A
AobNYC
Guest
- Jurisdiction
- New York
If both parties agree to child support below the state minimum, would a written agreement protect against a court challenge?
-
Welcome to our legal community! Click here or the create new topic button to ask a question and receive answers and comments from our friendly and helpful legal community.
Articles that answer frequent legal questions are in our Law Guide. Important legal news is reported in The Law JournalYou can find a lawyer near you in the Lawyer Directory. If you know that you need to hire an attorney, you can submit a case review from a lawyer.
- Status
army judge
Super Moderator
Probably not, if the state or other government agency has extended (or is extending) benefits on behalf of the child(ren).
VindictiveV
New Member
Here in NY we pay a set percent of gross income (including disability, retirement, and veterans benefits) depending on how many children you have. I pay 17% gross in child support DESPITE the fact that her mother and I have joint custody and her mother is gainfully employed at a well-paying bank job.
NY CS laws are completely unjust to men. Good luck paying anything less. The court said even if we agreed to less, I'd have to pay the difference into a savings account for my daughter that my wife could still access (despite the fact I already have a savings account for her).
Except the OP said they agreed to "below the state minimum." So I'm asking what is the state's minimum amount they will allow. In Nebraska the minimum amount that can be paid per child is $50. So if there was a minimum like that in New York I would wonder why you would even bother to pay anything or agree to something below the state minimum. $50 a month doesn't really cover much of anything. I just Googled it and see that for one child it's minimum 17% and then there's a chart for income ranges.
That's what we started with when I filed. Then my lawyer went back in and figured out what it would be for a minimum wage 40 hour work week as my then husband was not and still is not employed. Not continuously. I was going to waive child support in all honesty but I thought he has to pay it someday. I can give it to my daughter if she's an adult when that happens. Likely no one will get any support from him ever as he's $12000+ in arrears. But the worksheet takes into account my income and his income. I make more (even when he has a job). His monthly is about $86 a month I think. For the two with his ex wife it's I think $145 a month. For the oldest it's $100 a month.
Would you think it's unfair to men if you were the one receiving child support? I doubt it.
VindictiveV
New Member
My ex and I wanted to settle for less because we both have decent paying jobs. NY wouldn't allow it. 17% is the minimum for one dependent, so I believe I answered the OP's question. In other words, it doesn't matter what the parents agree to, the state sets the stage. So here we are, and she get's $18,000 per year tax-free even though I pay the exact same amount as her in food, clothing, medical, entertainment, extra-curriculars, etc. and our income is similar.
I think that ANY interference with voluntary adult transactions is unfair. Don't turn this into sex issue. If you think the above is fair, I think there is a significant issue with your idea of justice and equality.
You turned it into a gender issue because you said that NY has an agenda against fathers. So how about YOU don't start with me. I simply asked you after you said they target dads that would you have an issue if it was the other way around?
VindictiveV
New Member
Claiming NY has a gender issue based on the experience of any male who has come into contact with family courts is not making it a "gender" issue...it's stating a fact based on an institutional flaw. It's certainly an issue when males are treated differently (or women respectively). To be clear, the situation you hinted at won't occur in NY. If my ex made more money than me, she still wouldn't owe me Child Support, and I would still owe her 17% of mine. The only time a male will get CS in NY is if he has sole custody (good luck with that). As long as the mother has joint custody or more, she will always be entitled to 17% gross. When you stated that I would somehow accept this if the roles were reversed, however, you implied character flaws in me which would overlook obvious injustice. That takes some gall.
I don't care what parent makes more or what their respective sexes are. I would simply expect "the law", and "judges" who are supposed to be objective arbiters of justice, to allow two responsible adults to voluntarily agree on an amount without meddling simple because "the powers that be" decided that men have more of a financial obligation while women have more of a familial.
Last edited:
*Yawn*
Yes I have heard this time and time again from men who feel like the courts are "out to get them." My own ex husband told me he would have gone to court had he known I was going to "screw him over" on visitation. Problem is that visitation never came up and it resulted in a default hearing because his priority wasn't his child. All he has to do is online parenting class and mediation. He gets court ordered visitation. He won't. But yet it's my fault he didn't show up. Yep it's always the woman's fault. Smh.
You would likely accept it if the roles were reversed. I'm not implying any character flaw. You are allowing it to shine ever so brightly on its own. I do have a lot of "gall" so thank you. I'll take that as a compliment even though it's not intended as one.
