Wednesday, April 27, 2016

CSDA - AKA Child Support Directors Association


CSDA - AKA Child Support Directors Association
http://csdaca.org/

Apparently you can contact these people via email and get some action.  I emailed several places a week or so ago, one being the CSDA. My contact there was shocked to here how much I knew about FFCCSOA and URESA/UIFSA interstate and juridicional laws.  He immediately got on the phone with the local DCSS and got an update on my case.  The information he received was wrong, of course, so I helped guide him to the appropriate information. At least I am getting some action on my case. long overdue!
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Miracles do exists. I collected some arrears through the services of the El Dorado County Department of Child Support

Wow, pinch me. Am I dreaming. The DCSS in El Dorado County finally intercepted some funds from my ex.  A little over $1700 out of the over $87,000 in arrears. FINALLY something.  25 years and this is one of the largest amounts I have received.  

 Don't want to get my hopes up, but if this becomes a regular thing. That would be great.  Oregon Department of Child support has been sent the order for collection and registration.  We will see if he is somehow able to vacate it and if so, we are ready to take it to District Federal court.  Know your rights. It seems to make a difference with DCSS if you know what they are supposed to do to collect, you can literally FORCE their hand.  

 It certainly has not been easy or stress free and I have had to miss work for court dates, spend HOURS upon hours looking up state and federal laws, let alone trying to understand the MANY conflicting laws.  

 Do yourself a favor and look up the FFCCSOA it tells you what the state department of child support services is REQUIRED to do to get enforcement. As long as you have a valid order, which I do. The state or Oregon should not be able to Vacate my California order of arrears.

 JUSTICE IS A LONG TIME COMING over 25 years!
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, April 15, 2016

LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA - TEMPLATE along with my attachments.

Today 4/7/2016, I am starting a BLOG  (http://uifsa.blogspot.com) to discuss the reprehensible behavior of the California Department of Child Support Services, the Sacramento County Superior Court Family Law Division, The Oregon Department of Child Support and the Columbia County Circuit Courts in Oregon Along with many judges that have done nothing to help me with my 25 year old IV-D Child Support Case. I am now also working with the Department of Child Support in El Dorado County. We will see if they follow through with their job. So far I have had to be the one to persue inforcement, reopen my case when they attempted to close it several times, fight in Judical Administrative courts only to have the DCSS office VOID the judgement and write their own decision in their favor. To then force them to reopen my case again since it is a system set up for failure if you are trying to enforce your own order thru the courts without DCSS involved. Truly impossible.

I had a court date today I thought a Blog might help me with not only sharing information with people out there that are in my same situation. But also to help me in my case to keep regular notes as it has been a long 25 years that I have been attempting to collect this CALIFORNIA interstate child support order from OREGON.

Today my case was a motion filed by EDC DCSS to clarify my last order which the Sacramento County Courts LOST and for some reason couldn't provide a new certified copy of the order to El Dorado County DCSS, so I had to go to court with the Sacramento DCSS at 8:30a today in Sacramento for the pro temp/commissioner Judge Harman in Department 127, to basically reiterate what the last order already said.

I think this governmental agency/DCSS needs to explain why they spend our tax dollars and go to Leadership Conferences on our dime to learn the Federal laws and State Regulations only to then turn around and treat the pro se/pro per Custodial and NON Custodial parents hung out to dry when it comes to enforcement and just do their job! I have had to tell them the law. And force the enforcement and he just gets it vacated in Oregon.

Today I said in court that I was requesting to be heard in Federal District Court and Judge Harman said that DCSS in El Dorado County, CA would be required to do that if I request it. I have already done so on their website. I plan on following it up with a copy the final order after hearing and a letter requesting a formal hearing in district court to determine arrears and Jurisdiction once and for all according to the FFCCSOA and UIFSA which are both federal regulations that the two states must follow. I have had Continuing Exclusive Jurisdiction since 1998. The DA in Oregon has had my California order vacated back in 1999 through an ILLEGAL administrative judicial hearing that I was not even served for. A representative from the Sacramento County DCSS was served with the documents and never informed me of the hearing. So Oregon will now not honor the California order, even though I have proven personal and subject matter jurisdiction several times and have been awarded the Continuing Exclusive Jurisdiction in both Oregon and California superior courts. This case will go to Federal District court so that the two states can once and for all agree to the order and wage assignment of my over $87,000 in Child support arrears I am owed for my now 25 year old son that I had to raise with absolutely no help from his father Michael McDougle who has been protected by the DA in St. Helens, Columbia County Oregon named Stephen Atchison. SHAME ON YOU Mr. Atchison.

http://portlandtribune.com/scs/83-news/225450-87715-burglary-spree-hits-home-for-columbia-county-da

WE PAY THEM WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS!

If you want to file a FEDERAL complaint about your local State Department of Child support go here, believe be this form was not easy to find!

https://ocse.service-now.com/wf/webform.do




Fw: Fwd: Child support arrears order that has been mishandled over a 25 year period UIFSA and CEJ are the issues


  •  
  • Today at 12:56 PM
To
·         vicki.turetsky@acf.hhs.gov

Message body

SEE MESSAGE BELOW

From: Melissa Billups <aans@att.net>
Date: April 15, 2016 at 11:56:31 AM PDT
To: "vrea@csdaca.org" <vrea@csdaca.org>
Subject: Child support arrears order that has been mishandled over a 25 year period UIFSA and CEJ are the issues
Reply-To: Melissa Billups <aans@att.net>
I have had many years of work and anguish and want my case with DCSS to be reviewed by the CSDA as my case has Jurisdictional issues under UIFSA and the CEJ has been ordered to be where I and the child lived CA, but OR refuses to acknowledge the CA order. DCSS has been unable to collect and for some reason unhelpful and unwilling to file in federal district court to have this issue resolved. I have had judicial administrative hearings only for Sacramento DCSS to close my case anyway and fraudulently changed the Judicial Administrative order to read in their favor to close my case because of their failure to collect on my now emancipated child.  Since then my case was reopened in El Dorado County only for them to have a year of issues with Sacramento County on a simple request for a certified copy of my last arrears order.  I should not have to become a lawyer to enforce a child support order on a non custodial parent that now owns a home and has a job and tax returns that can be garnished properly.  This has been a nightmare for me, my son, and his father all because of the DCSS mistakes, cover-ups and blatant disregard for the child's support and parents obligations to his now 25 year old child.  My case number in Sacramento County is FL909978 and my current El Dorado County CSE# is 0670366562-01

Please contact me directly for more details. And how I can proceed with a complaint and hearing on the subjects addressed above.
916-397-5997

Sincerely,

Melissa Billups
All Around Notary Services
www.AllAroundNotaryServices.com
916-397-5997 Email: aans@att.net
Letter to our President -The White House
January 12, 2015 at 7:03pm
To:       President Obama                                                                                
The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

From:  


President Obama,

President Clinton Signed the Deadbeat Parents Punishment Act on June 24, 1998 stating
“This bill today is a gift to our children and the future. The quiet crisis of unpaid child support is something that our country and our families shouldn't tolerate. Our first responsibility, all of us, is to our children. And today we all know that too many parents still walk away from that obligation. That threatens the education, the health of our children and the future of our country”.

I would like to know as a Single Mother Struggling what you, as the current president raised by a single mom, are doing in regards to the Nations epidemic of the BILLIONS of dollars that is owed in back child support. We need to make this issue a PRIORITY.  Poverty is so high in the homes of single income families and our children suffer from this. Child Support Laws are in place yet they are not strictly enforced and deadbeat parents flee from their responsibilities and Judges/Commissioners let those parents have chance after chance to pay their obligations. Why should they, when they are not punished? How is this fair to tax payers when these families have to seek out public assistance just because the obligor parent refuses to abide by the court orders?

According to the federal Office of Child Support Enforcement, $108 billion in total back payments was owed to parents with custody of children in 2009.
If those payments aren't made and the children then need to go on public assistance, payments are supposed to be made to the government in the form of reimbursement. About 49% of that back money -- or roughly $53 billion -- is owed to the government, according to Joan Entmacher, vice president of family & economic security of the National Women's Law Center.

That's a raw deal for taxpayers. But for the mothers owed -- 82% of custodial parents are women -- it's the severing of an economic lifeline.

Deadbeats are a big reason why 41% of households headed by single women are below thepoverty level -- twice that for households headed by single men and nearly five times that for married couples.

To get out of paying, deadbeats will often take work in the underground economy to shield their income. Family courts are rife with tales where men with off-the-books jobs cry poor mouth to the judge, only to drive away in a Mercedes.

