Hi!
I am in a very complicated situation. Five years ago I was named by a woman who I have never met as a father of her child. I have never been informed about it. It was a default judgement and CSE claims they sent me out a letter to address where I have never lived.Now CSE wants $ 60 000 in child support and welfare reimbursements... There is a court order and now my salary is garnished.I went to CSE and informed them that I have never dated with this woman and I am not the father but they said the statute of limitations for challenging paternity had passed. What I have to do? I am in Washington.

Hi!
I am in a very complicated situation. Five years ago I was named by a woman who I have never met as a father of her child. I have never been informed about it. It was a default judgement and CSE claims they sent me out a letter to address where I have never lived.Now CSE wants $ 60 000 in child support and welfare reimbursements ...There is a court order and now my salary is garnished.I went to CSE and informed them that I have never dated with this woman and I am not the father but they said the statute of limitations for challenging paternity had passed. What I have to do? I am in Washington.
Take a deep breath and drink a glass of cold water:) and pay... You have to ask for DNA test but you are not entitled to remove your past unpaid support.You can set aside only future obligations.I am not sure about this because the State of Washington has law which prohibits paternity changes from 180 days after the court order to 2 years after the child's birth.

Get a lawyer. A good one.

I can't believe that if you've never met this woman, and never knew of the paternity summons, and DNA proves it, that you'd have to pay for a child you never fathered or even knew about.

My question here for you is why in the world did she name you as the father?

Request DNA testing and if it turns out you are not he father, there are legal steps you can take for refund and all garnished wages, and possible crimal charges against the people who made a false claim.

Request DNA testing and if it turns out you are not he father, their are legal steps you can take for refund and all garnished wages, and possible crimal charges agaisnt the people who made a false claim.
A lot of states have law which prohibits reimbursemsnt for victims of fraud... for example: in Alabama §26-17a-1 FC Allows action to disestablish paternity to be brought at any time upon presentation of scientific evidence by legal father that he is not the biological father. Not applicable in cases of adoption. Section 26-17a-2 prohibits claims for damages, recoupment or reimbursement against court, mother or state.
Tennessee is currently considering a law that would allow for the disestablishment of parentage.The new paternity law would not allow reimbursement for child support that has already been paid and would only apply to future child support payments.
See also Taron Grant James'case.
A man who made child support payments based on a paternity judgment later proven erroneous was not entitled to reimbursement, this district's Court of Appeal ruled yesterday.

Affirming an order by Los Angeles Superior Court Referee Dennis Carroll, Div. Eight held that Taron Grant James could not get back the money he paid to the Los Angeles County Child Support Services Department pursuant to a factually mistaken paternity finding.The case is County of Los Angeles v. James, B187770.
J.S. v. L.S. ___ N.J. Super.
Requiring reimbursement would be contrary to the best interests of the child because that would result in depletion of resources for the child. If anyone has been unjustly enriched, it was the biological father : the putative father's remedy is against him, not the mother.

You CANNOT /!! / sue the state, CSEA and the mother-it is contrary to the public policy:eek: :eek:... you CAN sue for refund the biological father ONLY.

Can you prove through income tax records where you lived at that time? Also go to the landlord or auditors records if privately owned and see who owned the home where the letter was sent. Surely you can get someone to listen to you. In Ohio we have fathers rights groups, maybe look around in your area, you never know maybe someone like that can help you. Also contact American Civil liberties Union (ACLU). Maybe they will take on your case. I am sorry for your problems and I hope that you get them resolved.

Get a lawyer. A good one.

I can't believe that if you've never met this woman, and never knew of the paternity summons, and DNA proves it, that you'd have to pay for a child you never fathered or even knew about.

My question here for you is why in the world did she name you as the father?
I haven't got any ideas

Can you prove through income tax records where you lived at that time? Also go to the landlord or auditors records if privately owned and see who owned the home where the letter was sent. Surely you can get someone to listen to you. In ohio we have fathers rights groups, maybe look around in your area, you never know maybe someone like that can help you. Also contact American Civil liberties Union (ACLU). Maybe they will take on your case. I am sorry for your problems and I hope that you get them resolved.
Good advices but... legaly thinking and speaking the facts are:1.The court established him as a father by default 2.there was deadline for contest 3.If the court allows disestablishment,it will refers to future obligations not to past ones. 4. For CSEA he is obligated to pay because there is a court order. 5. He is the legal father for all purposes from the day of the default order and will be the legal father till his paternity will be disestablished by court.

So... basically the law says that you can name some random John Doe as the father, go to court to get child support, giving his last known address as some floozy's flop down the street, and you can bilch him for thousands of dollars before he even realizes it, and he can't do a damned thing against you?

