So XH has come up with a proposal about the back support that he owes, and he told me what it was last night. He would ask me to waive the entire amount of back support. In exchange we could have something in written form where he agrees to pay about a third of what is owed, over the span of five years. He even ::generously:: said that we could have the form notarized. If I agree to this, he will continue to pay the monthly amount that he has been paying. If I do not agree, he will discontinue his monthly payments and file paperwork with the court to have his current support reduced.
Since I do not agree with this, and would never take the DCSS out of the mix, I guess XH won't be paying child support. My lawyer advised me to only settle with him on a lesser amount of back support if he had "cash in hand" which he obviously does not.
The most frustrating thing about this is trying to reason with someone who is completely irrational. I guess he doesn't realize that pay not paying his monthly support, for the sake of blackmail/making a point, he is ultimately hurting his child.
Re: Update from last week's post (re: child support)
That sucks... I'm so sorry to hear that. What a constant hassle to have to deal with someone like that.
My therapist recommended a book to me that I think you might find useful. It's called "The Sociopath Next Door". Apparently the idea is that 1 in 25 people have these traits and how to effectively deal with them... sounds like he might be a good fit.
I hope things improve!
I'm frustrated for you! Obivously the moron doesn't realize that you cannot choose to stop paying current support since you owe back support. All that's going to do is increase his back support. It's all going to catch up with him eventually, and it's already started to. Courts don't have pity on deadbeats who owe back support and lower their current support amounts accordingly.
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
Interesting. On some level, I think him paying you back anything could be a good idea (since I highly doubt you'll ever get the full amount paid back anyway). But on the other, he seems so backhanded that I'm not sure I would trust it at all without going through your lawyer to draw up the paperwork.
Does the court currently garnish his wages? If not, is that a possibility?
How much do you NEED his support each month? Would you be fine without it? Could you then relinquish any rights/visitation because of it?
Sorry...so many questions as I am not familiar with CS.
Wow! Your XH is in a really SAD state and so oblivious. I am sorry you have to deal with him and happy that you are not with him.
Your son is so lucky to have you.
@ Ghost-I can mostly go through my lawyer. I was hoping that some things could be worked out between us (for the sake of saving legal fees) but I realize that he's simply not rational.
Carrots-I would have no problem settling for SOME of what he owes me just to get something, but the fact that he wants to pay it over a long period of time, and not through the legal channels isn't going to work for me.
The major problem here is that he is self employed, therefore there are no wages to garnish. DCSS basically said there isn't a whole lot they can do with someone who's self employed. They've taken a hold out on his license and levvied bank accounts, etc.
I can make it without his support each month. Of course it's tight, but I can make it. The main thing that I was doing with the support he was giving was putting it into savings and/or putting it into P's college account because I feared something like this would happen.
Visitation and CS are totally non-related. So if he stops paying CS I cannot withhold visitation.
Ugh I'm sorry A. Smart not to agree to this crazy idea though. ((hugs))
CS and visitation are handled completely separately. So not paying has no affect on visitation and vice versa.
They can't garnish wages cause he gets paid under the table. (achase correct me if I am wrong)
I agree that getting something would be great, but like your lawyer said I would not take it unless it was "cash in hand".
He is an idiot. Getting this bent out of shape all over $158 is so ridiculous.
This exactly. Funny how he thinks he's "winning" the battle with his plan though. So typical of him.