I am asking you to please take the time to research this problem and prioritize it. The following website will give you an idea of how bad it really is. This is reality, with nearly almost 18,000 people complaining about Child Support arrearage. Please look at this site and read what SO MANY other Single parents are saying. https://www.facebook.com/ChildSupportYouOweItPayIt?ref=hl

Our future are OUR CHILDREN. What will you do about this?

Signed,

A Single Mother doing it ALL on her own.


Some information found in
Hargreaves, Steve. "Over $100 Billion in Unpaid Child Support." CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 05 Nov. 2012. Web


Posted by at No comments:

GREAT INFO FOR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COMPLAINTS - When your state agency wont help you!

Credit for info goes to:
https://www.facebook.com/ChildSupportYouOweItPayIt



Posted by at No comments:

CSDA - Child Support Directors Association of California

http://csdaca.org/about-child-support/federal-performance-measures/

 YAY SOMEONE NEW FOR ME TO COMPLAIN TO ABOUT DCSS AND MY URESA CASE


ABOUT CSDA


For information or assistance with your personal child support case please call (866) 901-3212

The Association

The Child Support Directors Association of California (CSDA) was established in 2000 as a non-profit association to represent the local child support directors of California’s 58 counties. The association strives to be of service to local child support agencies (LCSA) in their effort to provide children and families with the financial, medical, and emotional support required to be productive and healthy citizens in our society.

Mission

CSDA promotes and supports the county child support agencies in their efforts to provide for the economic well-being of the children and families served by California’s Child Support Programs.

Statement of Values

The Child Support Directors Association strives to maintain the highest level of professionalism. The California child support program community reflects the rich diversity of the State of California – one of the most diverse communities in the world and one which we proudly serve on a daily basis. We are bound by Federal and State law prohibiting discrimination or disparate treatment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, sexual orientation, physical abilities, political affiliation, ancestry, and national origin. All activities and publications of the Association shall conform to the following statement of values:
  • We seek to honor diversity and treat all participants in its activities with dignity and respect.
  • We are committed to direct and relevant communication, respecting the right of others to an atmosphere of learning, collegiality and professional development.
  • We abide by the principles of confidentiality applicable to the Child Support Program. We respect diversity, individuality, and personal and professional differences.
  • We are dedicated to conducting our business with professional and ethical standards. We are resolved to maintain a healthy, respectful, fulfilling and productive environment for all activities.

CSDA Staff

Vic Rea, Interim Executive Director
Lisa Bispham, Administrative Services Manager
Kate Pohl, Media Specialist
Sheri Sundahl, Office Assistant
CSDA
2150 River Plaza Dr. Suite 420
Sacramento, CA 95833
916-446-6700 phone
916-446-1199 fax

Child Support Directors Association of California

2150 River Plaza Drive, Suite 420, Sacramento, California 95833

For information or assistance with your personal child support case please call (866) 901-3212



Federal Performance Measures


The Child Support Performance and Incentive Act of 1998 enacted significant changes in the way federal incentives are paid to states. The methodology changed from being based on cost-effectiveness only, to five federal performance measures implemented over a three year period, beginning October 1, 1999. The federal Office of Child Support Enforcement’s (OCSE) Action Transmittal 01-01, dated January 3, 2001 contains the federal regulations that govern the system. Since Federal Fiscal Year 2000, states are evaluated for federal incentive funds based on five performance measures:

Paternity Establishment Percentage

The IV-D Paternity Establishment Percentage (PEP) measures the total number of children in the IV-D caseload in the fiscal year (or, at the option of the State, as of the end of the fiscal year) who have been born out-of-wedlock and for whom paternity has been established, compared to the total number of children in the IV-D caseload as of the end of the preceding fiscal year who were born out of wedlock, expressed as a percent;
OR
The “Statewide Paternity Establishment Percentage” measures the total number of children born out-of-wedlock for whom paternity was acknowledged or established in the fiscal year compared to the total number of children in the state born out-of-wedlock during the preceding fiscal year, expressed as a percentage.

Percent of Cases with a Child Support Order

This data element measures cases with support orders as compared with the total caseload. Support orders are broadly defined as all legally enforceable orders, including orders for medical support only, and zero orders, expressed as a percentage.

Current Collections Performance

This performance standard measures the amount of current support collected as compared to the total amount of current support owed, expressed as a percentage.

