Thanks for your response. Yes, you are correct, I am in Oregon. So the order ran from 1995-2010 and the arrears are 68,000 based on our incomes in 1995. So why would we both need to provide each other with proof of your incomes, including most recent tax returns and pay stubs. Our daughter is no longer a minor so why would our incomes be necessary, we are not trying to establish a new order just a judgement on the arrears. Also, is this something you would handle or would I have to find an attorney in the county where I live?
Your income is relevant because monthly payments will be calculated based upon a percentage of the parties' incomes. He can pay more if he makes more.
My firm does handle cases in Columbia County, so you're welcome to contact us to schedule a consultation if you're willing to make the trip to our area.
Well, I may just have to go back to Idaho then to avoiding having it imported into Oregon if that is and option. At the time of the actual support order I made substantially less than I do now and that order never accounted for the expenses I paid for such as healthcare or daycare. I am sure he made substantially more then than he does now also. So because of that reason it sounds like I will need pursue going back to Washington County to seek the judgement on arrears. Having our incomes reevaluated now at a time when my daughter is not in my home does not seem relevant especially since these payments are helping pay her expenses not mine. I can see basing it on the income from 95-2010 but not my current income, it would not be a beneficial outcome for my daughter based on my current income.
I'm pretty sure that's not what Mr. Bodzin was saying. It would be a good idea to consult with a local attorney who handles family law, collections, or debtor-creditor work. It sounds like you need to establish the arrearages and then collect on that amount. Your ex's current income becomes relevant because that determines the amount that can legally be garnished.