Can monthly child support being paid directly to the recipient without involving FRO?

[rockscan]

I want to note that a support deduction order is a last resort method to collect support. It is normally filed if the support payor has not been paying support or if they have amassed significant arrears. If an order goes to FRO and the payor does pay, they don't go after an employer. My husband's case was registered with FRO and he paid monthly his support. They never contacted his employer or garnished anything.

Like I said before, FRO is not a bad thing. It's like a bill payment for online banking and you don't have to worry about your ex asking for additional money or claiming you didn't pay. They register everything and manage the case for you. If you are both reasonable about updating, you simply sign the relevant forms and it all goes according to plan.

[JustQ]

Hi all,

When a court makes an order for child support based on a settlement agreement, is there a way to amend the support order or deduction order to pay on-going child support directly to the recipient from the payor instead of going thru FRO? Do both retroactive support(lump sum) and ongoing have to go to thru FRO? The parties agree on the one time lump sum retroactive support and on going, not clear if have to go thru FRO for both payments.

Thanks.

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that if you go through FRO, and you are the recipient of the payments, FRO has you covered in that they will garnish wages, take away drivers licences (???) So you will get your money. Otherwise, you are at risk of not being paid, if you don't go through FRO.

Is this correct?

[rockscan]

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that if you go through FRO, and you are the recipient of the payments, FRO has you covered in that they will garnish wages, take away drivers licences (???) So you will get your money. Otherwise, you are at risk of not being paid, if you don't go through FRO.

Is this correct?

Only if the payor is not paying or in arrears. As long as support is being paid and the arrears are less than $3000, there is no action like this taken.

[noteasy]

I may be wrong, but my understanding is that if you go through FRO, and you are the recipient of the payments, FRO has you covered in that they will garnish wages, take away drivers licences (???) So you will get your money. Otherwise, you are at risk of not being paid, if you don't go through FRO.

Is this correct?

Love the treating children as objects worth money thing. Yep, children are paychecks.
Nope, you are at risk of not being paid regardless if FRO is involved.
If the person owing child support gives that money to FRO then FRO will give it to the recipient.

If FRO does not get the money then they have some powers and resources to obtain it.
FRO can be abused by the recipient and will increase the court paper work yearly.
They do keep records so it is difficult for either party to lie about the amounts of CS paid/received.

It is a hostile process created to address those that will not follow court orders to pay support.

[rockscan]

FRO can be abused by the recipient and will increase the court paper work yearly.
They do keep records so it is difficult for either party to lie about the amounts of CS paid/received.

It is a hostile process created to address those that will not follow court orders to pay support.

Not true. FRO only enforces what is in the order. If you have percentages for expenses, they won't enforce it. If the ex files expenses as arrears, it can be disputed. FRO is only difficult if both parties are unreasonable. If both parties agree on annual updates, there is paperwork to fix it. The only time court is needed is if both parties disagree.

FRO is good to remove having to deal with the ex. It works as the middle man to take out any contact with the other party. My husband has not had to speak to his ex, pay her or write a cheque since 2014. In fact, he made his last cs payment last month and it was simply a monthly bill in his bank account. He turned it off and is now done.

[LMum]

It is said that when a court makes an order, the FRO will be automatically involved, the court will send a duction order to FRO, and the payor has to fill out a Support Order Information Form to list income source for deduction, is that not always the case if both parties agree to pay directly? Thanks

We had an order NOT to use FRO, However, it was still sent to them from the courts, and now we are in the process of signing a Notice of Withdrawal form which basically releases FRO from the process. Both parties has to sign. FRO will contact you or your lawyer once they get the paperwork for next steps.

[noteasy]

How and why did you get an order not to use FRO?
Did both of you agree to it?

[LMum]

How and why did you get an order not to use FRO?
Did both of you agree to it?

My ex really really didn't want it. Every offer we made we would include FRO and the he would insist on removing it. Basically he didn't understand how FRO worked and assumed that if he missed one payment he would lose his license. As much as it was explained that this is not the case, he had this idea in his head and that was that. We compromised and now if he is late, even just the one time, by 5 days I can file with FRO. So yes we both agreed and its in our agreement,

[noteasy]

My ex really really didn't want it. Every offer we made we would include FRO and the he would insist on removing it. Basically he didn't understand how FRO worked and assumed that if he missed one payment he would lose his license. As much as it was explained that this is not the case, he had this idea in his head and that was that. We compromised and now if he is late, even just the one time, by 5 days I can file with FRO. So yes we both agreed and its in our agreement,

Good compromise, sort of, 5 days late one time isn't much.