Family Court Maintenance - Bench Warrant

Deedee3

I'm just curious as to how long a bench warrant can take to be carried out before being brought before the courts?

Breech of maintenance resulted in bench warrant in September, sent by the courts via registered post, delivered. Guards have informed that the warrants units have made contact with the person a couple of times to which theyve failed to hand themselves in.

What is the normal outcome of this? Can you avoid jail time if/and when you eventually get caught or is it a game of cat and mouse and even after you're caught it's a slap on the wrists...

Cork Trucker

Deedee3 wrote: »

I'm just curious as to how long a bench warrant can take to be carried out before being brought before the courts?

Breech of maintenance resulted in bench warrant in September, sent by the courts via registered post, delivered. Guards have informed that the warrants units have made contact with the person a couple of times to which theyve failed to hand themselves in.

What is the normal outcome of this? Can you avoid jail time if/and when you eventually get caught or is it a game of cat and mouse and even after you're caught it's a slap on the wrists...

I was on the receiving end of this a loooooonnnnng time ago. Warrant was signed in say, January, it was then sent to a local cop shop, by the time they caught up with me it was May, i appeared in court in June and met the cop by mutual agreement to be "arrested" appeared before the judge and was immediately bailed for a hearing 3 months later. I wasn't jailed and all that happened was i paid back €5 per week on top of the newly reduced maintenance. took me 6 years to pay off the arrears.

Nowadays my understanding is that the maintenance creditor must serve the summons directly on the maintenance debtor, no more Gardai doing the leg work for the creditor. As for avoiding jail, i think only 1 person in the entire 26 counties was jailed in 2018 for non payment of maintenance by Judge Patrick Durcan in Clare.

Deedee3

Cork Trucker wrote: »

I was on the receiving end of this a loooooonnnnng time ago. Warrant was signed in say, January, it was then sent to a local cop shop, by the time they caught up with me it was May, i appeared in court in June and met the cop by mutual agreement to be "arrested" appeared before the judge and was immediately bailed for a hearing 3 months later. I wasn't jailed and all that happened was i paid back €5 per week on top of the newly reduced maintenance. took me 6 years to pay off the arrears.

Nowadays my understanding is that the maintenance creditor must serve the summons directly on the maintenance debtor, no more Gardai doing the leg work for the creditor. As for avoiding jail, i think only 1 person in the entire 26 counties was jailed in 2018 for non payment of maintenance by Judge Patrick Durcan in Clare.

€5 extra is an insult, sorry but it is.

My last court date a small amount of money was offered and suggested to be put in the bank by the end of the week along with starting the month fresh with an arrears amount on top of the agreed maintenance. Neither has been paid.

I've been onto the stations and their units look into the warrants. Like that was served, agreed to be "arrested" as you say, but failed on two occasions to hand himself in...
Surely this carry on is stopped as it shows no actual intent to pay anything.

If needs be I'd take great pleasure in serving the warrant but this is not the case, the warrant was sent to the stations who are 'chasing' it up.

Its ridiculous.

Evd-Burner

Deedee3 wrote: »

€5 extra is an insult, sorry but it is.

Your saying that without any background information or financial details! You have absolutely no idea what the financial circumstances were.

Deedee3

Evd-Burner wrote: »

Your saying that without any background information or financial details! You have absolutely no idea what the financial circumstances were.

Thats true. I don't need to know the details of this information anyway. It's my opinion on the amount regardless of circumstances. The parent with the child cant agree to pay €5 a week towards the cost of living and still survive... works both ways.

quote="Cork Trucker:
My question was to do with the outcome of a bench warrant. So thanks Cork Trucker for sharing your experience, and my comment was not to be taken disrespectfully. The fact you willingly pay is a bonus.

My situation is very much so frustrated to the point that the other person works and has suggested a minimum amount contribution but still refuses to pay.....

Severe penalties need to be put in place

Evd-Burner

I don't think severe penalties should be put into place. I think a proper maintenance system needs to be put into place instead of judges picking random figures out of their heads!

Something closer aligned to the UK in order to calculate maintenance payable. Obviously there would need to be exceptions in special circumstances.

There should be a centralised system where maintenance goes in and then out to the parent who receives it, non payment should be dealt with within days like a business following up. If unpaid it should be taken at source and only go to court if there is messing around at that stage.

I hate this court business, judges decisions vary wildly!

Cork Trucker

Deedee3 wrote: »

€5 extra is an insult, sorry but it is.

My last court date a small amount of money was offered and suggested to be put in the bank by the end of the week along with starting the month fresh with an arrears amount on top of the agreed maintenance. Neither has been paid.

