My husband has a son from a previous marriage. His ex tells the child bad things about my husband which are not true. She will not let him see the son as far as we know. We have no way of contacting him, we don't even know where they live other than Oregon. The ex is remarried and we have been told that she has 2 other children as well.
Almost 4 years ago we went up to Oregon to the Child Support office. We paid the ex a very large sum of money to close the child support case canceling all arrears, and future support. My husband and the ex were in the child support office and signed papers and they each wrote in the papers and signed that they came to an agreement to end the child support claim and she would not seek and future child support.
Well, about 2 months ago we got a letter in the mail from Oregon Child Support stating that she had filed a new claim for child support. My husband spoke with an attorney and the attorney made contact with the state and the ex. We don't know what transpired, b/c we have not heard from the attorney since before Christmas. All we do know is that my husband received an order in the mail 2 weeks ago saying that he will owe $650/month. It's funny since they have his income at approximately just over $4k a month, and our mortgage is $3700 a month.
He has until this week to request a hearing disputing the child support amount.
Other facts which may be helpful if anyone can give advice are. The child is 15. She is remarried, my husband and I have a child of our own together. The mother does not allow my husband to see or speak to his son, but she wants him to pay. We are in CA.
I am confused, if we have papers from 4 years ago from the state of Oregon closing the case and saying that she will no longer seek future support, then how can the state open the case again and allow her to file for more support?
Will the fact that our house is in my husband's name only, and that he would be left with less money than we owe per month on our mortgage with a $650/mo payment make any difference when he requests a change in the support amount at the hearing? I know Oregon bases the support on the shared income model, but apparently they don't take into consideration that fact that people have other bills to pay.
Any advice would be appreciated!
Almost 4 years ago we went up to Oregon to the Child Support office. We paid the ex a very large sum of money to close the child support case canceling all arrears, and future support. My husband and the ex were in the child support office and signed papers and they each wrote in the papers and signed that they came to an agreement to end the child support claim and she would not seek and future child support.
Well, about 2 months ago we got a letter in the mail from Oregon Child Support stating that she had filed a new claim for child support. My husband spoke with an attorney and the attorney made contact with the state and the ex. We don't know what transpired, b/c we have not heard from the attorney since before Christmas. All we do know is that my husband received an order in the mail 2 weeks ago saying that he will owe $650/month. It's funny since they have his income at approximately just over $4k a month, and our mortgage is $3700 a month.
He has until this week to request a hearing disputing the child support amount.
Other facts which may be helpful if anyone can give advice are. The child is 15. She is remarried, my husband and I have a child of our own together. The mother does not allow my husband to see or speak to his son, but she wants him to pay. We are in CA.
I am confused, if we have papers from 4 years ago from the state of Oregon closing the case and saying that she will no longer seek future support, then how can the state open the case again and allow her to file for more support?
Will the fact that our house is in my husband's name only, and that he would be left with less money than we owe per month on our mortgage with a $650/mo payment make any difference when he requests a change in the support amount at the hearing? I know Oregon bases the support on the shared income model, but apparently they don't take into consideration that fact that people have other bills to pay.
Any advice would be appreciated!
