I had owned a company just in my name fully and my husband worked for me and received a paycheck just like all the other employees. Now his ex wife has this new lawyer and she wants all company records back two years ago. She believes my husband benefitted from some of the non business expenditures. For one how can they go back two years, when he made all his child support payments the amount that was court ordered and how can they gain access to my company records. They want the check register, cancelled checks and everything they can get their hands on. How can the judge legally allow them to do this. My husband had no money left out of his paychecks to pay bills after paying child support so I was responsible for any bills and whatever else. So because he benefitted from having a roof over his head she is entitled to more than what she got. I see this as harassment and I want to do something to stop them. Help!!

The court-ordered amount was based on your husband's income at that time. This new lawyer is doing what she's paid to do: represent her client's best interest. She's trying to find out if your husband had more than he was claiming. If he wasn't, then prove it.

It's certainly not harassment and if the court requested it, you need to provide it. That's the way it works. If you don't want to, you need to hire an attorney to argue why you shouldn't have to prove anything. But that may just make him look like he is hiding something.

Im sorry to say that I can see the opponents side in this one. Since you own the business and pay your husband as an employee, that can be seen as a means to avoid paying his fair amount of owed support while maintaining a different household income.

Have you spoken to your husband's lawyer on this? If not, I would, quickly - because this might end up being a case of fraud against your husband.

- What they both said.

My husband was making the same pay he was for the company he worked for before I started my company. He was paying $200 a week and has been for 6 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

My husband was making the same pay he was for the company he worked for before I started my company. He was paying $200 a week and has been for 6 years.

---

What salary and benefits were your other employees receiving? That's going to matter - in my eyes.

If he had access to a company car and they did not, for example, I see a problem here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

My husband was making the same pay he was for the company he worked for before I started my company. He was paying $200 a week and has been for 6 years.

---

You're not understanding the situation. He may have been earning the same amount on paper, but when you're married to the boss, things are very different. That's why they want you to prove that you didn't alter documents and/or that your husband didn't receive any "extras" that he didn't account for.

I have to give credit to his ex-wife for hiring this attorney, who seems to be as sharp as a tack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

My husband was making the same pay he was for the company he worked for before I started my company. He was paying $200 a week and has been for 6 years.

---

Has he gotten a raise in the last 6 years? Have your other employees? Is his vacation schedule the same as others? Are his responsibilities the same as they used to be?

That's the kind of thing they are trying to prove. If he hasn't gotten a raise in years, that will be looked at VERY harshly.

This is a double edged sword here. But as the others have said they are trying to find more money. I believe that because you're a third party your entitled to compensation for document production. Also how much of his pay was going to child support ? That may also be an issue. He may have overpaid and they will be in for a big surprise. Were the records under soupena or were they just requested as interogacies ? That too can make a difference.

They subpeaoned the records I gave them tax returns. He made more than the other employees did. They never put in a motion for increase in child support so they cannot go back now after two years to try and get that, his lawyer told us that. She don't know what they are after. I think they just want to harrass us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

They subpeaoned the records I gave them tax returns. He made more than the other employees did. They never put in a motion for increase in child support so they cannot go back now after two years to try and get that, his lawyer told us that. She don't know what they are after. I think they just want to harrass us.

---

Its not harassment if it is a legitimate concern, and based off the number of people questioning it here, it seems legit, regardless how it turns out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

They subpeaoned the records I gave them tax returns. He made more than the other employees did. They never put in a motion for increase in child support so they cannot go back now after two years to try and get that, his lawyer told us that. She don't know what they are after. I think they just want to harrass us.

---

I can only address NY but in NY his Attorney is very, very wrong. If there was ANY fraud involved the child support shortage can go back to the date the incorrect/false papers were filed.

Here is how I view it as an outsider and probably if I were the opposing lawyer:

You two are married, so presumably equal. If hubby makes X dollars a month and you make X * 10 per month, why is the difference so great? One would surmise, you have roughly equal responsibility.

It doesn't matter if this is true or not... its how it appears. And if it appears that way to me, why wouldn't it appear that way to a judge whose first impression is going to be "gee - something is fishy here".

Just out of curiosity, why DOES he make so much less than you? Is there a tax benefit from him making a 'real wage' vs $1 and sharing in the profits?

These are the questions that the opposing counsel is trying to get answered. And please be aware, if it is proven that this is fraud, you can be held liable as well as your husband.

Editted to add: it wouldn't be at all unique to put all the assets in a non-liable person's name in order to attempt to protect them from debt.

There was no fraud. He did not make any more money then what he received on his paycheck. They are trying to say since he benefitted from what I made then so should she. Every married couple benefits from each other in one way or another. I am not responsible for his kids finanacially. What I make is not relovent to his kids.

When it came to my company there was weeks I didn't get paid. I have a regular full time job where I am an accountant. He made more than me in the company I owned. I had 8 employees working there. The company only lasted a year and a half before the recession took over and put us under I am paying on taxes still today. We don't have a huge house we rent a moderate size house. We are not living large.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

There was no fraud. He did not make any more money then what he received on his paycheck. They are trying to say since he benefitted from what I made then so should she. Every married couple benefits from each other in one way or another. I am not responsible for his kids finanacially. What I make is not relovent to his kids.

---

You aren't seeming to understand what we are saying: the question isn't what he makes, the question is why he makes a different wage than you do.

No one is saying how things will turn out - he might be found to be perfectly legit. However if his pay is found to be artificially low to prevent paying child support, he might be guilty of fraud and face some stiff penalties including back support.

Bottom line: they are not harassing you and have a legitimate complaint that needs to be addressed in court. I assume your lawyer is telling you something similar.

I would give gas allowance to all the employees that drove every week. My husband didn't get any extra benefits from anybody else. My husbands cousins ex is married living in a $500k house that his wife bought while they were married and she owns a company paying him minimum wage and she gets everything else and my husbands cousin cannot get an increase in child support because the judge she has says that is his wives money and it is not included, so it cannot be right for one and not the other. They laws cannot change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

When it came to my company there was weeks I didn't get paid. I have a regular full time job where I am an accountant. He made more than me in the company I owned. I had 8 employees working there. The company only lasted a year and a half before the recession took over and put us under I am paying on taxes still today. We don't have a huge house we rent a moderate size house. We are not living large.

---

Then chances are they won't find anything different than what he is paying now. No one is accusing you of doing anything wrong here... just that they have the right to question it.

Well he was making the same pay as he was with the company before I bought it out. I was just starting so how could I afford to pay 8 employees a regular pay then pay my husband a great deal more? I didn't make that much more then him maybe $1k more at the end of the year.

I don't make the same amount as my boss does I make considerably less then him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

I would give gas allowance to all the employees that drove every week. My husband didn't get any extra benefits from anybody else. My husbands cousins ex is married living in a $500k house that his wife bought while they were married and she owns a company paying him minimum wage and she gets everything else and my husbands cousin cannot get an increase in child support because the judge she has says that is his wives money and it is not included, so it cannot be right for one and not the other. They laws cannot change.

---

Well, if I were your cousin I would get a better lawyer, but that's really not the point here.

The other thing to consider is that your husband's ex's lawyer might just be trolling to see what he can find. It wouldn't be the first time in history that a lawyer pursued something that he knew was fruitless in order to generate fees.

They are not arguing I under paid him they are saying he benefits from the money I make so she should also. So basically that is saying I am responsible for his kids. What am I to do not allow him to live with me because I pay the rent and all the other household bills, which he would benefit from that. They cannot do that it shouldn't matter how much money I make I earned it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

They are not arguing I under paid him they are saying he benefits from the money I make so she should also. So basically that is saying I am responsible for his kids. What am I to do not allow him to live with me because I pay the rent and all the other household bills, which he would benefit from that. They cannot do that it shouldn't matter how much money I make I earned it.

---

Most places will not account for that. I know most of Canada does consider spousal income however, and some places in the US.

ggill, reread this paragraph:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevetcg

The other thing to consider is that your husband's ex's lawyer might just be trolling to see what he can find. It wouldnt be the first time in history that a lawyer pursued something that he knew was fruitless in order to generate fees.

---

You're not going to know until you go to court and see what the judge has to say. From what you've posted, it sounds like you're in the clear. But again, you won't know until the judge reviews everything.

But what the attorney is requesting is completely legal. The problem is that you have it stuck in your head that they're going after "your" money. They're not. They're looking at it this way: if your husband doesn't contribute to the financial responsibilities in his own home, why shouldn't the support be increased? If he's wasting money on himself, he should be able to give it to his children. That's why they're taking this avenue.

Odds are you'll be fine, but you can never guarantee anything in court.

He doesn't have but maybe $100 left out of his pay after child support comes out. He pays for the gas and what food he can buy and all my money goes on our bills, we barely have food to eat for a week. He isn't blowing his money there is never none left. Depending on how many hours he gets to work it could be less left after child support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggill

He doesn't have but maybe $100 left out of his pay after child support comes out. He pays for the gas and what food he can buy and all my money goes on our bills, we barely have food to eat for a week. He isn't blowing his money there is never none left. Depending on how many hours he gets to work it could be less left after child support.

---

Then its entirely possible you can counterclaim to LOWER child support payments.

I Strongly recommend you to look up the law explaining such details, as any advice from here is from random people, you can't tell who is or is not a lawyer.
You'd be best to try and look up a 1-800# to a Law-line (free legal advice from lawyers over the phone.), or maybe ask a lawyer and see if you can get a free half hour of advice, or go to a court house and see if they have duty councel, then see if they will take time to speak with you on the matter. Or maybe if you have Legal aid (lawyers who represent and councel you for free, depending on your income.)

That's about the best I can think of for money issues, but since you said money isn't an issue; I highly advise you to talk to a lawyer. After all it's not about the money...

