View Single Post
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2014, 05:57 PM
scarycheri scarycheri is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 129
scarycheri is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serene View Post
I think you have a mess.

You can dictate how payments are made and any time the recipient can revert to collecting through FRO. Therefore, this is not an issue/debate you should pursue (time well wasted in my opinion).

You don't know if child was even in care Does the payor not have contact with child?

Why email transfer? And why dictate and limit yourself to this? Pay as you wish. Just ensure its paid on time. Don't fight over the silly stuff.

I doubt you will be successful in limiting to $1200 a year. You have to support your quest and it's child's best interests and pattern of spending/activities enjoyed by child versus your budget request.

Tutor - if you request itemized list of dates, etc. Then what? If anything challenge the need versus as for a detailed bill....we're there free resources available but not pursued? Did payor even know this was talking place? Does the child have an IEP? Who and what warranted the need for a tutor? Did her marks in the subject improve?
1. The recipient doesn't want to be in FRO. She asks regularly for payor to agree to drop out. He would intend on adding a clause saying she can revert to FRO if he doesn't pay within 30 days.

2. Yes he sees her but he doesn't drill her about these things. He chooses not to involve the child. Also, it's not unusual for the child to visit the supposed "babysitters house" as the child is besties with their child. Asking her if she went to Jane's house after school would be pointless since prior to July 2013 she would hang out there anyway. She wouldn't know if mommy is paying Jane's mom suddenly. Anyways, isn't 12 a little old for a babysitter? Also, Mom's boyfriend works shifts and is often home after school.

3. With her everything has to be specific. If it isn't she picks a fight. That's why we are having this issue now.

4. Pattern of spending has been between $250 and $600 per year for the past 8 years. It's decreased as she as gotten older.At no time did the recipient contact the payor to let him know their child was interested in a costly activity. My ex was able to put a limit on my extra curriculars. My daughter was entering cheer which was $2000 a year and my previous spending was $675. The judge when with the previous history. Also....do you think a judge is going to let the recipient go back on what she agreed to?

5. Tutor....recipient pays tutor cash under the table. The tutor won't provide a receipt however did provide a letter confirming attendance and frequency in 2012. Judge ruled the letter serves as a receipt. A letter from 2012 doesn't confirm attendance in 2013 or any years in the future. The child has an LD and has an IEP in all subjects school. Her grades have not improved. With IEP she is still a C/D student at best. Child has been with tutor for 5 years, since being tested. Prior to testing she was an R student. Recipient associates new grades with tutor not IEP.

Previous to Feb 2013 recipient didn't want financial assistance from payor for s.7. She didn't want him to see her NOA and find out how much she made. She only pursued s.7 after payor asked for more time with child.

She emailed him this morning about his response and claims he's not living up to his responsibility. $950 a month sounds like a deadbeat dad? It didn't include any threat of court this time so who knows. We figured out that if they just leave his payment as is he is covering his share of a full year for karate, tutoring and a few weeks of summer camp. That's fair. He isn't looking to lower it. He's just not agreeing to increase his payment when she knowingly over spent.

Last edited by scarycheri; 09-22-2014 at 06:05 PM.
Reply With Quote