I've been onto the stations and their units look into the warrants. Like that was served, agreed to be "arrested" as you say, but failed on two occasions to hand himself in...
Surely this carry on is stopped as it shows no actual intent to pay anything.

If needs be I'd take great pleasure in serving the warrant but this is not the case, the warrant was sent to the stations who are 'chasing' it up.

Its ridiculous.

All that will happen is it will keep going back and forth like a game of pin pong. If he failed to show upon mutual agreement with the Gardai then they will most likely pick him up unannounced and detain him until the next court sitting, if he's picked up after 5pm on Friday he'll be there until after 10.30 on the following Monday doing porridge.

As for the €5 being an insult, it is very common here in Cork, i know of a taxi driver who is paying €30 plus €10 arrears on an €8k debt, hes 2 years into it and the child is 15 years old.

You yourself cannot serve a warrant, you can serve an enforcement summons, but in all honesty there will be next to no enforcement if he's unemployed.

As for the Gardai chasing things up, they do, each Garda is assigned a certain number of warrants to go and execute, it's just a case of where your ex is on their list and how easy or hard he is to find, between the Garda pulse system and Revenue/Welfare records this is how they trace people, It's how i was traced as i was on welfare at the time, when i got back into employment the maintenance was not varied nor the arrears as i had more children. All decisions are taken by the court, i provide them with my statement of means which consists of my income/outgoings. Where there is no agreement between the parties a court can only order the debtor to pay what they can, for example, if he is on €200 a week on welfare and there are 4 kids, it won't be €50 a child and the father has nothing left to survive, it can't work that way, a female judge is Cork was anti men and used hammer them, me included, any appeal i brought against her decisions has always been successful, i think i mentioned stuff to you about appeal courts in another thread.

Cork Trucker

Deedee3 wrote: »

Thats true. I don't need to know the details of this information anyway. It's my opinion on the amount regardless of circumstances. The parent with the child cant agree to pay €5 a week towards the cost of living and still survive... works both ways.

quote="Cork Trucker:
My question was to do with the outcome of a bench warrant. So thanks Cork Trucker for sharing your experience, and my comment was not to be taken disrespectfully. The fact you willingly pay is a bonus.

My situation is very much so frustrated to the point that the other person works and has suggested a minimum amount contribution but still refuses to pay.....

Severe penalties need to be put in place

I fully understand your frustration with the courts system, i've been there with my access applications being adjourned for upto 6 months at a time, all the while the child sees me as a stranger. this will happen again i have no doubt. Are you willing to accept the offer that was made irrespective of him paying it or not? As in are you happy or would you prefer more but just don't want the hassle of litigation? The fines act of 2010 was meant to keep debt defaulters out of prison but isn't working. Under that act only maintenance debtors are meant to be jailed, those who are usually go through a revolving door system and some get sent home with €20 allegedly for a bus fare home. How true that is i do not know but several fathers in court have told me that.

Cork Trucker

Evd-Burner wrote: »

I don't think severe penalties should be put into place. I think a proper maintenance system needs to be put into place instead of judges picking random figures out of their heads!

Something closer aligned to the UK in order to calculate maintenance payable. Obviously there would need to be exceptions in special circumstances.

There should be a centralised system where maintenance goes in and then out to the parent who receives it, non payment should be dealt with within days like a business following up. If unpaid it should be taken at source and only go to court if there is messing around at that stage.

I hate this court business, judges decisions vary wildly!

I used the UK calculator and based it on an Irish person i know of on the dole with 6 children, if he was in the UK he would be paying no maintenance. Seems the Irish system while it has flaws is better.

Evd-Burner

Cork Trucker wrote: »

I used the UK calculator and based it on an Irish person i know of on the dole with 6 children, if he was in the UK he would be paying no maintenance. Seems the Irish system while it has flaws is better.

Social welfare in the UK is a lot lower than here and isn't as easy to stay on long term.

Cork Trucker

Evd-Burner wrote: »

Social welfare in the UK is a lot lower than here and isn't as easy to stay on long term.

Aye, but you’ll always have those who manage in albeit in far less numbers than here. I don’t even know the weekly welfare rate over there.

Deedee3

Cork Trucker wrote: »

I fully understand your frustration with the courts system, i've been there with my access applications being adjourned for upto 6 months at a time, all the while the child sees me as a stranger. this will happen again i have no doubt. Are you willing to accept the offer that was made irrespective of him paying it or not? As in are you happy or would you prefer more but just don't want the hassle of litigation? The fines act of 2010 was meant to keep debt defaulters out of prison but isn't working. Under that act only maintenance debtors are meant to be jailed, those who are usually go through a revolving door system and some get sent home with €20 allegedly for a bus fare home. How true that is i do not know but several fathers in court have told me that.

