Can I Get Licensed in FL if I Am Behind on Child Support?

That was my entire point, Todd. For some reason it's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. Especially from actual industry folk... as opposed to uneducated civilian Primerica bait.
 
I know how you feel. I've watched agents on here doing that for so long I just had to say something.

I did work with Primerica shortly after it changed from ALW. It didn't take very long to realize what was really going on and how I really wasn't helping people because most of them just wouldn't "invest the difference". My point is, I really don't have any love for the company, but it is that "fingernails on the chalkboard" to me to hear someone pronounce it wrong. I should really care less, but it makes me cringe!
 
Al... PrimeAmerica? Really?

Your point is well made. I didn't think it through. Yeah, it probably wasn't one of my better suggestions. I saw Prime as a last resort (along with NAA,) but perhaps I should have drawn a line further up in the insurance food-chain.

Having had the same wife for 30 years and no children, I have no idea how serious it is when you have a child-support judgement against you when applying for an appointment. I'm sure it depends on the carrier. Perhaps some carriers don't do much of a background check OR would not care... especially in a non-financial product like health insurance, critical illness, or work-site (STD, hospital indemnity, accident, dental, vision, group health, etc.)

But I do stand by what I said about not taking this endeavor when your are broke or close to it. For someone who has been out of work for 2 years and down to the end of their savings, I think there are better ways to go about getting back up on ones feet than selling insurance, especially if one has had no previous sales experience.

Al
 
Al, you completely misread my point.

That I misspelled the company name? Yes, I missed it. I too thought it was PrimeAmerica. It's not a company I know anything about except what I've read here. I've never met a PA agent and the one person whom I met who had PA term, I found it easy to replace with a better priced policy that had conversion rights. I don't think PA is all that popular in my area. I never meet agents who sell them at the NAIFA or FPA meetings I go to.

I thought the point you were making was that I made a more serious "mistake" than just the spelling.

When I'm wrong I own up to it, and I was wrong to suggest the OP go the Prime route. It seemed right when I wrote it, but upon reflection of your post, I realize I didn't think it through.

Good catch. You were right (in both spelling and message.) I was wrong.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For everyone out there who thinks guys behind on child support are "evil" - don't ever get laid off.

Very close friend of mine was making decent pay - great job and paid "" in child support. No problem...until he got laid off.

He got another job but at much lower pay. Back to court he went and the judge said tough - no adjustment. He literally could not afford the payments and fell behind.

He wasn't evil. In a marriage if you're earning $80,000 then your family lives on that. Go down to $50,000 and you make adjustments.

With child support everything "sets" at your income at the time of divorce. Getting an adjustment if you make less money takes an act of God - especially when you're ex spends the money on herself, not the kids, and wants those nice checks coming in.

My high school friend got divorced. First thing his ex did with the money was buy a new car.

I couldn't agree more.
Back when I lived in Maryland, I knew more than one guy that got 'beat to hell' by their system.

The custodial parent (mostly mothers) were able to "set" the child's expenses and they used a "simple" but crazy system to decide how much both parents had to pay.

Example:
He makes 80k, she makes 20k = ya'll make 100k and since he made 80% of the money he paid 80% of the "private" school, women used to used this tactic to bleed a guy to pay much higher expenses (why not she was only paying .20 on the dollar).

Not saying, all of a sudden his kids should attend cheaper or public cause of a divorce but as John eluded financial changes in your overall life must be taken into consideration.

If those two people were not divorced that FAMILY would have to make adjustments, eat pb&j, use one car etc...till things got better. And, you would NOT "owe" back money once the family got back on its feet because you'd work as a unit, things should work the same if you are in the same house or not.

I feel for guys in that position, I really do, I've seen some terrible things happen...I'm very lucky, I'm not to be in that position and I don't wish it on ANYBODY.

Good Luck, Fellas
 
I don't understand child support. Let's separate it from alimony. That's different.

Just for child support, the money is far too high. For example, my buddy was on $1,600 a month payments based on his income. This is for one kid.

I have one kid. HOW do I even come close to spending $400 a week on him? That's absurd.

I've never seen anything so brutal in MD than actions for not paying child support - loss of drivers license, professional license, wages, garnishes, disability garnished, and jail time (night/weekend jail so you can still work and pay.)

Now there's a good system, huh - fall behind on support and lose your drivers license?
 
No matter how thin you make a pancake, it still has two sides. For every example of a child support payor getting brutalized by the system, there's an example of a child support recipient getting screwed by deadbeats, attorneys, and the jammed-up system.

Hats off to anyone who tries to do the right thing even if they hadn't been doing the right thing... but what's with all the lame stereotypes? Gold diggers, new cars, etc? A child is at a minimum a 20-year responsibility, and if you're eating but not paying for your child to eat (man or woman makes no difference) ...
 
Back
Top