn't get the support for months. Also, is there a way to ensure that no less than 50% of his wages are being garnished? Is it possible for an individual to be ordered to pay more support than 50% of their wages? Aren't ordered amounts supposed to be based on what an individual's income is? He is tens of thousands of dollars behind, and it's having a negative effect on my sister's financial stability. I am by no means an advocate for father's not adequately supporting their children, as I'm a single mother myself. He would like for the support, if not reduced to at least be spread more evenly between all 4 children, instead of 1 receiving 62% of the support, while 3 receive the other 38%. It should also be noted that he has very little contact with the 16 year old daughter (her mother's choice), and has seen her only once in the last 7 years (not sure the full situation there). Any insight would be extremely helpful, as he can't afford a lawyer, for all of the reasons listed above.
Calculation of Support: Lots of Child Support Issues
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire