Passport rules snag child support cash

[Darren M]

The Iggy wrote:

<quoted text>
I'll have you know that I have NEVER had an STD! I made sure I had protected sex!

Congrats; I'm done talking with your crazy ass. You're an idiot, and have no comprehension skills.

[Darren M]

Hussie wrote:

<quoted text>While I agree that alot of women are indeed bitches, there are a fair share of men who manipulate as well...
I do, however, get offended when the issue of Birth Control is left up to the woman, when she isn't screwing by herself...Granted, it's a womans "right to choose", but that's only AFTER conception...Men have just as much of a right to protect themselves, and should do just that if it's such a major concern...

See, once again, you are assuming things. When I first got together with Maryann (not her name) we had the whole birth control discussion. Was she on the pill, or should I use a condom; had she ever had an STD, or had I? This was 1987! I was 21 years old, had no desire for kids, and NO desire to be married then. When she got pregnant, I knew there was the slightest chance the pill didn't work, and I was willing to suck it up and do the right thing. But when I said "what happened, did you miss taking a pill?" which shouldn;t have made a difference, she told me she had quit taking them 4 months earlier because the were "making her sick". I almost passed out. I asked her why she didn't tell me she decided to quit taking them so I could start using condoms, or until WE found another suitable method, and she said she was worried I was going to leave if she'd told me. I asked what SHE wanted to do, and she said "We could get married". That BITCH almost ruined my life.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Darren your not the first to go through that. I've had several friends over the years that had the exact same thing happen.

[The Iggy]

Darren M wrote:

<quoted text>
Congrats; I'm done talking with your crazy ass. You're an idiot, and have no comprehension skills.

You are a bitter person that can't even take GOOD ADVICE when handed to you, instead you call names. PISS OFF!

[Dapper Dan]

The Iggy wrote:

<quoted text>
You are a bitter person that can't even take GOOD ADVICE when handed to you, instead you call names. PISS OFF!

Sorry, I'm with Darren on this. He tells you of blatant fraud, unfairly supported by the court system. And your childish response is, you should have used a condom. Yeah, real helpful advice. Do you even realize how absurd it is to blame the victim for not protecting themselves from lies and fraud? Why don't you go lecture a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. Then you can go on and on about how YOU never got raped because YOU don't wear short skirts.

[The Iggy]

Dapper Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Sorry, I'm with Darren on this. He tells you of blatant fraud, unfairly supported by the court system. And your childish response is, you should have used a condom. Yeah, real helpful advice. Do you even realize how absurd it is to blame the victim for not protecting themselves from lies and fraud? Why don't you go lecture a rape victim for wearing a short skirt. Then you can go on and on about how YOU never got raped because YOU don't wear short skirts.

WHILE CALLING NAMES to everyone. Look buddy, he got screwed yes, he says he didn't have the means to fight it, sorry about that, yet he just slams people that were willing to look past his assholeishness (calling us all bitches) to take some good advice.

GUESS WHAT we've all been screwed at one time or another. You learn to deal with it & move on. He should have looked harder for a lawyer to help him, work with him on payment, maybe a father's right's lawyer to work pro bono. He CHOSE to give up because he preceived he couldn't afford to fight it. Now he has been given a way to RESOLVE THE PROBLEM but just spits in her face. All things considered, I think it was pretty kind of Hussie to post a possible remedy, but she gets nothing but crap from him. FUCK HIM if he is going to be an asshole like that. NOT ALL WOMEN are coniving, neithe are all men. But let me tell you there are enough of them out there that I am Sooooooooooooooooooooooooo glad I didn't have children with my ex. I won't ever be in the position of seeking child support, I'll thank my lucky stars for that.

