2. UIFSA What does the future of UIFSA Look like for CA?
Presenters:
Alisha Griffin, Director - DCSS
Kristen Erickson Donadee, Attorney - DCSS
Elizabeth Pak, Attorney - Los Angeles LCSA

3. UIFSA 2008 - Background UIFSA 1996 (CA presently operates under this)
UIFSA 2001 (CA adopted this but it’s not operative)
11/23/2007 Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance
UIFSA 2008 (basically UIFSA Convention)

4. UIFSA Mandate
On September 19, 2014, President Obama signed HR4980 the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act which requires all states to enact UIFSA 2008 no later than:
“…the first day of the first calendar quarter beginning after the close of the first regular session of the State Legislature that begins after the date of the enactment of this Act.”
If a State has a 2-year legislative session, “each year of the session shall be deemed to be a separate regular session of the State Legislature.”

5. Where are we now?
CA has introduced legislation (Senate Bill 646) to comply with HR 4980
UIFSA 2008 will have its own Part in the Family Code
Family Code §4900 et seq. will be repealed
UIFSA will fall under Family Code 5700 et seq.
Sections will be renumbered to match UIFSA 2008
Example FC § will correspond with UIFSA §101

6. Where are we going? Once all states enact UIFSA 2008 …
President must sign the instrument of ratification
Then US must deposit its instrument of ratification with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the depository for the Hague Conference
Treaty will be effective for the US on the 1st day of the 1st month that is not less than 3 months after the date of the deposit.

7. UIFSA 2008 Changes
UIFSA builds on UIFSA 2001 & Implements the Hague
Article I – General Provisions
Article II – Jurisdiction
Article III – Civil Provisions of General Application
Article IV – Establishment of Support Order or Determination of Parentage
Article V – Enforcement of Support Order without Registration
Article VI – Registration, Enforcement & Modification of Support Order
Article VII – Support Proceeding Under Convention
Differences in documents, timeframes and defenses -
Non-Hague orders: Articles I through VI
Hague orders: Article VII

8. UIFSA 2008: Changes Section 102:
“State” now means a U.S. state, territory, or Indian nation or tribe.
But remember that in terms of the Convention, a “state” is a country
“Foreign country” means:
Bi-Lateral agreement for Federal reciprocity
State-level agreement for reciprocity
Enacted law or established procedures which are substantially similar to UIFSA; or
Convention Country
Courts can recognize foreign orders under Comity § 204(a).

9. UIFSA 2008: Changes Modification Provisions:
Order-issuing state can modify if no party lives there but parties consent. (UIFSA § 205 (a)(2))
US tribunal can modify a US order if one person resides in another US state and the other person resides outside the US. (UIFSA § 611)
US can modify a foreign order if the foreign country cannot or will not modify its order (UIFSA § 615)

10. UIFSA 2008 Changes
Section 312
Judicial Non-Disclosure Order no longer needed.
Party must allege in an affidavit or declaration that the health, safety or liberty of a party or child would be jeopardized by disclosure of specific identifying information, for information to be sealed and not disclosed.
May be disclosed after hearing after considering health, safety or liberty of party or child if in the interest of justice.

11. UIFSA 2008: Changes
Section 316: Physical presence of nonresident party
Courts now must allow for the telephonic or other electronic testimony of non-resident party.
UIFSA 1996 language indicated the court may permit.
*Keep time difference in mind when setting hearings, particularly for international cases

12. UIFSA 2008: Changes Section 316: Affidavit
“Under oath” replaced with “under penalty of perjury” requirement for documents and affidavits.

13. UIFSA 2008: Changes
Section 319: Redirection of Payments and Change of Payee
Where parties no longer live in the order-issuing state, the IV-D agency where CP resides and receives services may request that the issuing state obtain orders which redirect payment to their SDU.
Redirection by IWO or administrative notice of change of payee

14. UIFSA 2008 Changes Section 501: Direct Income Withholding
Employers do not have to honor Direct Income Withholding orders from foreign countries; no change in that they must honor them for orders issued in another state.

15. UIFSA 2008: Changes
Section 506: Contest by Obligor of Out-of-State IWO
Clarifies that Obligor may register to challenge direct IWO

16. UIFSA 2008: Changes Section 602: Registration
“Support order…may be registered in this state by sending the following records to the appropriate tribunal…”
The word “document” changed to “record” expands meaning to include electronic transmission of documents.

17. UIFSA 2008: Changes Section 604: Choice of Law
Issuing state’s law governs:
nature, extent, amount, duration of current payments,
computation and payment of arrearages and accrual of interest on arrearages,
existence & satisfaction of other obligations
Responding state’s law governs: enforcement
After a state has determined Controlling Order Determination, that state’s laws prospectively applies, including its law on interest, current and future support and on consolidated arrears

18. UIFSA 2008: Changes Section 307: Convert currency at registration.
Example of currency conversion recommended wording for Notice of Registration of Foreign Order:
The amount of the alleged arrearages is 900 Euros as of date having a United States of America Dollar equivalence of $___ as of date.

