40-5-412. Delinquency income withholding. (1) In the case of support orders not subject to immediate income withholding under 40-5-411, including cases in which the court or administrative authority has made a finding of good cause or determines that an alternative arrangement exists, the income of the obligor is subject to withholding under this part beginning on the date on which the obligor is found to owe unpaid support under the support order in an amount equal to or in excess of 1 month's support payment. Intervening agreements or orders establishing a schedule for payment of delinquent support do not prevent income withholding under this part.
     (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (1), income withholding must be initiated, without regard to whether there is an arrearage, on the earlier of:
     (a) the date the obligor requests that withholding begin; or
     (b) at the request of the obligee if the obligor is found, after an opportunity for hearing under 40-5-414, to be delinquent under the terms of an alternative arrangement for the payment of support.
     (3) To accomplish the purpose of subsection (1), the department shall monitor all support payments not otherwise subject to immediate withholding. To facilitate monitoring, the department by written notice to the obligor may direct an obligor who does not owe unpaid child support equal to or in excess of 1 month's support payment to pay all support through the department, notwithstanding a court order directing payments to be made to the obligee or clerk of court.
     (4) The only basis for contesting withholding under this section is a mistake of fact, which includes a mistake:
     (a) concerning the obligor's identity;
     (b) concerning the existence of the support obligation;
     (c) concerning the amount of support to be paid;
     (d) in the determination that the delinquent support amounts owed are equal to or greater than 1 month's support payment;
     (e) in computation of delinquent support amounts owed; or
     (f) in the allegation that the obligor is in default of an alternative agreement.

     History: En. Sec. 5, Ch. 571, L. 1985; amd. Sec. 9, Ch. 702, L. 1989; amd. Sec. 41, Ch. 16, L. 1991; amd. Sec. 8, Ch. 635, L. 1991.