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
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2017, 03:27 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 34
Sam Sung is on a distinguished road
Default Section 7 limit calculation ?

At my recent case conference, the magistrate told us that there is a limit as to how much someone is expected to pay for Section 7 expenses based on your annual salary .

Does anyone know where I might be able to find the formulas they use in Ontario ?

The example she gave us seemed very low ( example : if you make $120000 the cap is $ 300 )

Anyone ever hear of this ?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2017, 04:14 PM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,342
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

There is no formula. Section 7 determinations are almost random.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2017, 04:35 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,838
stripes is on a distinguished road
Default

That doesn't sound right. In practice, certain S7 expenses might be considered unreasonable for a given income level (e.g. if you make $30K and your ex wants to put your kid in riding lessons for $5K per year, it would be reasonable for you to say no, this isn't an acceptable S7 expense). But as far as I know, there's no hard cap. Certainly most people making $120K pay a lot more than $300 in S7.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2017, 05:58 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,248
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Sung View Post
At my recent case conference, the magistrate told us that there is a limit as to how much someone is expected to pay for Section 7 expenses based on your annual salary .

Does anyone know where I might be able to find the formulas they use in Ontario ?

The example she gave us seemed very low ( example : if you make $120000 the cap is $ 300 )

Anyone ever hear of this ?
I'm thinking you may be interpreting this backwards. Perhaps she meant that for an income that high, nothing UNDER $300 would be considered section7, but would should fall under what is covered by normal CS.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2017, 09:13 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 34
Sam Sung is on a distinguished road
Default

Rioe,

You may be right that I misunderstood but it sure sounded like the magistrate said " there is a cap " and it was not high at all .

If there is no formula and it is discretionary , then the person overseeing my case is on the frugal side .

Fine by me, I just wanted to know where I stand before the money is spent .
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 01-25-2017, 10:15 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3,012
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

The only s7 expenses that are mandatory are medical and day care. The rest are a crapshoot. Most of the time when it involves a high salary (over 100,000), judges err on the side of what the family decisions were like before the divorce. If you had your kid in $5000 worth of activities before divorce then you may be required to continue it. If you had none and suddenly the ex has them registered six of seven nights a week then thats questionable.

Then it goes back to my favourite question: is it worth at least ten grand in legal fees?
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 09:21 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

The only "cap" would be if the S7 expenses put you into a dire financial situation which makes you homeless.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 02:04 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Kingston, ON
Posts: 182
Bellbaby is on a distinguished road
Default

What would a judge think of the person makes $120k, I make $45k, and is standard extracurricular activity, mediocre cost, say swimming lessons $40/mnrh and something else at $300/year (dance, soccer, anything for an eight week session or whatever).

Ask the mother to pay as it is a lower cost?
Ask the father to pay as he has the higher income?
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 01-26-2017, 02:27 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bellbaby View Post
What would a judge think of the person makes $120k, I make $45k, and is standard extracurricular activity, mediocre cost, say swimming lessons $40/mnrh and something else at $300/year (dance, soccer, anything for an eight week session or whatever).

Ask the mother to pay as it is a lower cost?
Ask the father to pay as he has the higher income?
None of that is "special" nor is it "extraordinary". The parent that wants the children to attend the activity should pay. Nor should you expect the other parent to take the children to those activities should they fall on that parent's residential time.

If you can't afford an extracurricular activity you should do what an intact family does. Make a sacrifice or don't do it.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-27-2017, 11:56 AM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,248
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Extracurricular does not automatically mean extraordinary. Extraordinary expenses are the really big special things that the family would have had to discuss finances for even if they had remained intact. That level-of-expense-that-requires-discussion is obviously based on the combined family income.

Ordinary piano lessons? Not s7.
Child is a musical prodigy and needs expensive private lessons and a high-quality instrument? s7.

Ordinary hockey league? Not s7.
Child is a phenomenal NHL potential talent and needs better quality equipment, does a lot of out of town tournaments, gets extra coaching? s7.

The only ones that don't usually need discussion are things like braces, university tuition and daycare if the parents work schedule requires it.

Everything else is covered by normal CS. If the parents have a fairly large income disparity, such as the 120k vs 45k example, the lower income parent is receiving some CS which helps pay for the expense.
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
re-calculation of time for access Tatyana K Divorce & Family Law 75 12-12-2017 12:02 AM
Disclosure required for Section 7 Calculations ByMyself Financial Issues 7 01-17-2014 03:04 PM
Section 7.3 - net of NRTC's and CCTB? whatwasithinking Divorce & Family Law 6 05-01-2012 12:34 PM
Actually GETTING the Payment for Section 7 Expenses dazedandconfused2049 Financial Issues 4 10-20-2011 11:15 AM
section 7 calculation unstuck Divorce & Family Law 5 03-12-2010 05:22 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:31 PM.