Your case is not the same as someone else's case. I'm not sure why you have "law" and "judges" in quotations. They are real laws and real judges. They aren't meddling in your life. YOU went to court and YOU filed for a divorce. One of you did. So that makes the courts involved. If you didn't want the courts involved you could have just done this all verbally without them.
Last edited:
army judge
Super Moderator
What you've recited isn't how the process works.
How in the hell do I know?
Because I am, among other things, a retired district court judge in Texas (we also call it visiting judge).
I have adjudicated numerous support related cases, which are effectively decided almost the same way all across the country.
No state adjudicates these matters with bias towards any gender, today.
Yes, women were somewhat favored 20-30 years ago.
However, even in those days, I know men who won custody battles.
Today the law looks at who is the custodial parent.
The non-custodial parent is required to pay child support.
The amount of child support is determined by a formula.
Anyone can obtain those numbers by running the numbers through dozens of online child support calculators.
The amount one pays is determined solely y the official state formula using the state calculator.
The numbers favor no gender, and strike equally on women as they do on men.
VindictiveV
New Member
...except that what I stated is exactly what the lawyer and magistrate explained to us in the court. We both have equal custody and I have "residential" custody (which only determines what school system she goes into).
So do explain, if there is no bias, how I pay 17% of my gross income--and my spouse couldn't accept less even though she agreed to less--when we share equal custody, split all costs, and have similar income (there is a 7% difference in my favor). The judge, and both lawyers, each told the both of us the same thing. On record.
Explain that. You can also explain it to my best friend who is in the exact same situation, only his ex-wife makes more and he's still paying her, despite the fact he has residential custody.
So you make more money than your ex...you said there's a 7% difference between your incomes in your favor. So you don't make the exact same amount as she does nor does she as you. I feel as if you misinterpreted something.
I feel as though army judge won't bother explaining anything to you but I kind of would like to see him do it...
No your friend isn't in the "exact same" situation. You can't say it's the exact same and say "only this or that' or "but" essentially.
Yes courts used to favor women over men but you will see more and more men getting custody and women paying child support. I have actually seen a few of my male friends get custody of their children from the mother recently and now the mom pays child support. My ex brother in law's girlfriend actually had to pay child support for a while as her ex husband had custody of their three kids until last year when she got custody.
I've rarely run into anyone of either gender who thinks that the child support they were ordered to pay was "fair".
My ex-husband and I were divorced 40 years ago. In our state, there were no formulas for calculating child support at the time. During our dissolution we were just asked to agree on a number that we both thought was fair, and we agreed on a very low amount. And he still complained to me and anybody else who would listen how it wasn't fair that he had to pay all of $75/month for one child.
I couldn't believe he was that clueless, so I finally sat him down and went over all my bills with him so he could see what it was costing ME each month to raise his son. I asked him if he still thought it was unfair and if he'd like to trade bills with me for a month or two. He was quite enlightened by that conversation, and he actually voluntarily increased the amount of support he was paying, and ended up doing a "cost of living" type adjustment upwards every couple of years until our son turned 18.
My ex died last month, and in many ways he was a jerk right up to the very end, but at least I was able to get through to him about that one thing in all the years I knew him!
My ex-husband and I were divorced 40 years ago. In our state, there were no formulas for calculating child support at the time. During our dissolution we were just asked to agree on a number that we both thought was fair, and we agreed on a very low amount. And he still complained to me and anybody else who would listen how it wasn't fair that he had to pay all of $75/month for one child.
I couldn't believe he was that clueless, so I finally sat him down and went over all my bills with him so he could see what it was costing ME each month to raise his son. I asked him if he still thought it was unfair and if he'd like to trade bills with me for a month or two. He was quite enlightened by that conversation, and he actually voluntarily increased the amount of support he was paying, and ended up doing a "cost of living" type adjustment upwards every couple of years until our son turned 18.
My ex died last month, and in many ways he was a jerk right up to the very end, but at least I was able to get through to him about that one thing in all the years I knew him!
army judge
Super Moderator
You explained it correctly.
I don't understand what more I can explain.
Now, maybe you can help me understand something, my new friend, if it so pleases you.
Knowing all that you claim to know, as to how unfair the system is towards men, how much of your money you must pay to support your child, why didn't you get "spayed", "neutered", or "fixed"; so as not to be bamboozled by this unfair system?
