The Community Forum to Voice and Address Issues Affecting the Family
FOC Recommendation
Hubby met with the FOC referee to have his child support obligation investigated and a recommendation made today, but we're not really sure what is going on at this point because things are apparently being done differently this time.
First, both parties were told to bring in their financial information (W2's, last years tax returns, a recent pay stub, and anything else which shows 'income'). My husband brought in his most recent pay stub, our tax returns from last year, as well as his W2's from work, and the ones from when he was on one week of medical. Lastly he brought documentation from his website to show that he does not operate it for any 'income'. BM on the other hand only brought her W2's, and no tax returns, no pay stubs since she quit her job, and nothing showing the income she made during the months of medical she had previously been on.
Second, the referee (who happened to be for the first time in history, a man!) was going to impute her income at what she would be making, which he said would raise my husbands support obligation by about $100/month. My husband was actually going to agree to it at first, but then the double talk started when the referee started saying that BM could come back again next year and request another review due to the fact that she would have "run out" of the buyout money since it was approximately two years worth of the income she previously earned. At that point my husband started to point out certain facts and ask questions, to which BM's lawyer started his BS of mumbling under his breath and name calling. Which my husband could tell was even making the referee uncomfortable, even though he kept looking away and trying not to make eye contact.
When BM's lawyer replied (under his breath) "shut up, or hire a lawyer to file a disposition", my husband simply looked at the referee and said he could save everyone a lot of trouble right then and there because he wasn't going to sign anything there today. At which point he asked for a copy of the recommendation and the referee claimed "that's not how they do things". He further explained that once a recommendation is made, it is mailed to the parties, and if a party objects to it, it goes to the judge, whereas if the parties do nothing, nothing happens and it doesn't go into effect. That is something I want to check on because I was under the impression that a recommendation has to be objected to within 21 days, otherwise they assume the parties agree and it is put into effect. But I may be wrong, so I'm going to look into it.
Since my husband got home from court he has discovered a few other things, such as the fact that his income was again stated to be higher every month than what it really is (by around $1200 and appears that the income was based before taxes) and the recommendation that was made doesn't meet the states minimum threshold to have it changed. At least to our understanding.
In the meantime this is retroactive back to when the motion was filed (September 10, 2008), which is creating an arrear (that hubby just got rid of), and we don't know what to do or what is going on because hubby didn't receive anything on the recommendation today. Which means he's going to have to wait until it comes in the mail which is eating at the time he has to object to it in the first place.
So basically nothing was done today and hubby has to wait to get the recommendation in the mail so that he can object to it and get in front of the judge. Which also reminds me of the fact that hubby found out from the referee (I believe) that their judge is changing again next year to Chrzanowski, which will make the fourth judge since the case opened in 1999, three of which will have been since 2006 (when my husband first started going to court about not seeing his kids). So I'll come back and post when we get the recommendation in the mail, in the meantime there's nothing we can do because we don't really know what the recommendation is going to be. But the fact that the referee mentioned he was going to be talking to the new judge makes us more than a bit uneasy. So we will see.
First, both parties were told to bring in their financial information (W2's, last years tax returns, a recent pay stub, and anything else which shows 'income'). My husband brought in his most recent pay stub, our tax returns from last year, as well as his W2's from work, and the ones from when he was on one week of medical. Lastly he brought documentation from his website to show that he does not operate it for any 'income'. BM on the other hand only brought her W2's, and no tax returns, no pay stubs since she quit her job, and nothing showing the income she made during the months of medical she had previously been on.
Second, the referee (who happened to be for the first time in history, a man!) was going to impute her income at what she would be making, which he said would raise my husbands support obligation by about $100/month. My husband was actually going to agree to it at first, but then the double talk started when the referee started saying that BM could come back again next year and request another review due to the fact that she would have "run out" of the buyout money since it was approximately two years worth of the income she previously earned. At that point my husband started to point out certain facts and ask questions, to which BM's lawyer started his BS of mumbling under his breath and name calling. Which my husband could tell was even making the referee uncomfortable, even though he kept looking away and trying not to make eye contact.
When BM's lawyer replied (under his breath) "shut up, or hire a lawyer to file a disposition", my husband simply looked at the referee and said he could save everyone a lot of trouble right then and there because he wasn't going to sign anything there today. At which point he asked for a copy of the recommendation and the referee claimed "that's not how they do things". He further explained that once a recommendation is made, it is mailed to the parties, and if a party objects to it, it goes to the judge, whereas if the parties do nothing, nothing happens and it doesn't go into effect. That is something I want to check on because I was under the impression that a recommendation has to be objected to within 21 days, otherwise they assume the parties agree and it is put into effect. But I may be wrong, so I'm going to look into it.
Since my husband got home from court he has discovered a few other things, such as the fact that his income was again stated to be higher every month than what it really is (by around $1200 and appears that the income was based before taxes) and the recommendation that was made doesn't meet the states minimum threshold to have it changed. At least to our understanding.
In the meantime this is retroactive back to when the motion was filed (September 10, 2008), which is creating an arrear (that hubby just got rid of), and we don't know what to do or what is going on because hubby didn't receive anything on the recommendation today. Which means he's going to have to wait until it comes in the mail which is eating at the time he has to object to it in the first place.
So basically nothing was done today and hubby has to wait to get the recommendation in the mail so that he can object to it and get in front of the judge. Which also reminds me of the fact that hubby found out from the referee (I believe) that their judge is changing again next year to Chrzanowski, which will make the fourth judge since the case opened in 1999, three of which will have been since 2006 (when my husband first started going to court about not seeing his kids). So I'll come back and post when we get the recommendation in the mail, in the meantime there's nothing we can do because we don't really know what the recommendation is going to be. But the fact that the referee mentioned he was going to be talking to the new judge makes us more than a bit uneasy. So we will see.
Tags: child support, foc, lawyer, macomb county, mi, objection, recommendation
Add a Comment
About
© 2009 Created by Ralph Rogers on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
You need to be a member of Children Need Both Parents to add comments!
Join this Ning Network