dcl9310.htm

Decision: Barnes v. Healy

FEB 22 1993 OCSE-DC-93-10

TO ALL STATE IV-D DIRECTORS

Dear Colleague:

This is to bring to your attention a recent Federal court decision, Barnes et al. v. Healy et al., (No. 92-15520), (9th Cir. 1992), which addresses the right of child support recipients to receive notice of collections. Enclosed please find a copy of the opinion in that case. In its opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals held that child support obligees are entitled not only to monthly notice of collection made on their behalf, but also to notice of the date of such collections as such date is defined by 45 CFR 302.51(a)(3),(4), and (5). Furthermore, if no pass-through payment was made, the notice must specify in sufficient detail the reason why (e.g., collection was from Federal income tax refund interception and applicable to arrearages; no collection was made during the month).

While this decision is not final, it is noteworthy because it will effectively require the California Department of Social Services to provide more explicit notice of collections than is required by Federal law and regulations governing the IV-D program to meet the State standards of procedural due process.

As you know, section 104 of the Family Support Act (the Act) of 1988 amended õ454(5)(A) of the Act to require IV-D agencies, effective January 1, 1993, to provide a monthly (rather than annual) notice of the amount of support payments collected each month for individuals who have assigned their rights to receive support payments to the State. A State may be granted a waiver to provide quarterly notices if the Secretary determines that a monthly notice would impose an unreasonable administrative burden on the State. We amended 45 CFR 302.54(b) to meet the requirements of the Act. (OCSE-AT-92-02, 57 FR 30658, July 10, 1992). Section 302.54(b)(2) requires the monthly notice to list separately payments collected from each absent parent when more than one absent parent owes support to the family and indicate the amount of current support and arrearages collected and the amount of support collected which was paid to the family. As explained in the preamble to the final rule (57 FR at 30659) if no support collection is made in a month, the State is not required to provide a notice to the family. A State may, at its option, provide a monthly notice when no support collections are received.

Page 2 - State IV-D Directors

States should be cognizant that, like California, their notice of collections procedures may be similarly scrutinized on procedural due process grounds, despite the fact that such procedures may comport with minimum Federal IV-D requirements.

Sincerely,

Robert Harris

Acting Deputy Director

Office of Child Support

Enforcement

Enclosure

cc: ACF Regional Administrators, Regions I-X

Child Support Program Managers, Regions I-X