Arrearage Collections Performance

This performance standard measures the number of cases with child support arrearage collections as compared with the number of cases owing arrearages during the federal fiscal year, expressed as a percentage.

Cost Effectiveness Performance Level

This measure compares the total amount of distributed collections to the total amount of expenditures for the fiscal year, expressed as distributed collections per dollar of expenditure.

Data Reliability

In addition to meeting these performance goals, for purposes of incentives and penalties, data must meet a 95% standard of reliability beginning in the fiscal year 2001. Reliable data means the most recent data available found by the Secretary to be reliable for the purposes of computing each of the Federal performance measures. Data must be found to be sufficiently complete and error free to be convincing for their purpose and context. Federal auditors are required to conduct audits to assess completeness, reliability, and security of the data, and the accuracy of the reporting systems used in calculating performance indicators.

Penalties

The penalty system is used to penalize states that fail to perform at acceptable levels or fail to submit complete and reliable data. IF the state falls below one or more of the performance measures, or does not meet the data reliability criteria, an automatic corrective action period of one year will ensue. If not corrected during that period, a penalty will be imposed at the end of the year.
Posted by at No comments:

Electronic Withholding Orders for Child support implemented by DCSS e-IWO

If this is true, then why can't they seem to get child support to the custodial parents that need it?

Electronic Income Withholding Orders (e-IWO)

A faster and easier way for employers to receive and reply to Income Withholding Orders is available. By utilizing the federal e-IWO or Electronic Income Withholding Order process, employers will save time and money while reducing the potential for error usually associated with manually processing paper documents.
New Law Requires Electronic Processing of Income Withholding Orders in All States
A new federal law requires that all states provide employers with the option of processing Income Withholding Orders electronically by October 1, 2015. Employers in California have enjoyed the benefits offered by e-IWO for more than two years. If your office is not receiving IWOs electronically, you can sign up and participate in the e-IWO program, today.
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, April 8, 2016

FFCCSOA How to get your interstate (2 states) jurisdiction determined and enforced.


< BACK TO SEARCH

Applicability of the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act to States and Tribes

