Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/)
-   Financial Issues (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f5/)
-   -   Uniform (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f5/uniform-21174/)

zanman 07-08-2017 07:00 AM

Uniform
 
Hi everyone

Would a high school uniform be a section 7 expense.

My daughter is going to catholic high school.

Tayken 07-10-2017 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zanman (Post 222103)
Hi everyone

Would a high school uniform be a section 7 expense.

My daughter is going to Catholic high school.

The simple answer is no. A school uniform is neither SPECIAL nor EXTRAORDINARY.

SadAndTired 07-10-2017 12:45 PM

Tayken, YOUR simple answer is no.

My answer would be it depends. My lawyer's answer was yes.

Here is the Ontario Child Support Guidelines:

https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/970391 See 7.1.d

7.**(1)**In an order for the support of a child, the court may, on the request of either parent or spouse or of an applicant under section 33 of the Act, provide for an amount to cover all or any portion of the following expenses, which expenses may be estimated, taking into account the necessity of the expense in relation to the childís best interests and the reasonableness of the expense in relation to the means of the parents or spouses and those of the child and to the spending pattern of the parents or spouses in respect of the child during cohabitation:
(a) child care expenses incurred as a result of the custodial parentís employment, illness, disability or education or training for employment;
(b) that portion of the medical and dental insurance premiums attributable to the child;
(c) health-related expenses that exceed insurance reimbursement by at least $100 annually, including orthodontic treatment, professional counselling provided by a psychologist, social worker, psychiatrist or any other person, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, prescription drugs, hearing aids, glasses and contact lenses;

(d) extraordinary expenses for primary or secondary school education or for any other educational programs that meet the childís particular needs;

(e) expenses for post-secondary education; and
(f) extraordinary expenses for extracurricular activities. O.*Reg. 391/97, s.*7*(1); O.*Reg. 446/01, s.*2.




Extraordinary is relative. The school requires a uniform. It is mandatory and not something a teen would wear when not at school.

New uniforms for my daughter to attend Catholic High School cost me over $700 last year. Her high school is very specific and has their own provider. We simply can't run down to the local store and get what we need. That $700 was in addition to her back pack, gym uniform, other school stuff and normal fall clothing needs/shoes/coats/etc.

If I was receiving $300 a month, high school uniforms would certainly be section 7.

Tayken 07-10-2017 07:06 PM

Topic was already covered in 2015:

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...expense-19294/

Tayken 07-10-2017 07:09 PM

Also, I guess your lawyer isn't Andrew Feldstien:

Section 7 Expenses - Some are Just Not Worth the Fight

Quote:

This holds true with many other expenses; such as a child’s school uniform. It should be an incidental to the private school cost; however, it may be in lieu of other basic clothing that would fall under the child support. The dress shoes for the child, forming part of the uniform could also be worn for special occasions outside of school. Is this a section 7 expense? While my answer to the shoes would be a “no” in most cases, for a number of years I was contacted by one client who would indicate that his former spouse wanted his contribution to the shoes. Every year I say the same thing- the cost of a letter to the other lawyer would far exceed the cost of the shoes.
Andrew does a great job of explaining the complexities of the situation overall. I would recommend the OP to read this article and consider the actual Lawyer's advice. It is the more complex answer.

Good Luck!
Tayken

SadAndTired 07-10-2017 08:56 PM

See? This is a ridiculous argument.

In addition to the fact that your post talks about private school (high income families) Taken, your argument misses the point for me.

So, let's say for argument sake that uniforms are section 7.

Parent 1 says "Well, I am not paying."

Parent 2 says "But it is section 7"

Parent 1 says "No. Not paying."

Parent 2 receives $200 a month in CS.

Tayken says it isn't worth the fight. And he is right, Parent 2 couldn't afford the uniform, how could they afford a court case to take dick parent1 to court?

It is the same for my current situation, dance is over $5,000. Ex says "nope. not paying". So I have to take him to court and pay a lawyer to collect what he should be paying?

No parent should bother to pay anything under your philosophy of it will cost more to collect. Why pay when there is no consequence?? Further no parent should ever bother to go after any financial support as it costs too much to collect.