My original order was half of his social welfare, this was what the judge decided. He paid this for a number of months even though he was actually working. I never looked for more money because in my eyes if the courts feel it's necessary to up the money with the ages of the children and their needs then all well and good but I wouldnt be hungry for extra to bleed the other person dry. Its the principal. As not just about adult but with the title of a parent; responsibilities dont stop and financially you're always owing someone I.e.schools, hobby groups etc.

Regarding would I have agreed with the offer. Yes because it was the maintenance doubled on a monthly basis, so therefore I'm not the one struggling to pay the necessities.

My reason for going in and out of courts is basically to prove how the court system is not only shockingly biest at times and like you said varies depending on judges, but it does not give realistic responses to the lives that are effected by their decisions apart from having the ability to enforce or attach the bill to your job or welfare payments. This is obviously something any jo soap would not be able to achieve without the courts involved during to GDPR etc. I have 5/6 years of going in and out so by now I know how the system works and ill use it to my advantage.

My maintenance debt for under 2years is at €10,500 this includes educational expenses, medical etc which are all in the order made by the courts. The other person has never paid towards school fees due to it not being court ordered... once again education is not free so how mine have managed to be in school up to secondary is out of sight and mind, once it was put in the order he still ignores it but the courts informed me expenses and maintenance are the one so this is how my arrears has that sum attached. I probably wont see it all but I'll make a good enough fight to get most of it.

The warrants unit informed me about the next steps etc, because hes messed them about they're pretty pissed off with him so I'm sure like you said theyll turn up unexpectedly and hopefully take him in for whatever happens next. I dont see how the courts could have sympathy for a person that's not only fully aware of the warrant but how theyve made the guards do a run around more than once.

Totally agree with the idea of attaching maintenance to pps or whatever, should be done on the birth certificate to avoid this kind of time wasting.

Cork Trucker

Deedee3 wrote: »

My original order was half of his social welfare, this was what the judge decided. He paid this for a number of months even though he was actually working. I never looked for more money because in my eyes if the courts feel it's necessary to up the money with the ages of the children and their needs then all well and good but I wouldnt be hungry for extra to bleed the other person dry. Its the principal. As not just about adult but with the title of a parent; responsibilities dont stop and financially you're always owing someone I.e.schools, hobby groups etc.

Regarding would I have agreed with the offer. Yes because it was the maintenance doubled on a monthly basis, so therefore I'm not the one struggling to pay the necessities.

My reason for going in and out of courts is basically to prove how the court system is not only shockingly biest at times and like you said varies depending on judges, but it does not give realistic responses to the lives that are effected by their decisions apart from having the ability to enforce or attach the bill to your job or welfare payments. This is obviously something any jo soap would not be able to achieve without the courts involved during to GDPR etc. I have 5/6 years of going in and out so by now I know how the system works and ill use it to my advantage.

My maintenance debt for under 2years is at €10,500 this includes educational expenses, medical etc which are all in the order made by the courts. The other person has never paid towards school fees due to it not being court ordered... once again education is not free so how mine have managed to be in school up to secondary is out of sight and mind, once it was put in the order he still ignores it but the courts informed me expenses and maintenance are the one so this is how my arrears has that sum attached. I probably wont see it all but I'll make a good enough fight to get most of it.

The warrants unit informed me about the next steps etc, because hes messed them about they're pretty pissed off with him so I'm sure like you said theyll turn up unexpectedly and hopefully take him in for whatever happens next. I dont see how the courts could have sympathy for a person that's not only fully aware of the warrant but how theyve made the guards do a run around more than once.

Totally agree with the idea of attaching maintenance to pps or whatever, should be done on the birth certificate to avoid this kind of time wasting.

Half his welfare :eek: I've never heard of that, but as with my own case as you say it was court ordered. The thing with the courts is what is necessary and what is reality are nearly always 2 different things.

Being a parent has round the clock expenses, from the smallest of things to a packet of sweets in the shop through to education, sports and all the gear needed for it such as soccer, GAA etc, it's far from cheap.

The offer was of benefit to you, therefore it made financial sense to accept it, what if you went back in and the offer was to reduce it by 50% would you agree to that? The reason i ask is going before judges is like trying to predict the lotto numbers on a case by case basis, you'll never be quite sure how it could go, you could gamble and it would work which is great or it could backfire, i've had it work and backfire, more often than not it worked though, be it access or maintenance, but the access was a major one, i always refused their offers, the judge on each occasion gave me better terms even if only very slightly sometimes.

