boobatuba
04-11-2006, 04:32 PM
I am a NCP in Oklahoma, presently paying 43% of my disposable income in child support for two children. I have a medical debt from 1998 that I had been paying $75 every two weeks on, until the child support started. My employer's payroll department stopped paying the $75 for the previous debt, and was only paying the child support when it started.
Now the law firm for the original debt is saying they are eligible for 17% of my disposable income, since the cap for child support is 60% (I am not supporting a second family - in fact, I am still married to my kids' mother, only separated).
I have done some research, and the federal law (the Consumer Credit Protection Act - see 29CFR870.11) shows that when 25% or more of an individual's disposable earnings are withheld pursuant to a garnishment for support, and the support garnishment has priority in accordance with State law, the Consumer Credit Protection Act does not permit the withholding of any additional amounts pursuant to an ordinary garnishment.
So I guess the question is...does the child support order have priority among garnishment orders in Oklahoma? Anyone know, or experienced anything like this? A 43% deduction for child support is difficult, but I'm happy to do it for my kids - a 60% deduction is making things very difficult for me.
To top it off, the same law firm razed my bank account for my entire savings ($2865), so now I can't even afford a lawyer to represent me on this matter. I have a hearing before the same judge that ordered a $75 a month garnishment in 2001 on April 20. I'm hoping to get into legal aid on Thursday, but as many of you know, it is difficult to do when you work full-time.
I hope someone here has had a similar experience and can tell me if I can stop the medical debt garnishment. I've already paid these people over $7000 (if you include the $2865 they took from my account), and the original debt was $7560.17. After 5 years of paying on it, it stands at $8104.56, because I have been losing ground on the interest.
Wish me luck on April 20!
Now the law firm for the original debt is saying they are eligible for 17% of my disposable income, since the cap for child support is 60% (I am not supporting a second family - in fact, I am still married to my kids' mother, only separated).
I have done some research, and the federal law (the Consumer Credit Protection Act - see 29CFR870.11) shows that when 25% or more of an individual's disposable earnings are withheld pursuant to a garnishment for support, and the support garnishment has priority in accordance with State law, the Consumer Credit Protection Act does not permit the withholding of any additional amounts pursuant to an ordinary garnishment.
So I guess the question is...does the child support order have priority among garnishment orders in Oklahoma? Anyone know, or experienced anything like this? A 43% deduction for child support is difficult, but I'm happy to do it for my kids - a 60% deduction is making things very difficult for me.
To top it off, the same law firm razed my bank account for my entire savings ($2865), so now I can't even afford a lawyer to represent me on this matter. I have a hearing before the same judge that ordered a $75 a month garnishment in 2001 on April 20. I'm hoping to get into legal aid on Thursday, but as many of you know, it is difficult to do when you work full-time.
I hope someone here has had a similar experience and can tell me if I can stop the medical debt garnishment. I've already paid these people over $7000 (if you include the $2865 they took from my account), and the original debt was $7560.17. After 5 years of paying on it, it stands at $8104.56, because I have been losing ground on the interest.
Wish me luck on April 20!