A piece of advice: You get more flies with honey then lemons

[Dapper Dan]

The Iggy wrote:

<quoted text>
WHILE CALLING NAMES to everyone. Look buddy, he got screwed yes, he says he didn't have the means to fight it, sorry about that, yet he just slams people that were willing to look past his assholeishness (calling us all bitches) to take some good advice.
GUESS WHAT we've all been screwed at one time or another. You learn to deal with it & move on. He should have looked harder for a lawyer to help him, work with him on payment, maybe a father's right's lawyer to work pro bono. He CHOSE to give up because he preceived he couldn't afford to fight it. Now he has been given a way to RESOLVE THE PROBLEM but just spits in her face. All things considered, I think it was pretty kind of Hussie to post a possible remedy, but she gets nothing but crap from him. FUCK HIM if he is going to be an asshole like that. NOT ALL WOMEN are coniving, neithe are all men. But let me tell you there are enough of them out there that I am Sooooooooooooooooooooooooo glad I didn't have children with my ex. I won't ever be in the position of seeking child support, I'll thank my lucky stars for that.
A piece of advice: You get more flies with honey then lemons

YOu are being more of a bitch than he is an asshole. No, Hussie's advice, while good intentioned, is grasping at straws. He got a court order already, and civil suits are almost NEVER successful on this, particularly when the real father is not around. A court is not going to give such an award. So you look this serious injustice in the face and bash him because he used the word bitches. Well sorry, many of you are, some of you are right now. Here is a lesson to all young men, learn exactly (since you won't be able to comprehend it on your own), exactly how deceiptful, manipulating and selfish some women can be. It is staggering, it looks like it happened right here, and you are such a sexist idiot you just can't see who the evil person in this scenario actually was. You simply can't comprehend the injustice that happens to men on this issue, but would rather bash them for being angry at the result. I guess you are part of the problem then if you can't see this.

And the saying is: You can catch more bees with honey than with vinegar, genius.

[Darren M]

Dapper Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
YOu are being more of a bitch than he is an asshole. No, Hussie's advice, while good intentioned, is grasping at straws. He got a court order already, and civil suits are almost NEVER successful on this, particularly when the real father is not around. A court is not going to give such an award. So you look this serious injustice in the face and bash him because he used the word bitches. Well sorry, many of you are, some of you are right now. Here is a lesson to all young men, learn exactly (since you won't be able to comprehend it on your own), exactly how deceiptful, manipulating and selfish some women can be. It is staggering, it looks like it happened right here, and you are such a sexist idiot you just can't see who the evil person in this scenario actually was. You simply can't comprehend the injustice that happens to men on this issue, but would rather bash them for being angry at the result. I guess you are part of the problem then if you can't see this.
And the saying is: You can catch more bees with honey than with vinegar, genius.

I guess she totally misses the point that I am PAID IN FULL in my case, also. I tried like hell ($18,000.00 worth of lawyer) to get my case overturned, but because the BITCH didn't know who the daddy was, so nobody else would be responsible for keeping her skankiness off of welfare if her husband split, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts denied the motion since I had originally admitted paternity since I had no WAY of paying for the initial paternity testing, not to mention that I was deploying for a war 2 weeks after being slapped with the suit. I was told that if I postponed the case, using some writ of being deployed, that not only would I owe backpay on top of what she was already going for, but might wind up paying more than what she was asking for. Not to mention that if I had gotten killed, because there was pending litigation reference a child, then my wife wouldn't get my SGLI until it was settled, which could take years of going through the courts since I was from CA, wife from CO, BITCH from MA, and I was stationed in KY. Everybody wanted to put their fingers in it!!

When the dust settled, and I had PROOF the kid wasn't mine as I had him for a month while she was in jail (her husband had left her) everybody in the judicial system was like "Oopsie", to bad, so sad.

Poor kid; I hope he never finds out what his mom was really about, though I'm sure she's already shown him.

[Hussie]

Just to clarify, the information I provided came from a Fathers Rights Group, and it has indeed been sucessful...
You have to consider ONE major thing, in Civil Court it isn't about "reasonable doubt"...It's about "proponderance of evidence", and Darren has that evidence which PROVES the child isn't his...
It doesn't cost a sh1tload of money to file civily, and there's no attorney fees involved, unless you create them...I'd at least look into it...

