Department of Child Support Services DCSS, CSS, The Suck Conflicts of Interest, Embezzlement, Corruption, Racketeering, Extortion, Unlawful Debt, Harassment, Stalking Misallocation of Funds Camarillo CA

Now I'm going to be direct. Seeing as how your intent for disputing the validity of this report is one of the following reasons:

1. You are acting of behalf of DCSS

2. You are acting on behalf of a collection agency subcontracted by DCSS

3. You are acting of behalf of County District Attorney's Office

4. You are acting of behalf Senator Harris

5.  You are acting of behalf of DCFS

6. You are contenious troll who will argue as if this were social media

Your input here is supposed to be a fact based rebuttle of the validity of my report. At no time, in your incoherent hearsay that was blindly missapplied to your rebuttle did you even come close to subject matter of the Report. Mostly because you didn't even take time to read it. You are awarded no points. You may not pass go. We are all less intelligent for having read it. May God have mercy on your soul.

Perhaps you should really read the report yourself.  I am very familiar with the OIG and their reports - their reports are generally not to be taken too seriously because they often overstate the extent of exposures in order to justify their existence and their auditors are morons.  If you're going to rely on their audit to base your complaint on DCFS, then go away...

 First I'd like to start with urging you to actually read the information before disputing its validity. One of the primary reasons a flagarantly systemic pattern of racketeering activity has been operating succesfully in the U.S. since 1972 without any legitimate challenge, is the absence of logic, reason, and subject matter understanding of an issue prior to challenging its merrit or impact.

That being said, I hope you objectively digest the information in this rebuttle and don't take it personally when my response to your direct questions and comments feel like I'm insulting your intelligence. It is not my intent to do so, but your statements are nothing more than an incoherent rant that in no way apply to the report posted. WHO ---- You are correct in your observation. D-C-F-S is not the "point" or focus of this report.

I will be addressing that "Department" in a seperate but related Report. DCFS = Department of Children and Family Services (These are social workers) and more commonly identified as C-P-S Child Protective Services. I do not mention this government agency IN ANY WAY in my report and that is by design.

The government agency that I'm identifying is D-C-S-S. DCSS = Department of Child Support Services. (Theses are bill collectors). To further my point, the majority of the manpower that we identify as DCSS are exactly that. Third party Subcontracted Debt Collectors. The same ones that harrass you on the phone when you are late on a Credit Card or Car Payment.

In regards to your appraisal of the OFFICE of the Inspector Generals Resources and "Capabilities" I assume you are aware the it isn't just one individual, correct? We as a country don't have some guy in an office managing the duties of Inspector General for the entire nation. Some crazy workaholic that doesn't eat, sleep, or defacate like Sanata Clause going door to door doing the U.S. Census with one of those little hand ticket clickers like an usher at a movie?

Also the audit done for this report consited of just 23 states and ONLY 3 counties from each of those states. of those 23 states 21 were not reporting the money! 21 OUT of 23. Totaling over 33 MILLION DOLLARS This was merely a light probe to have something tangible from which to gain a factual understanding. YOU SHOULD TRY IT SOMETIME. YOU WOULDN'T SOUND SO MENTALLY CHALLENGED or ILLITERATE.

The entire reports that cover EVERYTHING I'm saying is in there. The mission of the Office ofInspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as amended, is to protect the integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) programs, as well as the health and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs.

This statutory mission is carried out through a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and inspections conducted by the following operating components: Office of Audit Services ------------------------ The Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides auditing services for HHS, either by conducting audits with its own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine the performance ofHHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their respective responsibilities and are intended to provide independent assessments of HHS programs and operations.

These assessments help reduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and promote economy and efficiency throughout HHS. Office of Evaluation and Inspections ------------------------------------ The Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts national evaluations to provide HHS, Congress, and the public with timely, useful, and reliable information on significant issues. These evaluations focus on preventing fraud, waste, or abuse and promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of departmental programs. To promote impact, OEI reports also present practical recommendations for improving program operations.

Office of Investigations ------------------------- The Office of Investigations (01) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of fraud and misconduct related to HHS programs, operations, and beneficiaries. With investigators working in all 50 States and the District of Columbia, OI utilizes its resources by actively coordinating with the Department of Justice and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities.

The investigative efforts of 01 often lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties. Office of Counsel to the Inspector General ------------------------------------------ The Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG, rendering advice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support for OIG's internal operations.