Furthermore, as a father who was blessed to have six great children with one wonderful woman, in a marriage that will see its 50th anniversary this August, I had no problem spending my earnings to send all six of them to college without a court order.
By the way, my wonderful wife spent her earnings towards that cause, too.
We also have been blessed to fund the college educations of four of our grandchildren.
We did that without a court order, and never once faltered in that effort.
They are our descendants, friend, why wouldn't we want to support them financially, emotionally, and lovingly???
After all, my wife's parents did it for her, and my parents have helped me financially, as well.
We aren't bragging because we did what parents are supposed to do, mate.
army judge
Super Moderator
Great information, and quite easy to do.
If Bill has to pay Molly $50 a month, nothing stops Molly from GIVING $25 a month back to Bill.
No one but Bill and Molly ever need to know the nature of their arrangement.
Anytime a person can avoid the court system, he or she should eagerly do so.
VindictiveV
New Member
Why didn't I get neutered? Is that a serious question? Nobody knows until they go through it. You don't decide to have children with this stuff in mind...the relationship falls apart for whatever reason much later.
If you think my original comment was a complaint about spending money, you missed the whole point and are simply exhibiting your own bias against single fathers. My ex and I are still best friends, our split was cordial and more for pragmatic reasons (simply wanting different things, not that it's any of your business). Neither one of us holds any ill will toward the other. We hang out regularly, have combined holidays and our families get along well. I have NO problem providing for our child or spending money. I have college and wedding savings accounts set aside for my daughter already. She'll go to college on my DEA VA benefits. Her mother has a savings account building towards a down payment on a house one day. So don't insinuate that either of us have any issues providing for our daughter. My complaint is the fact that her mother and I weren't allowed, by State order, to voluntarily agree to a different sum of money. We have to go behind the State's back, which is technically illegal, to make our situation equitable. My complaint, as I stated before, is that the state determined I have to pay 17% of my gross income to her despite the following facts:
She makes 7% less than I do. Thus, CS ends up giving her a 10% advantage in pay.
I owe her no alimony or maintenance...we both make over $100k and money is not an issue.
I AM THE CUSTODIAL PARENT. Her legal address is my address despite the fact that bi-weekly she spends 7 days/nights with each of us (3 me, 4 her, 4 me, 3 her)
We split every expense evenly.
Objectively speaking, the system is clearly favoring her. The argument is against the SYSTEM, not the child support amount. I'm lucky enough to have the income and relationship I do with her mother...most fathers are not that fortunate in my experience.
As for my friend, his situation is even more messed up. He makes about $50k, his ex makes about $85k. Again, HE is the custodial parent. They also split all expenses evenly. His child lives with him and his ex only takes his child every other weekend and one day during each week. Explain why he must pay 17% of his FAR lower gross pay in child support to her. Not alimony or maintenance. Child support. As the custodial parent.
I'm not sure why it's so hard to admit that the system is clearly and irrefutably favoring women, at least in some cases.
As for leslie, I put "law" and "judges" in quotes because I'm an adult that understands that laws have no moral imperative. They are instituted based on the whims of politicians and interpreted based on the whims of "judges" which have their own bias. Lest we forget that segregation, slavery, etc. were 100% legal, let's just understand that laws are rarely morally objective in nature.
So you two can explain how the system isn't favoring women "at least some of the time", based on the two cases I've mentioned (though I'm sure many others), or you can just admit that maybe, just maybe, the system does do so at times. Maybe the idea of "justice" isn't always just. Maybe bias comes into play and, if a father wasn't in as good of a standing with the mother as I am, the State could do a lot of harm by imposing their perverted version of "justice".
Yeah you can always do agreements that are verbal between the two of you - granted that won't hold up in court
Army judge has no bias toward single fathers as far as I can tell in any of his postings.
Again you never had to go to court about child support or any of it really. You could have kept it out of the court system. But you chose to go to court. So you have to play by the court's rules when you allow them in your life. Deal with it.
You and he pay 17% because that's how the fucking law is set up right now. If you don't like it then go petition your representative for your state to change the damn law. Otherwise it stays until the law changes.
No the system doesn't 'irrefutably" favor women. We said they USED TO like 20-30 years ago favor women because women were the primary caregivers. But now they don't favor women.
