Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Financial Issues

Financial Issues This forum is for discussing any of the financial issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 11:57 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,891
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Im sure she did speak to a lawyer. Many lawyers will tell you want you want to hear.

Im not going to give advice though. Medical is tricky. Some legal blogs say costs that total more than $100 a year and some say costs over $100. So is the $100 shared or is the cost over $100 shared? As in cost is $150 so the $150 is shared or the $50 is shared?
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 12:00 PM
Maggie82's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 183
Maggie82 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Im sure she did speak to a lawyer. Many lawyers will tell you want you want to hear.

Im not going to give advice though. Medical is tricky. Some legal blogs say costs that total more than $100 a year and some say costs over $100. So is the $100 shared or is the cost over $100 shared? As in cost is $150 so the $150 is shared or the $50 is shared?
That's a very good question. Was wondering that myself.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 12:18 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,717
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

IMO you are both splitting hairs. If the bill was $101 it would be over the threshold. The ex is being ridiculous if they are willing to spend hundred of $$ on legal fees to recover less than $100.

What is the proportional share? Is it like 90/10 split and that is why your partner is balking?

IMO, $100 for something that is clearly an s7 expense (medical/optical) isn't worth to the BS and hassle of dealing with the ex. If it was $90, I'd tell the ex it was c/s. But this has hit that $100 level and I think that if this ever got in front of a judge, that judge would a) slam their head against the desk, b) proceed to ream both parents out for wasting the courts time and then c) order that it be split.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 12:53 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,891
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Its hard NOT to split hairs especially when kids get glasses AND contacts when medical plans make you choose either/or. One set of eye glasses/years worth of contacts is a normal medical expense. Why should being divorced make it ok for things that intact families wouldnt get the benefit of. I get that some kids have image and self esteem problems but if you bump back and forth, your eye care should last longer than a year. Plus one kid gets eye infections every time she wears contacts so wouldnt a reasonable parent say contacts for special circumstances?

I know i know shut up rockscan...
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 01:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,717
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Its hard NOT to split hairs especially when kids get glasses AND contacts when medical plans make you choose either/or. One set of eye glasses/years worth of contacts is a normal medical expense. Why should being divorced make it ok for things that intact families wouldnt get the benefit of. I get that some kids have image and self esteem problems but if you bump back and forth, your eye care should last longer than a year. Plus one kid gets eye infections every time she wears contacts so wouldnt a reasonable parent say contacts for special circumstances?

I know i know shut up rockscan...
I see where you were coming from, but my comment was aimed at the OP and the splitting of hairs of what $100 constitutes.

I wear glasses, my ex had laser eye surgery. My D10 doesn't need glasses yet (luckily). I know my wife wears glasses and contacts, switching between the two depending on how her eyes feel. She goes through contacts a little more than years worth in a year, but her glasses are every two years. So we pay for my wife a little more than normal. I wouldn't expect to do less for my kid (given my situation, should it arise).
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 02:21 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,891
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default Section 7(1)(c) - Health-related expenses that exceed insurance reimbursement

My partners eyes are horrible and sadly his youngest has the same issue. I also wear glasses but prescription has never changed. While both of us would love to wear both glasses and contacts its not financially feasible. When he was married it was the same thing. They covered what they could after benefits. Now that theyre divorced the eye care costs have increased. I am only going by what he said the last time the bill came in. This time he knows he was wrong to cover the stuff that wasnt technically s7 (lens cleaners etc). He isnt being mean, hes putting an end to the "dad will pay for it whether he likes it or not" argument. Plus as he put it, if kid isnt mature enough to handle cleaning the contacts properly so there are no infections then perhaps they should not wear contacts so much.

He'll cross the bridge when he comes to it.

ETA as an example, lens solution at the drugstore or grocery store is about $10+ cheaper per bottle than the eye doctor. Eye doc supplied all the lens cleaner last time to the tune of $250. If you can get the same thing elsewhere, why not do that? He told me when they were married it was purchased with groceries for cheaper. He did groceries. Its convenient to get the cleaner with the glasses/contacts at the docs office. (His ex is not frugal)

Last edited by rockscan; 08-28-2015 at 02:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 02:37 PM
Maggie82's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 183
Maggie82 is on a distinguished road
Default

To be fair, regardless of hue you calculate it, as long as the parties stick to that one method, that's what matters. Unfortunately this becomes somewhat difficult when one party always wants to use whichever method gets him/her the most $ reimbursement at the time. That is why Dad is balking. Up till now, the method of adding up expenses and only sharing expenses when the $100 "no-share" limit had been reached. But now the the current expense reached the $100 limit, Mom wants to switch to the other interpretation/method where any expense $100 or higher is to be shared regardless of whether the &200 limit has been reached. It's the flip flopping to try to get the most money that Dad is fighting against. If that makes sense.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 02:55 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,717
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggie82 View Post
To be fair, regardless of hue you calculate it, as long as the parties stick to that one method, that's what matters. Unfortunately this becomes somewhat difficult when one party always wants to use whichever method gets him/her the most $ reimbursement at the time. That is why Dad is balking. Up till now, the method of adding up expenses and only sharing expenses when the $100 "no-share" limit had been reached. But now the the current expense reached the $100 limit, Mom wants to switch to the other interpretation/method where any expense $100 or higher is to be shared regardless of whether the &200 limit has been reached. It's the flip flopping to try to get the most money that Dad is fighting against. If that makes sense.
Then the argument you make to the other side is that in past instances you calculated the amounts X way (provide examples). That this has been found to be fair to all parties. That you don't understand why there is a need to change the method now. However, if they are instant, that he agrees that this instance, and all future instances, will be calculated in the same fashion. It puts it out there that ex is flip-flopping, and that you won't accommodate future flip-flops, while also acting reasonable and in a co-operative fashion
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 02:59 PM
Maggie82's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 183
Maggie82 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HammerDad View Post
Then the argument you make to the other side is that in past instances you calculated the amounts X way (provide examples). That this has been found to be fair to all parties. That you don't understand why there is a need to change the method now. However, if they are instant, that he agrees that this instance, and all future instances, will be calculated in the same fashion. It puts it out there that ex is flip-flopping, and that you won't accommodate future flip-flops, while also acting reasonable and in a co-operative fashion
That's the plan. Just trying to see what methods others are using so that this can be worded properly and isn't too far outside "the norm."
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 08-28-2015, 06:59 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,035
Berner_Faith will become famous soon enough
Default

Here is another question regarding health care from a coworker.

Agreement states any medical coverage that is not covered by the benefits shall be divided proportionately between the parties in accordance with subsection 7(2) of the child support guidelines.

Mom wants to take the kids on a trip, they require a vaccine. The vaccine is not covered under either parents benefits. Do the parents split the cost as per section 7 or does mom pay for the whole cost as she wants to take them on the trip?

My fiance and I are taking our kids on a trip and never thought of asking mom to cover a portion, so I don't really know the answer.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Section 7 Expenses Question blendedinsanity Divorce & Family Law 14 05-25-2015 04:41 PM
Insurance Premiums Deducted from Paycheck for Chidren's Health Care ross_toronto Financial Issues 13 03-27-2015 11:29 PM
FRO - section 7 expenses Coop Financial Issues 5 10-22-2012 01:19 PM
Question on CS and Section 7 Expenses decent fellow Financial Issues 4 11-15-2011 12:59 AM
Actually GETTING the Payment for Section 7 Expenses dazedandconfused2049 Financial Issues 4 10-20-2011 10:15 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:20 PM.