Hell, if that's the case, forget getting rid of child support. Go for full custody of the kid, based on the fact that the mother is a pathological liar, cannot support her own child, and apparently doesn't even know who she's sleeping with.

THEN--go after HER for child support.

Bet she changes her tune mighty fast.

So...basically the law says that you can name some random John Doe as the father, go to court to get child support, giving his last known address as some floozy's flop down the street, and you can bilch him for thousands of dollars before he even realizes it, and he can't do a damned thing against you?

Hell, if that's the case, forget getting rid of child support. Go for full custody of the kid, based on the fact that the mother is a pathological liar, cannot support her own child, and apparently doesn't even know who she's sleeping with.

THEN--go after HER for child support.

Bet she changes her tune mighty fast.
:D :D :D :D :D :D

A lot of states have law which prohibits reimbursemsnt for victims of fraud...for example: in Alabama §26-17a-1 FC Allows action to disestablish paternity to be brought at any time upon presentation of scientific evidence by legal father that he is not the biological father. Not applicable in cases of adoption. Section 26-17a-2 prohibits claims for damages, recoupment or reimbursement against court, mother or state.
Tennessee is currently considering a law that would allow for the disestablishment of parentage.The new paternity law would not allow reimbursement for child support that has already been paid and would only apply to future child support payments.
See also Taron Grant James'case.
A man who made child support payments based on a paternity judgment later proven erroneous was not entitled to reimbursement, this district's Court of Appeal ruled yesterday.

Affirming an order by Los Angeles Superior Court Referee Dennis Carroll, Div. Eight held that Taron Grant James could not get back the money he paid to the Los Angeles County Child Support Services Department pursuant to a factually mistaken paternity finding.The case is County of Los Angeles v. James, B187770.
J.S. v. L.S., ___ N.J. Super.
Requiring reimbursement would be contrary to the best interests of the child because that would result in depletion of resources for the child. If anyone has been unjustly enriched, it was the biological father : the putative father's remedy is against him, not the mother.


This is why the courts in this country need to go back to the beginning, and start over. Under Common Law this would not happen.

If it turns out he not the father, the mother committed prejury on the original complaint file. This person needs to see that she doesn't get away free.

No surprise on this one, the State of California like it when the are behind in support, the state charges 10% interest in the arrears which the state keeps, it doesn't go to the parent.

Affirming an order by Los Angeles Superior Court Referee Dennis Carroll, Div. Eight held that Taron Grant James could not get back the money he paid to the Los Angeles County Child Support Services Department pursuant to a factually mistaken paternity finding.The case is County of Los Angeles v. James, B187770.
J.S. v. L.S. ___ N.J. Super.

You CANNOT /!!!/ sue the state, CSEA and the mother-it is contrary to the public policy:eek: :eek: ...you CAN sue for refund the biological father ONLY.

Well, I can see that if you had some idea about the kid. But it seems highly unfair for someone to get a default judgement against someone 14 years after the kid is born (hypothetically) when they know that the person isn't the father, and for that man to be stuck paying the support for the last 14 years even after proving that he's not the father. Sure, he can sue the bio dad, but as many people have pointed out, getting the judgement is easy, actually making him pay is not. The state will go after the one guy for child support, but they will not help him recover a legal judgement against the bio dad.

Just my thoughts. On the other hand, I don't see how the mom managed to get a default child support judgement without the putative father knowing about it.

Well, I can see that if you had some idea about the kid. But it seems highly unfair for someone to get a default judgement against someone 14 years after the kid is born (hypothetically) when they know that the person isn't the father, and for that man to be stuck paying the support for the last 14 years even after proving that he's not the father. Sure, he can sue the bio dad, but as many people have pointed out, getting the judgement is easy, actually making him pay is not. The state will go after the one guy for child support, but they will not help him recover a legal judgement against the bio dad.

[QUOTE=froggy7]Just my thoughts. On the other hand, I don't see how the mom managed to get a default child support judgement without the putative father knowing about it.
No way... we have "Bradley amendment"which prohibits all past pay challenges/see
Bradley Amemdment and retroactive modification of child support (http://www.ancpr.org/666.htm) /
You are right- it seems highly unfair for someone to get a default judgement...

Hi!
I am in a very complicated situation. Five years ago I was named by a woman who I have never met as a father of her child. I have never been informed about it. It was a default judgement and CSE claims they sent me out a letter to address where I have never lived.Now CSE wants $ 60 000 in child support and welfare reimbursements ...There is a court order and now my salary is garnished.I went to CSE and informed them that I have never dated with this woman and I am not the father but they said the statute of limitations for challenging paternity had passed. What I have to do? I am in Washington.
I'd get an attorney asap. It might cost you money out of pocket in legal fees but I'm sure it would be a lot cheaper than $60,000.