OMFG you did not bring up slavery, segregation and "etc" in regards to your child support. You're ridiculous.
I have seen so many more men getting full custody and the mothers paying child support in the last 5-10 years than ever before. The only one who seems to be biased on here is you.
As Army judge stated, he provided for his kids because that's his job. It fucking amazes me how much people bitch about providing for their kids when they divorce but it's not an issue when you're still with the other parent. I have gotten like $375 in the last year and a half since I divorced my ex husband. He doesn't help with daycare. He doesn't help with anything. He doesn't help with any of his kids. You wanna talk about "fair?" But I take care of my daughter. He only has to pay me $86 a month. That's what was figured for a 40 hour minimum wage workweek. His share is $86 a month...for one kid. For all four it's $331 a month. Is that "fair?" Should I go piss and moan to the judge about it? No. I take care of my daughter whether he helps or not because IT IS MY FUCKING JOB TO RAISE HER!
No it's not illegal to make deals between each other outside what the state minimum requires you to do. Just like parents can amend the visitation schedule. The visitation schedule is the minimum required by each parent. But if you have to change weekends or holidays it can be done if the parents are adults and not children.
If you don't like the way the law is talk to your elected representative to change it. That's all you can do. Or whine and moan that men get treated so unfairly in custody cases.
Army judge has no bias toward single fathers as far as I can tell in any of his postings.
Again you never had to go to court about child support or any of it really. You could have kept it out of the court system. But you chose to go to court. So you have to play by the court's rules when you allow them in your life. Deal with it.
You and he pay 17% because that's how the fucking law is set up right now. If you don't like it then go petition your representative for your state to change the damn law. Otherwise it stays until the law changes.
No the system doesn't 'irrefutably" favor women. We said they USED TO like 20-30 years ago favor women because women were the primary caregivers. But now they don't favor women.
OMFG you did not bring up slavery, segregation and "etc" in regards to your child support. You're ridiculous.
I have seen so many more men getting full custody and the mothers paying child support in the last 5-10 years than ever before. The only one who seems to be biased on here is you.
As Army judge stated, he provided for his kids because that's his job. It fucking amazes me how much people bitch about providing for their kids when they divorce but it's not an issue when you're still with the other parent. I have gotten like $375 in the last year and a half since I divorced my ex husband. He doesn't help with daycare. He doesn't help with anything. He doesn't help with any of his kids. You wanna talk about "fair?" But I take care of my daughter. He only has to pay me $86 a month. That's what was figured for a 40 hour minimum wage workweek. His share is $86 a month...for one kid. For all four it's $331 a month. Is that "fair?" Should I go piss and moan to the judge about it? No. I take care of my daughter whether he helps or not because IT IS MY FUCKING JOB TO RAISE HER!
No it's not illegal to make deals between each other outside what the state minimum requires you to do. Just like parents can amend the visitation schedule. The visitation schedule is the minimum required by each parent. But if you have to change weekends or holidays it can be done if the parents are adults and not children.
If you don't like the way the law is talk to your elected representative to change it. That's all you can do. Or whine and moan that men get treated so unfairly in custody cases.
army judge
Super Moderator
Hey, GENIUS, tell me something I don't know.
Frankly, any idiot knows the big shots, potentates, and billionaires run the entire planet.
People don't need government, government needs people.
Knowing that, you and your former spouse decided to marry with the consent of the big brother state government.
Then when your marriage went haywire, you once more went to big brother state government to divorce.
You even allowed big brother state government to tell you which one of you is primary caregiver, and how much the dummy, non-caregiver must pay to the primary caregiver, passing your money through the big brother government hands so big brother gets his cut.
You complain about the crooked, corrupt system now, yet ran to it when you thought things were great.
What dummy doesn't know everything may not end well, you, I suppose?
Then you're unhappy because you feel you have to make a secret arrangement behind big brother's back and feel all butt hurt and gobsmacked because big brother doesn't know every detail of your life.
Get over yourself, GENIUS.
You're so wealthy, so wise, so powerful, why come slithering around to FREE legal discussion sites BEGGING for advice, big shot?
You're a billionaire in your little mind, use your riches to hire the best legal talent to fix shit you don't like.
I don't care if big brother steals your billions, I got mine, GENIUS.
I also got the LAST word here, discussion closed.
- Status
Share this page
