1 / 8

What States Do But Shouldn’t, Differences, $ Reconciliation

This panel discussion addresses issues faced by state agencies when enforcing child support orders across multiple states. It provides insights and guidance on handling various scenarios to ensure effective enforcement and reconciliation of child support payments.

nwong
Download Presentation

What States Do But Shouldn’t, Differences, $ Reconciliation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What States Do But Shouldn’t, Differences, $ Reconciliation Moderator Kesha Rodriguez - OCSE Panelists Joe Landers – New Jersey Dee-Ann Burdette – West Virginia Andrea Dodasovich –Pennsylvania

  2. Question #1 • State A has the only child support order between the parties. Both parties subsequently leave State A. The obligee moves to State B and seeks enforcement of the order. State B sends an income withholding to the obligor’s employer in State C and asks that the employer send the payments directly to State A, which does not have an open child support case. State A receives unidentified money and is unsure what to do with it. Later State B sends a transmittal to State A asking that the payments be redirected to State B. The transmittal also states that B is not asking A to open a full service case in order to redirect the payments, but A cannot distribute money without creating financials.  However, A’s online reporting system will not allow financials to be created in a limited services case.   This will also cause State A problems with its Federal reporting for arrears owed if balances are not set or the current support is not collected.  • How should State A handle this transmittal from State B?

  3. Question #2 • Two child support obligees both live in State A. One has an order from State A, and the other has an order from neighboring State B. The obligees both have the same support obligor, who lives in State B. State A has sent UIFSA transmittals for both cases to State B, which is collecting for both cases and sending the money to State A. The case with the order from State A is for state arrears only, while the case with the order from State B contains both a current obligation and family arrears. State B’s puts collections for state arrears at the bottom of its hierarchy, so it is applying all sums collected only to the case with the State B order and current plus family arrears. However, when the money reaches State A, it splits between the two cases according to State A’s hierarchy. State B sends State A an accounting which does not match the accounting in State A. • How do you reconcile the different accountings for State A and State B?

  4. Question #3 • State A has an order in effect for three children. The order is registered for enforcement in State B where the father resides (mother still resides in State A). One of the children goes into placement in State A (child is no longer in the care of mother). The placement agency files a support petition seeking support for the child. State A attempts to establish an support order to reimburse the placement agency but is unable to serve father with notice of the support complaint. Two children remain with mother and one child is in placement. • What should State A do?

  5. Question #4 • State A sends a case to State B for enforcement. State A provides Information that the NCP is working for ABC Company in State B. • Should State B accept the case or return it to State B and tell State A to use long arm?

  6. Question #5 • State A has an enforcement only case from State B. This case is unenforceable under the laws of State A (imprisonment, SSI Disability, homelessness, etc.). • Should State A close the case? • If State A decides to close their case anyway, what can State B do?

  7. Question #6 • State A has a “dead” case. That is, there is no realistic chance that the NCP who lives in State B will pay (e.g., NCP is incarcerated in State B). • Should State A send the case to State B for enforcement?

  8. What States Do But Shouldn’t… Thanks for your participation!

More Related