My ex and I had split custody years ago, and he worked the system so that he didn't have to pay anything for a very costly school. He asked for state assistance which he received and in addition the state paid for the cost of the school although he was self employed and making over !00k per year. Three years later the state tried to come after me for $100,000. I hired an attorney which cost me $1500 but in the end I paid $5000 instead of $100,000. Please protect yourself and get a good attorney.

Actually, I'm wondering if the OP is going about this the wrong way by contesting the paternity. It seems to me that the problem is that he was never informed of the case, and thus could not adequately defend himself. Does he have grounds for getting the judgement vacated, which would then put the paternity back to be unestablished, and give him a chance to defend against the case? In which case he would not be suing for fraud, etc. but just to have a wrongfully determined judgement reimbursed.

But yes, I'd be talking to the best lawyer I could afford at this time.

Does he have grounds for getting the judgement vacated, which would then put the paternity back to be unestablished, and give him a chance to defend against the case? In which case he would not be suing for fraud, etc., but just to have a wrongfully determined judgement reimbursed.
My answer is He doesn't have grounds for getting the judgement vacated... Unfair,unjustice but... that is the law.

Impossible! I have never met this woman I am white she is white,too. The boy is a six years old mulatto!!

I have informed by a lawyer that I would be able to re-open the case and I don't need a DNA test. I am happy because if the boy was white I can never escape CS.

But no one is sure I can get my money back.

http://www.lawhelp.org/documents/1487513810.pdf?stateabbrev=/WA/


How can I make sure the correct support amount is set?
A. Court Cases
A Superior Court judge sets the monthly child support that the parent owing support must pay. You must be served with papers when you are involved in a divorce, paternity, or other court case. The papers you receive tell you how to respond to the court and other party (spouse/parent/state). You must properly respond to the papers you are served with. You will receive notices of important court dates when decisions will be made about support and other issues. You must show up and be prepared to participate at trial or another court proceeding. If you do not go to court or fail to meet a deadline, the court may give the other party whatever they ask for without

Any input from you. If you do not respond to a paternity action, you could be named the father of the child. If named as the father of the child you could be expected to pay for:
• the costs of birth
• court and blood tests costs
• past and current child support
• child's medical expenses


1. Statute of Limitations
The Statute of Limitations is essentially a legal time limit. On support orders signed by a judge or set by DCS on or after July 23, 1989, the statute of limitations allows DCS ten years from the date the youngest child named in the order turns eighteen to collect unpaid child support. Any back support not collected by the time the child reaches eighteen will not be collected.

Ok things get screwed up, I got my check garnished for child support last year, someone with a similar name in another state owed support, they got it for 3 weeks before I was able to stop it.

What do you do. First forget about complaining, forget about saying it ain't fair. ( courts don't care) forget about wanting to sue someone.

1. you hire an attorney
2. you file a motion to have the child support motion vacated pending a DNA testing.
3. you file in court demanding a DNA test.

*** then you will be proved either to be or not be the father.

Assuming you are found not to be the father, you can sue for a return of your money, In may case, since there was a incorrect Social security number, my employer had to pay my money back But your attorney will know who to sue for the money back.

Ok things get screwed up, I got my check garnished for child support last year, someone with a simular name in another state owed support, they got it for 3 weeks before I was able to stop it.

What do you do. First forget about complaining, forget about saying it ain't fair. ( courts don't care) forget about wanting to sue someone.

1. you hire an attorney
2. you file a motion to have the child support motion vacated pending a DNA testing.
3. you file in court demanding a DNA test.

*** then you will be proved either to be or not be the father.

Assuming you are found not to be the father, you can sue for a return of your money, In may case, since there was a incorrect Social security number, my employer had to pay my money back But your attorney will know who to sue for the money back.
It was done...
1. I filled up a motion to have CS vacated pending race difference
2. The judge relieved me of my future support obligation
3. The judge declined to vacate the past obligation

My attorney said that I CAN'T sue CSA and the mother for a return of my money.My only odds are to find the natural father:confused:
I wish I was born in another country.

It was on Friday.

I can see not suing CSA or having the court vacate the past obligation. But I don't understand not suing the mother. Even if you can't sue her, can you try getting her prosecuted for fraud and perjury? Maybe she'll pay you back to avoid going to jail. Given the circumstances she can't claim she thought you were the father.

IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY!!

