Ken

I was recently told the INS was not currently enforcing the provisions of the I-864
against the sponsor, in my case the divorced husband of an immigrant. Last night an
attorney on a chat channel mentioned the INS would be hiring new employees and felt
the INS may enforce the provisions of I-864 against sponsors. I would appreciate a
reply from Ingo or anyone else having information relating to the I-864 and
garnishment of wages, pensions etc. My only income is from a disability pension and
is of particular interest to me.

Ken

Please Help!

Has anyone been sued by the INS under the I-864 provisions. I would like to chat with
anyone with personal knowledge.

My former wife is currently attempting to get pregnant and apply for welfare
benefits. The father of the baby will have responsibility, but only to the extent of
child support.

In California she will receive more from welfare than working and I will be
responsible for these benefits assuming INS begins pursuing the I-864 sponsors. My
only source of income is a disability pension and I have been informed by the PERS
retirement board of California that the pension can be garnished.

Ken wrote:

    > I was recently told the INS was not currently enforcing the provisions of the I-864
    > against the sponsor, in my case the divorced husband of an immigrant. Last night an
    > attorney on a chat channel mentioned the INS would be hiring new employees and felt
    > the INS may enforce the provisions of I-864 against sponsors. I would appreciate a
    > reply from Ingo or anyone else having information relating to the I-864 and
    > garnishment of wages, pensions etc. My only income is from a disability pension and
    > is of particular interest to me.

name="positive_72.vcf"

filename="positive_72.vcf"

begin:vcard
n:Elkins;Kenneth x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1
email;internet:[email protected] fn:Kenneth Elkins end:vcard

Mrtravel

Ken wrote:
    >
    > Please Help!
    >
    > Has anyone been sued by the INS under the I-864 provisions. I would like to chat
    > with anyone with personal knowledge.
    >
    > My former wife is currently attempting to get pregnant and apply for welfare
    > benefits. The father of the baby will have responsibility, but only to the extent
    > of child support.

Why would he not be responsible for the child's hospital charges? They may not make
him responsible for the mother's expenses, but the child's expenses are their joint
responsibility.

    >
    > In California she will receive more from welfare than working and I will be
    > responsible for these benefits assuming INS begins pursuing the I-864 sponsors.

My only source of income is a disability pension and I have been
    > informed by the PERS retirement board of California that the pension can be
    > garnished.

I really don't think having one baby is going to get her more from welfare than
from working, but I know which job is harder. Are you saying this why she wants to
get pregnant? Isn't there limits now about how long you can get welfare if you are
able to work?

As PERS has said, your pension can be garnished. However, I think it would be limited
to the immigrants benefits being paid back, not the child's. You should obtain legal
advice on this. If you do not have enough money, contact a legal aid organization.

Good luck..

Ken

I understand a women with child receives in excess of $1,000 per month in California,
plus medical benefits. According to I-864 requirements the sponsor is obligated to
pay 125% of the current poverty level. I agree the child's father would be required
to pay, if he can be located. Most government agencies go for deep pockets or the
easy money, mainly my retirement check. I can't run or hide since the retirement
income was used as income when applying for AOS.

mrtravel wrote:

    > Ken wrote:
    > >
    > > Please Help!
    > >
    > > Has anyone been sued by the INS under the I-864 provisions. I would like to chat
    > > with anyone with personal knowledge.
    > >
    > > My former wife is currently attempting to get pregnant and apply for welfare
    > > benefits. The father of the baby will have responsibility, but only to the extent
    > > of child support.
    >
    > Why would he not be responsible for the child's hospital charges? They may not make
    > him responsible for the mother's expenses, but the child's expenses are their joint
    > responsibility.
    >
    > >
    > > In California she will receive more from welfare than working and I will be
    > > responsible for these benefits assuming INS begins pursuing the I-864 sponsors.
    >
    > My only source of income is a disability pension and I have been
    > > informed by the PERS retirement board of California that the pension can be
    > > garnished.
    >
    > I really don't think having one baby is going to get her more from welfare than
    > from working, but I know which job is harder. Are you saying this why she wants to
    > get pregnant? Isn't there limits now about how long you can get welfare if you are
    > able to work?
    >
    > As PERS has said, your pension can be garnished. However, I think it would be
    > limited to the immigrants benefits being paid back, not the child's. You should
    > obtain legal advice on this. If you do not have enough money, contact a legal aid
    > organization.
    >
    > Good luck..