19. Hague Maintenance Convention Background
71 countries participated in the negotiations
Different legal traditions
Diverse approaches to delivery of child support (maintenance) services
Result: One convention document, forms, and caseworker practice handbook

20. Hague Convention Background
United States participated in negotiations and is a signatory to the treaty.
Senate gave advice and consent to ratify on September 29, 2010, and the President signed the treaty
Public Law Number (HR 4980): Congress approved implementing legislation on September 29, 2014
All states must adopt UIFSA 2008 prior to ratification by President

21. Hague Convention Status
32 countries have ratified:
Norway
Albania
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ukraine
European Union countries (except Denmark) (as of 8/1/2014)
See HCCH.net for updated status, recommended forms, Country Profiles, and Caseworker’s Guide

22. Countries Slated to Ratify
United States
Anticipated Summer 2016
Brazil
Belarus
Kazakhstan
New Zealand
Recent new movement
All ratifications by a state (country) are dependent on each country’s passage of state-level legislation

23. Potential Impact of the Convention
International Case Research 2013
Compared international caseloads in 9 jurisdictions
Diverse jurisdictions; diverse sizes
Some conclusions:
Caseloads highest with states in close geographic proximity
International cases have longer lives than domestic cases
The cases look similar to domestic cases

24. International Cases & the Hague Convention
Non-Hague Foreign Support Order
Hague Foreign Support order
Transmittal letter
2 copies of order (1 certified)
Complete text of order or abstract by issuing tribunal
Sworn or certified arrears statement
Record: order is enforceable in issuing country
Certain obligor/obligee info
For a default order, record attesting to due process
Name/address of person to whom support payments will be sent
Record: arrears and automatic adjustment of support
Request for Determining Controlling Order, if appropriate
Record of receipt of free legal assistance in issuing country (if necessary)

25. International Cases & the Hague Convention
Timeline to Contest Registration
Non-Hague Foreign Support Order (Section 605): within 20 days after notice of registration
Hague Foreign Support Order (Section 707)
Not later than 30 days after notice of registration
Not later than 60 days after notice if contesting party does not reside in US

26. International Cases & the Hague Convention
Acceptable Contests to Hague Foreign Support Orders
Procedural fraud
Proceeding between same parties with same purpose is pending before a tribunal of state and that proceeding was filed first.
Issuing tribunal lacked personal jurisdiction consistent with § 201.
Order is not enforceable in issuing country
If an order was obtained by default, it lacked due process re: notice and opportunity to be heard
Registration manifestly incompatible with public policy, including the failure of the issuing tribunal to observe minimum standards of due process

27. Non-Recognition of Hague Order
If a tribunal does not recognize a Hague order because of:
Lack of personal jurisdiction,
Procedural fraud, or
The order is a default order in which Respondent neither appeared nor was represented, then
Court must allow a reasonable time for a party to request establishment of a new Convention order, and
DCSS shall take all appropriate measures to facilitate that request.

28. Role of Central Authority
Entity under the Hague Convention which performs specific functions
The Central Authority in the US is the Secretary of Health and Human Services
HHS will designate CA IV-D agency to perform many of the CA functions

29. Forms 2014 Intergovernmental Forms Revision Project (OCSE):
Addresses sensitive/confidential information (PII)
Forms adjusted for UIFSA 2008
The Hague Conference website has the mandatory and recommended forms for the Convention, Country Profiles, and a Caseworker’s Guide

30. Practical Handbook Practical Handbook for Caseworkers
Contains procedures, flowcharts
and guides
Available on HccH website
( )

31. iSupport
Case management application to assist Central Authorities in processing Convention applications and EU regulation cases
Expected implementation: Summer, 2016
See iSupport page on HccH website (

32. iSupport Key Functionality
Ability to generate required and recommended Forms in multiple languages
Secure transmission of messages and documents between Central Authorities
Allows case managers to track cases and complete required Convention tasks
May be able to handle payment transmissions and exchange in the future

33. DCSS Efforts to Implement UIFSA 2008
DCSS Project Management Team
Executives, Legal, Policy, Intergovernmental Services, Training
Established UIFSA 2008 Forum
CA CS Central
Workgroup with LCSA Volunteers (Feb-March)
Reviewed RFCs to Update CSE
Reviewed DCSS, Judicial Council, OCSE Forms
Discussed Impact to LCSA procedures
Discussed Training Approach

34. Impact on LCSA
DCSS is developing training to address multiple groups: LCSA, Court, Private bar
Section 319: Redirection of Payment and Change of Payee
DCSS will receive incoming redirect requests
LCSA training will focus on when and how to request redirect from other states
Telephonic appearance mandatory
Non-Disclosure Declaration or Affidavit
Judicial Council and OCSE Forms Updates to come
International Cases: Training will focus on long-term impacts and increase in cases

35. Kristen Donadee