[The Iggy]

Hussie wrote:

Just to clarify, the information I provided came from a Fathers Rights Group, and it has indeed been sucessful...
You have to consider ONE major thing, in Civil Court it isn't about "reasonable doubt"...It's about "proponderance of evidence", and Darren has that evidence which PROVES the child isn't his...
It doesn't cost a sh1tload of money to file civily, and there's no attorney fees involved, unless you create them...I'd at least look into it...

He would rather complain & call all women bitches! I am done here. See ya on the other thread, please do keep me posted on your support case over there.

[Dapper Dan]

Hussie wrote:

Just to clarify, the information I provided came from a Fathers Rights Group, and it has indeed been sucessful...
You have to consider ONE major thing, in Civil Court it isn't about "reasonable doubt"...It's about "proponderance of evidence", and Darren has that evidence which PROVES the child isn't his...
It doesn't cost a sh1tload of money to file civily, and there's no attorney fees involved, unless you create them...I'd at least look into it...

Yes, fine tools I agree. But there are often real world issues that make it impossible. Without an attorny, good luck. Also, doesn't sound like she has any money, so what good would your judgment be? And even in a civil case, best interest of the child prevails over all other civil rights. So if the judgment was going to affect the child, you probably won't get it (why not having the actual father on the hook is a detriment to any judgment). I think the problem is systemic and biased against men. And since I see many of the child support laws and judgments as grossly unfair, it is hard to support various means of enforcement. You can basically stop every contract, benefit, travel, and put a guy in jail for not paying past support, but not do a think if the woman uses the support to buy herself a diamond necklace. Not to say I don't want child support to be enforced, but certainly that I'll be more sympathetic when I hear a story like Darren's since I know this is common.

[Hussie]

Dapper Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, fine tools I agree. But there are often real world issues that make it impossible. Without an attorny, good luck. Also, doesn't sound like she has any money, so what good would your judgment be? And even in a civil case, best interest of the child prevails over all other civil rights. So if the judgment was going to affect the child, you probably won't get it (why not having the actual father on the hook is a detriment to any judgment). I think the problem is systemic and biased against men. And since I see many of the child support laws and judgments as grossly unfair, it is hard to support various means of enforcement. You can basically stop every contract, benefit, travel, and put a guy in jail for not paying past support, but not do a think if the woman uses the support to buy herself a diamond necklace. Not to say I don't want child support to be enforced, but certainly that I'll be more sympathetic when I hear a story like Darren's since I know this is common.

The "child" in question is now an adult, and any original concerns about the "child" will no longer be considered...Whether she has money or not is irrelevant, a Civil Judgment would still afford Darren legal remedies, such as wage garnishment, tax witholding, leins, etc...Hell, they can even garnish her SSI if she's disabled...Darren would likely win such a Judgment, considering the FACT that he has undisputable proof (DNA) that the child is not his, and that he has indeed made efforts to have these FACTS considered by the Courts...The Civil Courts often go against the Family, and Criminal Courts rulings...Just ask O.J. Simpson...For Darren to sit idly by, and do nothing, is where the real injustice lies...Remember, it's all about what we're willing to tolerate, and cases like this affect many others to come...

[Darren M]

Hussie wrote:

<quoted text>The "child" in question is now an adult, and any original concerns about the "child" will no longer be considered...Whether she has money or not is irrelevant, a Civil Judgment would still afford Darren legal remedies, such as wage garnishment, tax witholding, leins, etc...Hell, they can even garnish her SSI if she's disabled...Darren would likely win such a Judgment, considering the FACT that he has undisputable proof (DNA) that the child is not his, and that he has indeed made efforts to have these FACTS considered by the Courts...The Civil Courts often go against the Family, and Criminal Courts rulings...Just ask O.J. Simpson...For Darren to sit idly by, and do nothing, is where the real injustice lies...Remember, it's all about what we're willing to tolerate, and cases like this affect many others to come...

