Sunday, February 19, 2006

High paternity fraud rate

WorldNetDaily reports:
WASHINGTON – More than three years ago, a Maine district court judge ruled that Geoffrey Fisher no longer had to pay child support for a child that wasn't his.

But that didn't stop the state from revoking Fisher's driver's license and coming after him for thousands of dollars it says he owes in back payments.

Last year, Maine sent Fisher, 35, a letter seeking $11,450 in child support, even though officials know that DNA tests proved he isn't the father of the child in question.
The article goes on to claim that paternity fraud rates could be as high as 30%. That seems improbable to me, but I don't know.

When I was in family court on Thursday, the case ahead of ours was a man who got tricked into admitting paternity and paying child support. He produced a DNA test that proved that he was not the father. The mother was there, and did not contest the result. He was relieved of making any more support payments. The mother was not prosecuted, and did not have refund any of her fraudulently-obtained money.


Anonymous said...

I guess if we robbed a bank, they'd let us keep the money and not receive any punishment for the CRIME?

Yeah, riiigggghhhhttttt!

What a double standard!

I guess that sort of fraud isn't a crime. right.

McLaren583 said...

“The family court of Charleston County, South Carolina had stolen property and extorted money out of my disabled husband from 1987 thru June 3, 2005 under color of law -- knowingly willfully and wantonly falsely alleging -- it was for the support of a child born on October 25, 1984.”

There has never been a hearing on the paternity of this child.
There has never been an adjudication of the paternity of this child.
No child has ever been named as one entitled to the support of my husband.
My husband has never fathered -- or acknowledged paternity of -- any child and he has never filed for adoption of any child.
My husband has never formed a parental relationship with any child, and he has had no contact with this particular child beyond this child’s 17th month of age.
My husband is “White”.
The woman involved is “White”.
The child of this woman is fully and completely -- “Asian / Oriental” -- in features.
It is a -- "physical impossibility" -- for any “White” man to father an “Asian / Oriental” child by a “White” woman therein rendering a DNA test unnecessary. (However, a DNA test would not be objected to.)
The Social Security Administration (SSA) Office in Longwood, Florida allowed this woman to place her son of -- unknown and undocumented paternity -- on auxiliary benefits under my husband’s award of Social Security disability (SSD) in April 2001.
In wanton and reckless disregard of the law and regulations under the Social Security Act the SSA -- obviously -- required none of the documentation from this woman that is required of all other persons in similar situations.
The woman then went back to the Charleston County family court and complained that these SSD auxiliary benefits under my husband’s award were coming directly to her through the mail from the SSA.
The woman deduced that this meant my husband was not providing support for her child (paid through the court) and alleged that her SSA office had informed her she was entitled to go back to court and seek garnishment of the disability benefits my husband was receiving in addition to the auxiliary benefits she was receiving for her child under my husband’s SSD award.
To shorten this story up a bit, after several trips back to court she was allowed to illegally garnish 50 % of my husband’s monthly SSD on top of the auxiliary benefits that she was fraudulently receiving.
We appealed that illegal garnishment to the issuing family court and filed complaints against the judges that colluded and conspired in this criminal act of social security fraud.
We filed a complaint of social security fraud with the SSA.
The primary judge in the case retaliated by increasing the illegal 50 % garnishment to a full 65 %.
This woman was walking away with approximately $1,330.00 per month while my husband was left with $404.60 per month to meet his medical and living expenses.
This social security fraud which was knowingly willfully and wantonly conspired and colluded in by officers of the court -- and reported to the SSA -- netted us a letter from the SSA saying they could not get involved.
-- The SSA wrote that we were to appeal the matter of the illegal garnishment to the court which contrived and conspired to create the illegal garnishment. --
We had already done that and suffered retaliation from the court through the increase of the illegal garnishment.
As soon as the family court stopped receiving their cut of this woman’s take through fraudulent court fees we were notified by the SSA that they were going to stop my husband’s disability benefits because his disability had ceased.
There is no medical evidence to support this unfounded and false allegation of cessation of disability.
We immediately filed for reconsideration and are still awaiting a response from the SSA.