My child will be 18 in nov she will not graduate until she turns 21 due to learning disabilities I need to know when her dad will no longer have to pay child support

Where was the divorce granted? Maryland? Texas?

If he was ordered to pay child support, the circumstances of the birth (adultery, not his child) do not matter.

A pre-nup protects your (or his) assets upon death.

If you are this concerned about shielding your assets you MUST consult with an attorney, providing all your paperwork for his/her review.

Nobody can be forced to exercise their visitation right. If he continues to receive a credit on his child support based on visitation days, but never uses them, they can go back and redo child support order.

[QUOTE=Susan2936;1795769][QUOTE=stevetcg;1625934]You aren't seeming to understand what we are saying: the question isn't what he makes, the question is why he makes a different wage than you do.

Quote:

---

I'm confused by this statement... if she is the owner of the company and her husband is not (he is a regular joe employee), then doesn't it make sense that she makes more? Or is there some sort of "community property" thing here because they're married?

Thanks!
Susan

---

The question is because they are married. If she were the president of a publicly owned company and he was just some employee the question wouldn't be asked. I asked because since she OWNS the company, it becomes a lawyer's billing dream to figure out why their salaries are different since presumably they are equals.

A lot of the milking horror stories you hear are the ex spouse going after more regardless of entitlement and LAWYERS doing the milking.

Many states will not account for the new spouses income. Some will account for the fact that the paying spouse presumably has less expenses so can pay more of their salary. However, most states are on a percentage based system now which doesn't account for spousal income.

Many states do allow for disestablishment of paternity which is grounds for support removal. Many have statutes of limitations also so depending on the age of the children, that might factor in.

As for them in your house, we addressed that in your other thread, but its only an issue if you choose for it to be. As for her checking herself into a mental health facility... no one is going to show up and drop the kids on your doorstep. His parental rights give him first right of custody but if he refuses (his right to do so) they become the problem of the state to foster or find other family. On the flip side, she might lose HER rights to the kids.

You mentioned giving up his rights... he cannot unless someone is going to adopt, so might as well quash that line of thinking.

Ulitmately you will need to get a lawyer to get the disestablishment done. That's really your best bet.

As said no, he dosen't have to use his visitation. By not doing so he will risk the ability to visit if he ever wants it again. As for the child support it depends on how much visitation he has because child support is calculated using a formula and I don't know which state has jurisdiction in his case but if it is TX (which is quite like my state) if he has a great deal of nights at his house child support could be recalculated. But with out knowing those things I can't give you a clear answer.

Maybe I missed it but where is this located at? That will make a huge difference.

Im sorry but there is something I find VERY disturbing.
( quote ) Yes, of course I am biased against this woman, I fully admit that. But I also never want those children to be forced upon my fiancé against his will. From what I understand, she is raising them in ways with which I do not agree and they are already demonstrating behaviors that I find abhorrent. In short, I do not want them in our house or mingling with our future children because of some serious differences in values.

And yes, I do understand not punishing the children for the mother's transgressions. But every child must bear the consequences of their parents' choices, right? I know that I did. And ultimately, they are not my concern… my future husband and our own family is my concern. ( end quote )

I find statements like these very selfish and not inline with parenting at all. It seems that with this attitude you shouldn't consider children till you realize they are not possesions. When you agree to marry someone you not only take on a future with them but also their past. That attitude taken into a courtroom will get you nowhere. Please consider that the children because he raised them are his and he might try to accept that too.

It's a table (calculation) in Texas, not by Statute.

Texas Child Support Calculator - AllLaw.com

Because of the different questions, each one adding more info, I am requesting that these threads by combined.

Deleted my response.

Realized I was giving the wrong kind of advice for the legal boards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinawords

Maybe I missed it but where is this located at? That will make a huge difference.

---

Original question PLUS #5 - not saying it's a done deal for the other side but I think this arrangement certainly is fodder for Attorneys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Susan2936

I hope it's okay that I'm posting multiple questions in one day... they're sort of separate topics.

The ex wife is the custodial parent and my fiance is the non-custodial parent with visitation rights of two children (not his biological kids...essentially stepchildren). We live in MD and they live in TX.

Please no moral responses... just legal ones: If he no longer wishes to have a relationship with the children (but he will continue court ordered child support) can she or the courts force him to visit?

For example, the divorce decree states that he will have the right to visitation on "Christmas in odd numbered years." Does that mean he must take them for Christmas in 2009? Or only that he has the right to ask for it if he wants it but can voluntarily decline to do so?

If he declines to see them anymore, is that somehow violating the divorce decree...thereby opening the door for the ex to go back to court and to possibly ask for more child support?

I may be over simplifying this...but any advice/precedent would be much appreciated.

Thanks!
Susan

---

I'm glad everyone seems to have gotten this right. There is no such thing in American law as "forced visitation." Forced child support, yes. Visitation, no.