Your attorneys advice doesn't jibe with what you just posted about getting all you can now and giving back what you deem appropriate later, which is good advice BTW.
PHRoG wrote:I might be biased, but I believe her reaction will initially be to get upset about what I'm asking for...but, once she calms down and considers everything, I think she'll end up agreeing with it.
Well, I guess that really depends on how "all you can get" is defined.
Fatheroffour wrote:That your attorney says that you can pay her and not go through the state because you have no record of not paying her before is a huge red flag to me that says someone doesn't really know what they are doing.
Most non-custodial parents use income withholding to fulfill their child support obligation. This means a child support payment is automatically withheld from the parent’s paycheck and sent to the Child Support Program.
If granted an exception, the non-custodial parent may choose an alternative method of payment such as an electronic withdrawal from their bank account, payment by check, money order or Western Union wire transfer.
Fatheroffour wrote:Just for the sake of discussion, let's assume your child is 1 and you faithfully hand your ex a CS check on time, every time and for the full amount for the next 17 years.
But due to an error, or pure evil, at the end of your CS obligation she claims you have not paid all you owe. You must then prove you have. You must prove every payment.
The state doesn't care about cancelled checks you lost in a move a decade ago. It doesn't care your bank went out of business. It doesn't care about what's fair. It doesn't care about logic or how you can prove the last 10 years but not the 7 before.
Prove it or pay it again.
It is to any recipient of child support advantage to request an accounting as the end of the obligation because any payment that can't be proven must be paid. Anything over is a gift.
However, the state won't argue with its own numbers so paying through the state generally prevents such accounting boondoggles.
Your attorney makes good money to warn you of such things. This would be a red flag staked on his competence.
Here is a previous thread on the subject with others input.
PHRoG wrote: I'd rather not be involved with the state any more than I'm required to be. It's my opinion that any involvement with the government tends to complicate life. If I have the option to handle it all without them, I'm taking it.