Perhaps the emphasis should be on concrete section 7 expenses so the parent1s of the world cannot create arbitrary situations and refuse to pay.

rockscan 07-10-2017 09:01 PM

On the flip side my partners ex deemed expenses she estimated as section 7 and is now taking him to court to recover them. He has to pay to have a judge school her.

The expenses arent concrete because theyre open to interpretation by income levels. Your ex is a stingy ass who refuses all. OP could be paying $1000 a month. It may not be a s7 expense.

Tayken 07-11-2017 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
See? This is a ridiculous argument.

Yes. It in fact is. Fighting over pennies with pounds is always silly in family law.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
In addition to the fact that your post talks about private school (high income families) Taken, your argument misses the point for me.

Most Catholic schools (which are part of a public system) have systems where people who truly cannot afford a uniform can get them. Parent counsel and other organizations at the school often raise uniforms for this. In addition, the affiliated Church often has a program.

The point I am making that school uniforms are not worth the fight. Find alternative means to get assistance rather than duking it out in a court battle where NO ONE WINS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
So, let's say for argument sake that uniforms are section 7.

Parent 1 says "Well, I am not paying."

Parent 2 says "But it is section 7"

Parent 1 says "No. Not paying."

Parent 2 receives $200 a month in CS.

Tayken says it isn't worth the fight. And he is right, Parent 2 couldn't afford the uniform, how could they afford a court case to take dick parent1 to court?

Correct. If the parent is truly in poverty and cannot afford the uniform then there are alternatives to assist with the problem as mentioned above. You often can buy second-hand uniforms as well at significantly reduced rates.

Also, the risk is high because a judge *may* evaluate your situation against the average income of the school. No doubt there are families making less than the two goofs in court fighting over hundreds of dollars who are making ends meet and paying for the uniforms.

The courts are not for wasting taxpayer dollars on petty disagreements is my point. So the simple answer is "no".

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
It is the same for my current situation, dance is over $5,000. Ex says "nope. not paying". So I have to take him to court and pay a lawyer to collect what he should be paying?

Or the children don't participate in dance. Knowing your situation I do agree with you that the other parent is just being cheap. But, the courts don't like to meddle in the "cheapness" of parents. So, you are probably SoL. But, yes, in your situation the other parent is just being cheap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
No parent should bother to pay anything under your philosophy of it will cost more to collect. Why pay when there is no consequence?

What about the benefits to the kids by paying and sucking it up? If a child wants to participate in it and you can afford it without the other parent's assistance. Just do it for the benefit of the child. Not so you can "collect" from the other parent.

Majority of children do not participate in extracurricular activities like $5000 dance. Special kids with rich parent(s) do. Majority of society doesn't live in the 1% or doesn't share children with the 1%. So, don't try to relate every situation to the 1% problem you have. Your situation is very different than 99% of the people on this site. They don't share children with a cheap 1%er. They share children with the 99% than't are the "have nots".

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
Further no parent should ever bother to go after any financial support as it costs too much to collect.

There is a cost benefit analysis that is in ratio to the house hold income. Some times, the conflict isn't worth the couple of hundred bucks depending on the house hold income. Too many people in family court spend 10's of thousands chasing conflict that boils down to 100's or even a couple of 1000's of dollars. All on the "principal" of it... Waste of resources and taxpayer moneys.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadAndTired (Post 222165)
Perhaps the emphasis should be on concrete section 7 expenses so the parent1s of the world cannot create arbitrary situations and refuse to pay.

I do agree. There should be way better guidance on "what is" and "what is not" a "section 7 expense".

Good Luck!
Tayken

zanman 08-28-2017 01:10 PM

Ok recent update with this and some advice needed.

She now has gone purchased $130.00 shoes. I didn't ok this and no she is asking for 80% of this. I wouldn't think this would be a section 7

SadAndTired 08-28-2017 03:17 PM

Now the shoes I would NOT consider section 7. My daughter's school has a requirement that shoes are all black including the sole. But the shoes can be worn other places. The uniform is section 7 to me because it can't be worn anywhere else and is a requirement of attendance. Child support you already paid should cover shoes that can be worn on an everyday basis (which the shoes for high school can be).

And before Tayken decides to jump down my throat, my ex had his lawyer exclude uniforms from section 7 expenses specifically in our agreement due to his high child support. Both my lawyer and his lawyer agreed that uniforms are section 7.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0