Yes Hussie, now that it's OVER, I suppose I could spend another 20k in leagal fees to "win", but again, at what cost? Add 20k with the 18k I spent on lawyers in the past, along with the 119k I spent on child support over 18 years. Factor in my age (42) and figure I'll live to 75 (just a number) and do the math..Yep, she'd OWE me around $400.00 a month, every month until I died, just for me to BREAK EVEN!!! It makes me f'n SICK!!!

And that's ASSUMING I make it to 75 years old. I guarantee you she won't. She's probably got hep A, B, and C, and probably HIV by now. Sure could have used that $550.00 a month I spent supporting her car and rent for 18 years. It ended a little over 2 years ago, and I had a guy who said he could "win it" back for me... What's the matter with truth prevailing, and CRAP getting thrown out in the first place? That's my beef with "the system".

And for that other BITCH to call ME a deadbeat dad? I paid, and I wasn't even the dad. Fuck that bitch TOO!!

[Hussie]

Darren M wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes Hussie, now that it's OVER, I suppose I could spend another 20k in leagal fees to "win", but again, at what cost? Add 20k with the 18k I spent on lawyers in the past, along with the 119k I spent on child support over 18 years. Factor in my age (42) and figure I'll live to 75 (just a number) and do the math..Yep, she'd OWE me around $400.00 a month, every month until I died, just for me to BREAK EVEN!!! It makes me f'n SICK!!!
And that's ASSUMING I make it to 75 years old. I guarantee you she won't. She's probably got hep A, B, and C, and probably HIV by now. Sure could have used that $550.00 a month I spent supporting her car and rent for 18 years. It ended a little over 2 years ago, and I had a guy who said he could "win it" back for me... What's the matter with truth prevailing, and CRAP getting thrown out in the first place? That's my beef with "the system".
And for that other BITCH to call ME a deadbeat dad? I paid, and I wasn't even the dad. Fuck that bitch TOO!!

The only "costs" associated with a Civil Suit are generally filing fees, and in your case, travel expenses...If the most you get is $5K, that's something, and better than letting her skate completely...At least explore the option, then decide...Things have changed drastically in the area of Child Support since then, and Paternity Fraud is indeed considered...You may have more going for you than you realize...
For the record, I'd take $1.00 a month to ensure she was punished for her lies...

[Darren M]

I'll call my attorney, and see who he recommends I talk to. There is a lot more associated with trying to win this case, if I pursue it. I looked into it before, though it wasn't a civil suit. A civil suit would take years without a lawyer pushing things through. I don't have the time, or the attention to do it myself. Well, I'm off to the airport.

[Dapper Dan]

Hussie wrote:

<quoted text>The "child" in question is now an adult, and any original concerns about the "child" will no longer be considered...Whether she has money or not is irrelevant, a Civil Judgment would still afford Darren legal remedies, such as wage garnishment, tax witholding, leins, etc...Hell, they can even garnish her SSI if she's disabled...Darren would likely win such a Judgment, considering the FACT that he has undisputable proof (DNA) that the child is not his, and that he has indeed made efforts to have these FACTS considered by the Courts...The Civil Courts often go against the Family, and Criminal Courts rulings...Just ask O.J. Simpson...For Darren to sit idly by, and do nothing, is where the real injustice lies...Remember, it's all about what we're willing to tolerate, and cases like this affect many others to come...

Yes, there are certainly options. But no, if she has no money you may spend more trying to garnish (and there are limits are what you can garnish) and may not be worth it. No, you cannot garnish SSI. And all of these manuvers also cost in attorney fees. There are more costs associated with civil litigation, including the tons of papper, there are many mandatory filings, depositions, etc. And doing it without an attorney is really a BAD idea. I may be biased, I'm an attorney. But I've never even seen a pro se plaintiff win, ever. There is indeed a reason people get paid a lot to know the legal system. And even a simply case takes $20-30k all the way through trial, domestic issues probably even more. And most domestic attorneys demand a huge retainer since the cases are notoriously nasty.

