To Whom It May Concern:


I have received an order for child support (067DAE280741) that I feel is incorrect, and I hope to show that within these pages.

1.      First, I would like to know why this is being handled by the Division of Child Support in Eugene, when this case is held by Washington County.

2.      My income amount is way off base, and I am including my recent offer letter from the job I just got. This income is $16 an hour, an annual salary of $33,280, or $2733 a month. This document has been titled Offer Letter.

3.      The parenting time calculated seems to be a little off. First, the calculations that are shown are 25%, and yet there was not parenting time given. However, when I went through the actual parenting time compared to the order, it turns out to be more like 29%, there was no time given for winter and spring breaks. I have included my calculations as the document titled Parenting Time, and the order as Current Order.

4.      Based on these numbers, I have rerun the child support calculations, and the amount of my support works out to be $159. I have included this document as Support Calculation.

5.      I have always had Jordan covered on health insurance. Even though I have been un- and under- employed the last few years, I have been able to keep him covered under my partners insurance, through her company. The fact that Cherie is using the Oregon Health Plan to cover someone that is already covered is tantamount to theft, and should be stopped immediately. I am providing documentation that shows that Jordan is covered, and has been. I am including this document titled Insurance Coverage.

6.      There is a question of child support that Cherie owes me. On the previous order, I was awarded $399 a month, but agreed to a lesser amount of $350 a month. Cherie made it very clear that she did not want to be garnished for this amount, and had it put in the order (in several places), but then in May of 2007, payments started to be missed, and in June of 2007, payments stopped all together. The order was not modified until May of 2009, therefore there are still child support payments that have not been made from May of 2007 till April of 2009. I am including a spreadsheet calculation of this arrearage including the 9% per annum according to the support order. The calculation is up to this date, and accumulates every day. I have titled this spreadsheet Arrears. I am also including the previous order titled Previous Order.

7.      I am also including the communications between Cherie and I (email) regarding this child support in arrears, and the bankruptcy paperwork from Cherie showing her knowledge of the arrears. This is in the document titled Support of Arrears.

8.      Also, Cherie lists her income as $3,792 per month, yet the company that she has been the VP of since November of 2005 (during the time she was claiming that she could not pay child support) claims $100,000 - $500,000 in Annual Revenue. Why is a parent allowed to not pay their child support obligations when they clearly have the means to do so, and much more? I am adding copies of her Linked In, and Manta business listings, this is labeled Net Visibility Group.

9.      There is also a judgment that Cherie owes me in the amount of $2000 awarded 12/2/2004. With 9% per annum accumulated on this judgment, the amount owed as of today is $3,052. I have included the judgment, and the calculation titled Judgment.

10.  As a side note, Cherie has made it very difficult, if not impossible to visit with my son. Jordan has visited with me less than 24 hours since Mothers day of this year, and this is in direct violation of the custody and visitation orders. Since July 15th, Jordan has been away at a special program, OYCP, in Bend, that was needed because he fell so far behind in school down in Eugene. I have been reluctant to bring this and the previously mentioned matters to the courts for fear of retaliation by Cherie by withholding my son even more. As it is, I am supposed to have Jordan for the Thanksgiving weekend, and I am afraid that this response is going to cause me to lose that.

In conclusion, I believe that there has been a misrepresentation of the facts, and therefore a miscalculation in the numbers presented to me. Please review this material and re-evaluate.


Thank you


Timothy A Tinney

850 Corby St

Woodburn, OR 97071