AT-02-03

Published: May 28, 2002
Information About:
State/Local Child Support Agencies, Tribal Child Support Agencies
Topics:
Case Management, Enforcement, Review and Modification, Intergovernmental/Interstate
Types:
Policy, Action Transmittals (AT)
Tags:
UIFSA
ACTION TRANSMITTAL
OCSE-AT-02-03
DATE: May 28, 2002
TO: STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTERING CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT PLANS UNDER TITLE IV-D OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT, TRIBES AND TRIBAL ORGANIZATIONS, AND OTHER INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS
SUBJECT: Clarifying the Applicability of the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act (FFCCSOA) to States and Tribes.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this action transmittal is to inform states and tribes of provisions of the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act (FFCCSOA) and their application to both jurisdictions.
Congress enacted FFCCSOA (28 U.S.C. 1738B) in 1994 because of concerns about the growing number of child support cases involving disputes between parents who live in different states and the ease with which noncustodial parents could reduce the amount of the obligation or evade enforcement by moving across state lines. FFCCSOA requires courts of all United States territories, states and tribes to accord full faith and credit to a child support order issued by another state or tribe that properly exercised jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
Congress amended FFCCSOA in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 to be consistent with the requirements of the Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA) regarding which of several existing orders prospectively controls the current support obligation, as well as UIFSA’s choice of law provisions. Most of the provisions regarding modification of orders in FFCCSOA and UIFSA are consistent as well. While tribes are not obliged to enact UIFSA as a condition of receipt of Federal funding of their child support enforcement programs operated under title IV-D of the Social Security Act, states are obligated to do so.
FFCCSOA addresses the need to determine, in cases with more than one child support order issued for the same obligor and child, which order to recognize for purposes of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction and enforcement.
Definitions applicable to FFCCSOA appear in section 1738B(b). FFCCSOA defines "state" to include "Indian country" as this term is defined in 18 U.S.C. section 1151. This means that wherever the term state is used in the Act, it includes tribe as well. "Court" is defined as "a court or administrative agency of a state [or tribe] that is authorized by state [or tribal] law to establish the amount of child support payable by a contestant or make a modification of a child support order."
Provisions of the Full Faith and Credit for Child Support Orders Act
General Rule: FFCCSOA section 1738B(a) provides that the appropriate authority in each state and tribe shall enforce a child support order made consistent with the provisions of FFCCSOA in another state or tribe according to its terms and that a state or tribal court may not modify an order of another state or tribal court except in accordance with subsections (e), (f) and (i) of FFCCSOA. Where a state or tribal court or administrative agency issues an order that is consistent with FFCCSOA the order must be recognized and enforced by other states and tribes.
Requirements of Child Support Orders: Section 1738B(c) of FFCCSOA contains the requirements of child support orders. In order for a child support order to be consistent with FFCCSOA, a court with subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the contestants must have issued it. Additionally, the contestants must have been given reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard.
Continuing Jurisdiction: Section 1738B(d) of FFCCSOA contains the provisions on continuing jurisdiction. A state or tribe has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over an order issued by a court of that state or tribe if the state or tribe is the child’s residence or the residence of any individual contestant unless the court of another state or tribe, acting in accordance with subsections (e) and (f) has modified the order.
Recognition of Child Support Orders: Section 1738B(f) contains the provisions for determining the order recognized for continuing, exclusive jurisdiction. Both FFCCSOA and UIFSA have consistent rules for determining which order is the single effective order entitled to prospective enforcement when multiple orders exist. The rules are:
"If one or more child support orders have been issued with regard to an obligor and a child, a court shall apply the following rules in determining which order to recognize for purposes of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction and enforcement:
(1) If only one court has issued a child support order, the order of that court must be recognized.
(2) If two or more courts have issued child support orders for the same obligor and child, and only one of the courts would have continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under this section, the order of that court must be recognized.
(3) If two or more courts have issued child support orders for the same obligor and child, and more than one of the courts would have continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under this section, an order issued by a court in the current home state of the child must be recognized, but if an order has not been issued in the current home state of the child, the order most recently issued must be recognized.
(4) If two or more courts have issued child support orders for the same obligor and child, and none of the courts would have continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under this section, a court having jurisdiction over the parties shall issue a child support order, which must be recognized.
(5) The court that has issued an order recognized under this subsection is the court having continuing, exclusive jurisdiction under subsection (d)."
Authority to Modify Orders: A state or tribe may modify its own order as long as it has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction. The authority to modify the child support order of another state or tribe under FFCCSOA is found at section 1738B(e). Under this section, a state or tribal court may modify the order of another state or tribe if it has jurisdiction and the issuing state or tribe no longer has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction or if each individual contestant files written consent with the state or tribe of continuing, exclusive jurisdiction. FFCCSOA prohibits a state or tribe from modifying an existing order issued by another state or tribal court, unless these criteria are met.
Enforcement of Modified Orders: Section 1738B(g) of FFCCSOA contains the enforcement provision. If a state or tribe no longer has continuing, exclusive jurisdiction it may enforce the nonmodifiable aspects of the order and collect on arrearages that accrued before the date on which the order was modified under subsections (e) and (f).
Choice of Law: Section 1738B(h) contains FFCCSOA’s choice of law provision. In a proceeding to establish, modify, or enforce a child support order, the law of the forum state or tribe applies.As an exception to this rule, courts must apply the law of the state or tribe that issued the order when interpreting the order’s obligations, such as the amount and duration of support payments. In a proceeding for arrearages, the statute of limitations under the laws of the forum state or tribe or the issuing state or tribe, whichever is longer, applies.
Registration for Modification: Section 1738B(i) contains FFCCSOA’s registration for modification provision. If all of the individual contestants have left the issuing state or Indian country, the contestant seeking to modify an order issued in another state or tribe must register that order in a state or tribe with jurisdiction over the nonmoving contestant for purposes of modification. Either a state IV-D agency or a tribal CSE agency may be a party who is seeking to modify and enforce an order under this subsection.
RELATED REFERENCES: For further information on determining which order is entitled to prospective enforcement in cases with more than one order, consult OCSE-IM-01-02 which issued a TEMPO on determining controlling orders and DCL-00-64 which provided material and resources to help states and tribes make determinations of controlling order.
INQUIRIES TO: ACF Regional Administrators
ATTACHMENT: 28 U.S.C. 1738B

___________________
Sherri Z. Heller, Ed.D.
Commissioner
Office of Child Support Enforcement
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)