ScottGem-you are right... but if you do not live in the USA. Really-I cannot see justice in American Courts.Here is an example;"We find that the balance of policy considerations favors protecting the best interests of the child over protecting the interests of one parent defrauded by the other parent ...” writes Justice Kenneth Bell for the court.
“We recognize that /Mr.Parker/ in this case may feel victimized,” he writes. He then quotes a scholar to explain the ruling: “While some individuals are innocent victims of deceptive partners, adults are aware of the high incidence of infidelity and only they, not the children, are able to act to ensure that the biological ties they may deem essential are present.”
Judges generally view the man as nothing more than a “walking checkbook,”The Florida legislature tried to balance the law to avoid forcing children onto welfare rolls, says Tom Sasser, chairman of the family-law section of the Florida Bar. It rejected a proposal to allow ex-husbands to recover prior child-support payments. It also rejected a proposal to allow triple damages against deceptive mothers. Instead, the law allows ex-husbands to be released from future payments.
Default
Federal law also requires, as a condition of receiving Federal funds, that State law provide for the entry of a default order in a paternity case. In addition, the State can allow any additional showing(s) required by State law. Entry of such a default order is considered a binding legal determination of paternity, and may serve as the basis for a support order.

Prohibition against Jury Trials
Historically, State law determined whether a defendant in a paternity case had a right to a jury trial. However, PRWORA required States, as a condition of receiving Federal funds, to preclude jury trials in contested paternity matters.
Some defendants denied jury trials have attempted to argue their right to a jury trial on constitutional grounds. Generally, courts have found that there is no right to a jury in a paternity trial.
Because American judges have feminist overlords in 44 states it is prohibited to sue mothers for wrong paternity claims.So called PUBLIC POLICY prohibits any reimbursement because the money was used for the children not for their deceitful mothers...No one in the USA is against the children,O.K.???
I read in another forum one feminist post,"Men,if you are duped-you are duped!If you are not duped-you are not duped!Either way you HAVE TO PAY!"
Proud to be American!

A lot of states have law which prohibits reimbursemsnt for victims of fraud... for example: in Alabama §26-17a-1 FC Allows action to disestablish paternity to be brought at any time upon presentation of scientific evidence by legal father that he is not the biological father. Not applicable in cases of adoption. Section 26-17a-2 prohibits claims for damages, recoupment or reimbursement against court, mother or state.
Tennessee is currently considering a law that would allow for the disestablishment of parentage.The new paternity law would not allow reimbursement for child support that has already been paid and would only apply to future child support payments

Sad. I am all for protecting the child and making it hard for the non custodial parent to get out of supporting the child, especially when public funds have to be used. But it should not go so far as to allow such a gross miscarriage of justice.

I'm wondering if it's possible to sue the mother who committed fraud for defamation of character, or something along those lines.

If you're not suing SPECIFICALLY for refund of child support funds, can you still sue?

I'm wondering if it's possible to sue the mother who committed fraud for defamation of character, or something along those lines.

If you're not suing SPECIFICALLY for refund of child support funds, can you still sue?
What kind of fraud do you mean?

Saying that someone is a father when you KNOW they are not to get money from them is fraud, if you ask me.

Granted, the law is there to protect the kids, but really... do you really want a liar and a cheat bringing up children?

It is not about who is the liar-it is LAW!!

What we're saying is that while it's the LAW, it's not JUSTICE.

There's a HUGE difference between the two.

If she were a welfare mama she may have been just giving them a name to satisfy them, or not to look bad. Sounds like she just pulled your name from thin air. I would def. be giving them a call.

If she were a welfare mama she may have been just giving them a name to satisfy them, or not to look bad. Sounds like she just pulled your name from thin air. I would def. be giving them a call.
And what?Do you think a call will solve the problem?

And what?Do you think a call will solve the problem?
No but If she did this to intentionally defraud them . I think she has questions that she should have to answer. Why should she just get to walk. A innocent man has been paying welfare back for a child that is not his. Let her pay it back. Let welfare pay him back what they took from him, that was never theirs to begin with. I would at least try. If one person did not listen I would go up the chain of authority until I ran out of options.

No but If she did this to intentionally defraud them . I think she has questions that she should have to answer. Why should she just get to walk. A innocent man has been paying welfare back for a child that is not his. Let her pay it back. Let welfare pay him back what they took from him, that was never theirs to begin with. I would at least try. If one person did not listen I would go up the chain of authority until I ran out of options.
Hi,Geri! bushg-It means Bush,George W.;) and his administration do not think in this way.It is FORBIDDEN to welfare and the mother to recoup/compemsate ,reimburse... /this man because it is not a case as Fr.Chuck's-wrong SN... Legaly there is nothing able to be done because that is the LAW and PUBLIC POLICY of the USA.Policy of "blaming victims";)

I will remain as a legal father without child support obligation.Now I am trying to reduse this past obligation.