Sure, try. But don't overestimate chances, and don't ignore cost beneift analysis. Also don't overestimate chances of succes just becasue there is DNA evidence. Fraud needs to be shown, not just that he is not the father, and proving what was somebody's intention is never that easy. All she has to testify to is that she didn't know, and where do you go from there. YOu have to PROVE she knew, and lied, for the purpose of fraud. Good luck.

And yes, cases affect future cases. So does the damn legistlator. And as I see it, currently it is lopsided against men, my original point, and it can be fixed. But telling somebody just sue is NEVER as good an idea, or as easy, at it seems.

[Darren M]

Dapper Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, there are certainly options. But no, if she has no money you may spend more trying to garnish (and there are limits are what you can garnish) and may not be worth it. No, you cannot garnish SSI. And all of these manuvers also cost in attorney fees. There are more costs associated with civil litigation, including the tons of papper, there are many mandatory filings, depositions, etc. And doing it without an attorney is really a BAD idea. I may be biased, I'm an attorney. But I've never even seen a pro se plaintiff win, ever. There is indeed a reason people get paid a lot to know the legal system. And even a simply case takes $20-30k all the way through trial, domestic issues probably even more. And most domestic attorneys demand a huge retainer since the cases are notoriously nasty.
Sure, try. But don't overestimate chances, and don't ignore cost beneift analysis. Also don't overestimate chances of succes just becasue there is DNA evidence. Fraud needs to be shown, not just that he is not the father, and proving what was somebody's intention is never that easy. All she has to testify to is that she didn't know, and where do you go from there. YOu have to PROVE she knew, and lied, for the purpose of fraud. Good luck.
And yes, cases affect future cases. So does the damn legistlator. And as I see it, currently it is lopsided against men, my original point, and it can be fixed. But telling somebody just sue is NEVER as good an idea, or as easy, at it seems.

I'm going to look into it, but odds are, nothing will be pursued due to cost/time. I'm a very busy person, am quite well off,(considering I get screwed over by little whore in my younger days) and seriously doubt if I have the time or energy to pursue a case against the BITCH.

[Natural Gas]

I say Dapper Dan for president. His posts are the only reason I still go to topix, LOL!

[Hussie]

Dapper Dan wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, there are certainly options. But no, if she has no money you may spend more trying to garnish (and there are limits are what you can garnish) and may not be worth it. No, you cannot garnish SSI. And all of these manuvers also cost in attorney fees. There are more costs associated with civil litigation, including the tons of papper, there are many mandatory filings, depositions, etc. And doing it without an attorney is really a BAD idea. I may be biased, I'm an attorney. But I've never even seen a pro se plaintiff win, ever. There is indeed a reason people get paid a lot to know the legal system. And even a simply case takes $20-30k all the way through trial, domestic issues probably even more. And most domestic attorneys demand a huge retainer since the cases are notoriously nasty.
Sure, try. But don't overestimate chances, and don't ignore cost beneift analysis. Also don't overestimate chances of succes just becasue there is DNA evidence. Fraud needs to be shown, not just that he is not the father, and proving what was somebody's intention is never that easy. All she has to testify to is that she didn't know, and where do you go from there. YOu have to PROVE she knew, and lied, for the purpose of fraud. Good luck.
And yes, cases affect future cases. So does the damn legistlator. And as I see it, currently it is lopsided against men, my original point, and it can be fixed. But telling somebody just sue is NEVER as good an idea, or as easy, at it seems.

SSI can't be garnished?...I beg to differ...I have a friend whose SSI has indeed been garnished over a Civil Judgment, and it has for over two years now...And when you consider the fact that Attorneys generally aren't involved in Civil cases, Pro Se is the only way to go about it...Fraud does not need to be shown in a Civil Suit because he has EVIDENCE to support his claim...If he's suing to recoup because he's NOT the father, that's all he needs...He also has evidence to support that he tried to handle it in the Family Courts...He doesn't have to shoot for the moon here, but the principal should be considered...

[Natural Gas]

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) cannot be garnished except to repay overpayment of SSI.

Social Security Income can be garnished to pay Uncle Sam for any Uncle Sam-type things, and also to pay court ordered Child Support/Alimony.