Going to jail for not paying alimony?

[RVonse]

As an aside, it should be noted that going to jail for non-payment of a parking ticket is still based on a criminal case. Its a petty criminal case to be sure....but it is still a crime to park without paying and also a crime not to pay the ticket. That is criminal activity.

Where as alimony is a civil situation. No crime involved with the state, because it is only 1 person who owes another person a debt.

If the credit card companies had the same authority as women do with their civil disputes, they could jail their deadbeat customers too. And there wouldn't be enough jails to hold everyone!

 

[RVonse]

Mr. Schneider was jailed for defying a judge's order. We don't know the detail of the case - we only have his side of it.

Laughing dog, the point being that Mr. Schneider could have been a complete ass hole and he still should not have gone to jail over a civil case!

If a tenant decides to act like an ass hole in a landlord rent dispute, does the judge throw them in jail too? Not likely. You just don't normally see parties of a civil cause going to jail. In fact, the police try to do their best to stay completely out of civil disputes.

 

[laughing dog]

As an aside, it should be noted that going to jail for non-payment of a parking ticket is still based on a criminal case. Its a petty criminal case to be sure....but it is still a crime to park without paying and also a crime not to pay the ticket. That is criminal activity.

It is not a crime to not pay the ticket.

Where as alimony is a civil situation. No crime involved with the state, because it is only 1 person who owes another person a debt.

You keep repeating this mantra as if it is relevant. It is not. Mr. Schneider was not jailed for failure to pay alimony. He was jailed for refusing to obey a court order- an order that is given only after the defendant has had multiple opportunities within the system to deal with it.

According to your position, anyone who refuses to obey a court order should face no real penalty. That makes court orders pretty much useless.

If the credit card companies had the same authority as women do with their civil disputes, they could jail their deadbeat customers too.

You keep harping on this gender distinction even though you have presented no evidence to support your claim. None.

 

[laughing dog]

Laughing dog, the point being that Mr. Schneider could have been a complete ass hole and he still should not have gone to jail over a civil case!

You are entitled to your opinion.

If a tenant decides to act like an ass hole in a landlord rent dispute, does the judge throw them in jail too? Not likely.

And it is not likely that someone who does not pay alimony goes to jail. So what is your point?

You just don't normally see parties of a civil cause going to jail.

Exactly. And Mr. Schneider's case is not normal. So what is your point?

In fact, the police try to do their best to stay completely out of civil disputes.

The police had nothing to do with Mr. Schneider's situation, so what is your point?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the credit card companies turned their civil matters into criminal proceedings after 10 months as happened here.....the jails would quickly run out of space!

In the final analysis, somebody went to jail over a squabble of money owed. That should not happen in a civilized society. There are normally better remedies (liens, etc) for a dispute over property.

If you can't pay you shouldn't go to jail.

However, if you can pay but simply refuse to, what else is the court supposed to do but hold you in contempt and throw you in jail until you see the error of your ways?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Much better answer, and I can give some insight into what this article is writing about, as I have done this myself when working on debt collection.

I am not aware of any cases here in Canada (I can't speak for the USA) of people going to jail for not paying or refusing to pay a court ordered debt. But what happens often is that people run and hide and fail to show up and appear before a judge when ordered to do so. That is what lands them in jail. And it has nothing to do with money. The same applies to failing to appear before a judge if ordered to for any other case.

Here we do get cases where willfully not paying is considered contempt of court and results in going to jail until they comply.

I do agree that the vast majority of cases are those who don't show--although sometimes that's abusive, they keep getting called into court to the extent it interferes with their job.

 

[RVonse]

If the credit card companies turned their civil matters into criminal proceedings after 10 months as happened here.....the jails would quickly run out of space!

In the final analysis, somebody went to jail over a squabble of money owed. That should not happen in a civilized society. There are normally better remedies (liens, etc) for a dispute over property.

If you can't pay you shouldn't go to jail.

However, if you can pay but simply refuse to, what else is the court supposed to do but hold you in contempt and throw you in jail until you see the error of your ways?

There are all kinds of remedies which are commonly used including but not limited to the following:
1. Involuntary wage garnishment
2. Liens against property and assets
3. Foreclosure of property

and in the case of the IRS
1. Confiscation of private bank accounts
2. Confiscation of business assets
3. Confiscation of personal assets

also in the case of drug smuggling (which actually is a crime anyway)
1. Asset confiscation

Clearly these are the civilized methods to handle a dispute over money between 2 parties. Commonly referred to as a civil matter. Even if one person is clearly right and the other is wrong. And even if one person is not paying even though he/she might have the means to pay.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the credit card companies turned their civil matters into criminal proceedings after 10 months as happened here.....the jails would quickly run out of space!

In the final analysis, somebody went to jail over a squabble of money owed. That should not happen in a civilized society. There are normally better remedies (liens, etc) for a dispute over property.

If you can't pay you shouldn't go to jail.

However, if you can pay but simply refuse to, what else is the court supposed to do but hold you in contempt and throw you in jail until you see the error of your ways?

There are all kinds of remedies which are commonly used including but not limited to the following:
1. Involuntary wage garnishment
2. Liens against property and assets
3. Foreclosure of property

and in the case of the IRS
1. Confiscation of private bank accounts
2. Confiscation of business assets
3. Confiscation of personal assets

also in the case of drug smuggling (which actually is a crime anyway)
1. Asset confiscation

Clearly these are the civilized methods to handle a dispute over money between 2 parties. Commonly referred to as a civil matter. Even if one person is clearly right and the other is wrong. And even if one person is not paying even though he/she might have the means to pay.

And if they're an option they're used.

Note that they all fall into one of two categories: Ordering a third party to turn over the assets, or physically taking the assets. Neither approach can be used when the assets are not held by a third party and can't be picked up. In that case the only thing to do is jail them until they comply.