THE TEXAS OAG SUCKS
In regards to: RECENT COMPLAINT
Office of the Attorney General
Dear Attorney General:
I recently filed a complaint with the Attorney General Ombudsman’s on March 23, 2009. I received a letter from Eric Rodriguez dated March 2, 2009 stating that an investigation had already been completed. I called his office and left a voicemail in response to his recent determination letter. I wanted to know how an investigation into my complaint could be done with out talking to me. Eric Rodriguez determined that the amount ordered by the court was indeed appropriate based on the noncustodial parent’s current income.
What if the order wasn’t based on child support guidelines? The noncustodial parent provided the Attorney General with only one pay stub and one W2. I met with Attorney Lucinda Canavan Mantz the morning of the Hearing on March 23, 2009. She suggested she was to be the attorney representing the state and in the best interest of the child.
I asked her many questions for which she answered. I was present when she was questioning the noncustodial parent regarding our Childs health insurance previously ordered by the court in 2004. The noncustodial parent didn’t care about the health of his child then and doesn’t now. I was told by Attorney Lucinda Canavan Mantz that the Attorney General and through the Texas Workforce Commission obtained the noncustodial parent’s income and that is what the Attorney General was going to use to determine the Child Support Modification. The Judge took a recess for lunch and when the court resumed, my name was called, and to my surprise Attorney Koos stood up in the place of Attorney Lucinda Canavan Mantz.
Mr. Koos did not confer with me in the hall before the hearing nor did he introduce himself to me. Had I known he was representing my Childs best interest, I would have asked the court for time so I could have been better prepared.
I don’t know if he spoke with the noncustodial parent; it would appear to me that he had because it was acceptable to Mr. Koos that the noncustodial parent failed to hand over the Production of Documents part of the order as it pertains to the Texas Family Code. Mr. Koos said the Production of Documents was only a request. The noncustodial parent is a car salesman and has been with the same employer for many years therefore his pay varies. He receives many perks with his employment like the use of new cars, bonuses, commission, and cash given to him on a gift cards from other dealerships like Drive Time.
When I was before the Judge I was kept out of negations and unable to speak because the Judge kept saying I made my ruling. I stated in open court and for the record that I didn’t understand what was going on. It was as if the noncustodial parent was about to sale a car and the Judge and the Attorney were making a deal. The fact of the matter is the Attorney General has not helped my child and me at all. The modification increased $6.00 in child support even though it has been five years since the last order. What about the cost of living? What about extra activities teenagers need to help them become well rounded?
Clothing is more expensive? Everything cost more.
The Attorney General didn’t collect the Arrears owed to me since last year. Mr. Koos told the Judge no arrears were owed when in fact there are. The Attorney General did not provided the Judge or me with accurate information as to the Financial Activity Report. The balance numbers do not coincide with the dates on the Administrating Writ of Withholdings and the child support checks received.
I have not received the health insurance information for our daughter and it has been over thirty days. The Attorney General was supposed to receive proof of insurance no later than thirty days as well. Do you have it?
I expected the noncustodial parent to do whatever he could to get out of his responsibility and the job of being a father; however, I did not expect the Attorney General to do the same. I thought it was your responsibility and job to uphold the law in the best interest of my child.
Sec. 154.063. PARTY TO FURNISH INFORMATION. The court shall require a party to:
(1) furnish information sufficient to accurately identify that party’s net resources and ability to pay child support; and
(2) produce copies of income tax returns for the past two years, a financial statement, and current pay stubs. It is pay stubs with a S at the end of the word this would imply more than one
In accordance with the Texas Family Code
Sec. 154.061. COMPUTING NET MONTHLY INCOME. (a) Whenever feasible, gross income should first be computed on an annual basis and then should be recalculated to determine average monthly gross income.
(b) The Title IV-D agency shall annually promulgate tax charts to compute net monthly income, subtracting from gross income social security taxes and federal income tax withholding for a single person claiming one personal exemption and the standard deduction.
The definition of the word annually is many times a year or recurring in year based intervals.
Until Then I Remain Paula Arias