See thats just it, case law is mixed in FL on this. FL shows a huge dislike for retroactively reducing arrears but on the other hand will grant it under special circumstances.
State of Florida, Department of Revenue of Behalf of Pulliam v. Watt, 681 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1996) the court indicated that special circumstances existed where the child lived with the payor father for a period of twenty-one months. The trial court’s order crediting the father for those twenty-one months was upheld.
The consensus is that the obligor parent bares the burden of returning to court to modify things rather than unilateral decisions to not pay.
Puglia v. Puglia, 600 So. 2d 484, 485 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1992), the non-custodial father “sought credits for weeks the child resided with him. Although the father could have sought modification of the child support order in advance, he did not do so. Having failed to do so, it is too late to seek this remedy retroactively.”
Most cases claiming the defense involved children that had reached the age of majority by the time the obligee parent calls for arrears and most (but not all) dont pan out because all the elements either arent plead or proven. So to me, unless im pleading estoppel or laches, i wont get a reduction in arrears unless my time sharing case goes in my favor since i can ask for support to be back dated 2 years prior to the filing of my petition. There are more cases that support its use but the courts are very strict on applying it, with good reason.