Mrtravel

Ken wrote:
    >
    > I understand a women with child receives in excess of $1,000 per month in
    > California, plus medical benefits. According to I-864 requirements the sponsor is
    > obligated to pay 125% of the current poverty level.

No, the sponsor is required to earn 125 percent of the poverty level.

    > I agree the child's father would be required to pay, if he can be located.
    > Most government agencies go for deep pockets or the easy money, mainly my
    > retirement check.

My point was that you should only be responsible for paying for her, not the child.
That is why I suggested legal assistance.

I can't run or hide
    > since the retirement income was used as income when applying for AOS.
    >

Whether it was used for AOS or not, it would still be easy to find.

In any case, if she is planning a future with this man, it is doubtful she can
stay on welfare. I assume you will do what you can to make sure of that. Are they
living together?

Mrtravel

Ken,

Check out http://www.dss.cahwnet.gov/calworks/

Thanks to "The Welfare to Work Act of 1997, AB 1542, establishes welfare reform in
California."
9.

There are also limits on the time you can collect welfare. The CA State DSS website
has links to varioous county info. Has she really looked at the information? Getting
welfare and staying on it is not as easy as it used to be.

Ken

Mrtravel:

I think I'm correct. Take a look at this, note it states the action can be brought by
the alien also. Thanks for your comments and I will be checking the California
welfare program. They are not living together at this time, she wants her freedom and
is not sure of the relationship at this point. She however wants his baby. I really
feel stupid!

The sponsor must agree to provide support to maintain an alien beneficiary at an
annual income of not less than 125 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, until
the alien becomes a US citizen, has worked in the United States for 40 qualifying
Social Security quarters (at least ten years), permanently departs the United
States, or dies.

The contract is legally enforceable against the sponsor "by the sponsored alien", the
federal government, any state, or by any other governmental agency that provides to
the alien beneficiary any means-test public benefit. An action to enforce the
contract may be brought in any state or federal court.

Note: Re-marriage of immigrant has no effect on the contract. Read before you sign.

mrtravel wrote:

    > Ken wrote:
    > >
    > > I understand a women with child receives in excess of $1,000 per month in
    > > California, plus medical benefits. According to I-864 requirements the sponsor is
    > > obligated to pay 125% of the current poverty level.
    >
    > No, the sponsor is required to earn 125 percent of the poverty level.
    >
    > > I agree the child's father would be required to pay, if he can be located. Most
    > > government agencies go for deep pockets or the easy money, mainly my retirement
    > > check.
    >
    > My point was that you should only be responsible for paying for her, not the child.
    > That is why I suggested legal assistance.
    >
    > I can't run or hide
    > > since the retirement income was used as income when applying for AOS.
    > >
    >
    > Whether it was used for AOS or not, it would still be easy to find.
    >
    > In any case, if she is planning a future with this man, it is doubtful she can stay
    > on welfare. I assume you will do what you can to make sure of that. Are they living
    > together?

Mrtravel

Ken wrote:
    >
    > Mrtravel:
    >
    > I think I'm correct. Take a look at this, note it states the action can be brought
    > by the alien also. Thanks for your comments and I will be checking the California
    > welfare program. They are not living together at this time, she wants her freedom
    > and is not sure of the relationship at this point. She however wants his baby. I
    > really feel stupid!
    >
    > The sponsor must agree to provide support to maintain an alien beneficiary at an
    > annual income of not less than 125 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, until
    > the alien becomes a US citizen, has worked in the United States for 40 qualifying
    > Social Security quarters (at least ten years), permanently departs the United
    > States, or dies.
    >
    > The contract is legally enforceable against the sponsor "by the sponsored alien",
    > the federal government, any state, or by any other governmental agency that
    > provides to the alien beneficiary any means-test public benefit. An action to
    > enforce the contract may be brought in any state or federal court.
    >
    > Note: Re-marriage of immigrant has no effect on the contract. Read before you sign.

I agree.. I must have read it when I signed it. , or did the form change? So, in
theory, she doens't need welfare to get money, she is entitled to get up to 125
percent of the poverty level, from you.