The court service is terrible, the main reason is not so much the system as the core reason, it's the judges and the lack of training they have, there are very few judges who spent their entire legal careers as solicitors or barristers solely doing family law and then they get promoted into a position of trust by the state.

As for attachments, you can get an attachment of earnings, if he changes jobs or quits that goes out the window, you can't get an attachment of earnings in cases of social welfare, as least that is my knowledge, it was tried on my and the judge stated the statute books prohibit it.

In relation to PPS numbers, if and only if, the father is named on the birth cert do the welfare know he is the father of the children as it is on their database, again, personal experience showed me that by dealing with the welfare office over the early years of fatherhood. The birth certs themselves, the biggest problem you have is mothers and fathers are refusing to register the father as the father to gain what they can from the state in benefits, i'm not saying it is the reason across the board, but it is the biggest reason for it, i'm named on all of my children's birth certs even though my ex did try and stop me. It needs to be mandatory to have the father on the birth cert to claim benefits where there are children involved, then we might see some shift in attitudes in society, no father on the birth cert then no one parent family payment just jobseekers etc. We have the highest percentage of "single" or "lone" parents in Europe, on paper at least, as the unregistered father is usually working and living in undeclared.

Deedee3

Cork Trucker wrote: »

Half his welfare :eek: I've never heard of that, but as with my own case as you say it was court ordered. The thing with the courts is what is necessary and what is reality are nearly always 2 different things.

Being a parent has round the clock expenses, from the smallest of things to a packet of sweets in the shop through to education, sports and all the gear needed for it such as soccer, GAA etc, it's far from cheap.

The offer was of benefit to you, therefore it made financial sense to accept it, what if you went back in and the offer was to reduce it by 50% would you agree to that? The reason i ask is going before judges is like trying to predict the lotto numbers on a case by case basis, you'll never be quite sure how it could go, you could gamble and it would work which is great or it could backfire, i've had it work and backfire, more often than not it worked though, be it access or maintenance, but the access was a major one, i always refused their offers, the judge on each occasion gave me better terms even if only very slightly sometimes.

The court service is terrible, the main reason is not so much the system as the core reason, it's the judges and the lack of training they have, there are very few judges who spent their entire legal careers as solicitors or barristers solely doing family law and then they get promoted into a position of trust by the state.

As for attachments, you can get an attachment of earnings, if he changes jobs or quits that goes out the window, you can't get an attachment of earnings in cases of social welfare, as least that is my knowledge, it was tried on my and the judge stated the statute books prohibit it.

In relation to PPS numbers, if and only if, the father is named on the birth cert do the welfare know he is the father of the children as it is on their database, again, personal experience showed me that by dealing with the welfare office over the early years of fatherhood. The birth certs themselves, the biggest problem you have is mothers and fathers are refusing to register the father as the father to gain what they can from the state in benefits, i'm not saying it is the reason across the board, but it is the biggest reason for it, i'm named on all of my children's birth certs even though my ex did try and stop me. It needs to be mandatory to have the father on the birth cert to claim benefits where there are children involved, then we might see some shift in attitudes in society, no father on the birth cert then no one parent family payment just jobseekers etc. We have the highest percentage of "single" or "lone" parents in Europe, on paper at least, as the unregistered father is usually working and living in undeclared.

Honest to god his €180 was halved and I got €90 per week. This amount has never changed even with him being in employment and earning much more.

That's it some people just dont ever understand that as grown adults.

No I wouldn't be accepting half of anything, why should I? After this amount of time and me having to ask for loans or lends there isnt a chance I'd settle for less. I'm not money hungry but I'm also not going to be taken for a mug just to spare an argument.

As for access. My situation is that the other person only ever wanted to see the kids to gain insight into my life, he spoke badly about me to my kids, hes a danger to them with having served a sentence prior to court proceedings. So when my kids views were heard it was confirmed that it's not good for them.
But he tried every trick in the book with trying to take my kids off me. I've sole custody.
With the minority of fathers I do feel sorry for access refusal and unless totally necessary as in unless the father is a hazard to the kids or exposes them to age inappropriate behaviour then there isnt a hope they should be given a second with the kids but unfortunately that majority have painted a dark version of events for all.

Like maintenance, access cant be forced and the other party wont ever be put in prison so I guess you have to hope they screw up down the line or move on with their lives and dont feel the need to control the access situation other than to pawn the child off when they want to live their "best life".

If you were to stop paying car insurance and drive around eventually you get caught and theres fines and repercussions in place. For me this is the same with regards to contempt of a court order even if its not seen in the same light to others it will be explained in the same way in court.