BPDFamily.com

I am in the middle of negotiating terms before going to trial. Hoping it might be over before trial. I am giving up the half of his stock (not worthy for the fight and stress). Not asking him morning/afternoon care CS portion.

I have a question about CS wording.

It says

Father shall cause the CS to be delivered to Mother on or before the 1st of each month.

If the CS is not received within 30 days of the 1st month or CS is more than 5 days late for 2 consecutive months, wife may file for an earning withholding order.

Now BPDf wants to stretch the numbers 30 to 60 days and 5 to 30 days. I am not going to agree to those numbers but what if I take whole IF sentences out? What are the disadvantages? Even without the sentences, if CS is late repeatedly or not received, can't I gather evidences and file for an earning withholding order? To me, it gives him more leeway to be late for certain days and be okay as long as it is paid before the grace date. Or is it wise to be there saying 35 days late/ 10 days? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!

In my state, PA, we have PACSES which manages the CS transaction.  It comes right out of my paycheck and goes to ex.  No arguments.  Sounds like you guys are trying to do this without this type of arrangement?  I don't know that I'd feel comfortable with this written in an order, and then me being responsible for making sure I pay her.  Too much back and forth.  With PACSES there is no way for ex to accuse me of not paying. 

My troubles have been with the courthouse and the inconsistent way they make the calculations.  And God forbid if there is an error not in your favor and you have to try to get that corrected.  I've had many mistakes made in my very simple calculations.

You are right not to put that much leeway in writing. In my case my step children's mom has a very hard time with flexible thinking. She feels that "at minimum" means that the minimum is the maximum she has to do. If you gave him the kind of leeway he is asking for then you could probably expect to get the CS right on the cusp of him failing to follow the order on a regular basis.

What you need to find out is if there are any guidelines for your jurisdiction on what would be required to get a withholding order. If there are already specific guidelines in place then you may not need a clause about it. But the thing about having the clause in there that works to your favor is that expectations and consequences are clearly spelled out. So If you do have to file for action you are more likely to get the outcome you desire.

Also keep in mind that an entitled BPD/NPD will ask for the moon while offering nothing in return. What you are asking for here seems very reasonable and I don't think the court would have a problem going with this. You may find that you are far more likely to get a more fair outcome from the court than you would from your ex, so go with what you feel is fair and of it's something you are likely to get anyway the other side may not fight it at the end.

Most of these situations don't get resolved until the day of trial, walking into the courthouse. Once having to go before a judge is imminent there is a lot more pressure to settle.

Thanks for your input! In my state, there are many enforcement tools too.

Are those guidelines the standard in your state?

When DH was ordered support, he had it automatically deducted from his paycheck. He thought it was all good until the second month when he got a notice of delinquency. Apparently the first day of the first month the CS was deducted but the balance was zero because his payroll deductions hadn't started yet.

Anyway, I brought that up because it was all handled automatically through the court. uBPDbm didn't have to file anything.

Is it even an issue if he is a little bit late each month? I mean, I would just automatically assume I would never get a dime and use CS as "bonus" money for the kids (college funds, etc).

If that's the wording I don't know if ex can change it. It sounds like those are state set guidelines.

I'd look it up before spending too much effort fighting him on it.

One problem court has is that once it addresses an issue, it resets the clock back to zero, so next time it happens again then you have to start all over again.  It's frustrating when the second, third and fourth times are treated virtually identically as the first.  If you're going to be lenient on the terms then you need to tighten the compliance terms.

Rather than haggle back and forth, would he accept your terms more readily if you say, "Well, this isn't working.  The only alternative is to let the court decide, of course, that means everything's back on the table, your other assets, etc."

Thanks Everyone, I looked up and found state guide lines. With those, I don't even need the wording there. I needed to make sure with all your insight and research before asking my lawyers why they added the wordings there since I don't have much trust in them anymore. This was their response.

Regarding child support-if he fails to timely pay the child support payments, you can file for an earnings withholding order so that he wages are garnished but we included this in the agreement as a way of compromising with him.

? So I have decided to take the whole thing out