OCIG represents OIG in all civil and administrative fraud and abuse cases involving HHS programs, including False Claims Act, program exclusion, and civil monetary penalty cases. In connection with these cases, OCIG also negotiates and monitors corporate integrity agreements. OCIG renders advisory opinions, issues compliance program guidance, publishes fraud alerts, and provides other guidance to the health care industry concerning the anti-kickback statute and other OIG enforcement authorities.

The Child entitled to the money ------------------------------- I am absolutely positive that every parent who has their wages or other residual source of income garnished knows EXACTLY how much is being taken, why it is being taken, and who it is supposed to go to their dependent minor children. Hence the name, "Child Support" and the check stub that comes with it that also details the income tax.

As concerned as I am that a profitable business pays you to perform a professional service of some kind, do you make yourself difficult to find on pay day or leave it to your employer to hunt you down for your paycheck? I'm guessing you have direct deposit, get a check mailed to you or grab it on payday.

You track the work you do and have an idea how much you should be getting, correct? Same deal here. YES! If the money I'm paying to my childs mother specifically for my childs living expenses is not going to my child, I WANT IT BACK! If there is nobody to receive the money DONT TAKE THE MONEY. You must make ridiculous amount of cash if you are good with it just going to whoever wants it.

I pay $1300.00 a month.... No the D.A. cant just keep it for himself if my child doesn't receive it. The funds do not just sit there till the payble individual is found. The D.A., SDU and DCSS are not reporting the money and it is just being dipersed how they see fit and it falls off the books L.A. county in the reports I posted JUST LA County was making about 1.8 to 1.9 million a month in undistributal funds and nearly 800K on the interest that would just disappear with no record.

I'm not going to embarass you anymore... Read the data posted and maybe work on you literacy and english comprehension..... I hope to god my tax dollars are not funding a paycheck for you. Please tell me that it was like a disconnect with Google Translate or something that is driving your thought process....

For starters, let's remember we're talking about an OIG audit trying to perform an audit on 50 states - each of which have different rules regarding how to even determine what constitutes abandoned money.  I would have serious questions about the OIG having the capability to perform such an audit in a competent manner, but that's a different issue.

Let's also remember that in virtually every case of an undistributable child support payment, the person making the payment has no idea the person who is supposed to receive payment has either (a) moved, (b) changed banks, c) changed thir name, or (d) otherwise makes it completely impossible to receive the funds from DCFS.  Now whose fault is that?  Is it DCFS?  No.  Is it the person to whom the funds should have been received?  Largely and most often - yes.  Whose responsibility is it to contact DCFS if there's been a change?  It becomes the responsibility of the recipient of the funds.  It would also help for the payor to make certain their information is also available, but that may be a minor issue.

So when a situation like this happens, should the money go back to the person paying?  NO, because there is no way for the funds to be returned to the payee, as defined in the text.  Now the funds could go to the Abandoned Property Department (in California that comes under the State Controller's Office) where it would literally sit - forever - potentially waiting for someone that may or may not exist.  On top of that, whose name do you put the abandoned property under?  The Payee?  The adult recipient?  The child?  So the Federal Government requires abandoned funds be recognized as program revenue if the property is determined to be abandoned because it wants no part of making 50 sets of rules for 50 different states.

So the audit was critical of states who chose not to recognize the abandoned property as program revenue, which means the states who chose not to recognize the property as revenue chose instead to either consider the property abandoned and transfer to the custodian, or decide there was no such thing as abandoned property.  The report states, the audit concluded there was no written procedure to transfer the funds.  However, it doesn't mean the funds weren't transferred to the Abandoned Property Department IF the funds were considered abandoned; that is a sentence missing from the OIG report and it is an important nuance to recognize because it potentially inflates the exposed numbers.  However, if the states followed the rules exactly as the OCSE required, then yes, those states would potentially become corrupted as well, simply by deciding to pocket the funds.  Either way, the corruption has NOTHING to do with DCFS; it has everything to do with the Federal Government and it's requirements for treating abandoned property. 

Here's the funny part:  If the State treated the funds as truly abandoned property and escheated the funds to the Controller's office to be potentially claimed later by the intended recipient, which is what they should REALLY do, then there would be no opportunity for corruption.  However, the OIG would criticize them in an sudit scenario for not following their procedures that would ultimately result in corruption.  Accordingly, this is not a DCFS issue.  This is a Federal Government issue and should be considered as a Federal Government deficiency - if you so wish to complain.