Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Support for adult children

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Support for adult children

    Is it normal to be paying child support to my ex-wife when my daughter is away at school full-time? I pay 75% of my daughters Tuition, books and residence costs and my ex-wife expects to get support for one child on too. My daughter is 19.

    Is anyone else in the same boat?

  • #2
    Not yet... but I can't wait.

    What you are describing above is normal. You pay until the children are no longer "children of the marriage". See the Divorce Act and Family Law Act. So your ex expects it, gets it and spends it until your daughter is about 30.

    Here is a good site for CS info.

    http://www.bcfamilylawresource.com/04/0401body.htm

    More here:

    http://www.familylawtoronto.ca/child...MINATION-29647

    I think there are ways to direct your SC to your child instead of the ex.

    Your daughter should consider herself lucky. As a child-of-divorce she gets a free ride through university. What ever happened to our Charter?

    Comment


    • #3
      jq55,

      As DD has mentioned, it is normal. Child support is generally paid until the child of the marriage or relationship obtains their first post secondary degree from university or a diploma from a community college. The criteria is that the child returns to the custodial parent when not attending the post secondary school. ie: summer months, holidays etc. If the child is out on their own full time and not attending school, not returning to the custodial parents home in the off months, then no child support is payable. This is a clear indication that the child has withdrawn from parental control.


      The reason why the obligation to pay child support exists while the child is attending a post secondary institution; is that the custodial parent has to maintain a resident for this child. This is somewhat of a oxymoron philosophy as a non custodial parent has an obligation to maintain a suitable home environment for when the child exercises their access and contact with the non-custodial parent.

      Depending on the age of the child, more and more courts are expecting the child to contribute to their own post secondary education costs if they are employed part-time, hence reducing the section 7 expense for the parents.


      lv

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by logicalvelocity
        The reason why the obligation to pay child support exists while the child is attending a post secondary institution; is that the custodial parent has to maintain a resident for this child. This is somewhat of a oxymoron philosophy as a non custodial parent has an obligation to maintain a suitable home environment for when the child exercises their access and contact with the non-custodial parent.
        LV, you are attempting to apply logic, reasoning and common sense to the Canadian Divorce system. You should know better....

        <sarcasm>If you carried that thought further, CS should be for life. I mean really, does that room suddenly go *poof* when the child graduates school? Apparantly all those custodial parents would then have to move into those one-bedroom houses I see listsd all the time. </sarcasm>

        BTW, the issue of "indefinite" support is one of the main changes the Tory MP from BC is proposing. CS ends at 18. Period.

        Comment


        • #5
          Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with paying for my daughters education. The issue I have is with paying support to my ex-wife and her husband when there are no children living with them. The agreement was supposed to be I would pay 75% she would pay 25% however I am giving her far in excess of the 25% she is required to pay so in reality I am paying 100% Plus. I can't understand the logic of claiming to pay 25% of the expenses and then demanding that I give her the money to pay it??? Is there no sane solution to this problem?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jq55
            Don't get me wrong, I have no issue with paying for my daughters education. The issue I have is with paying support to my ex-wife and her husband when there are no children living with them. The agreement was supposed to be I would pay 75% she would pay 25% however I am giving her far in excess of the 25% she is required to pay so in reality I am paying 100% Plus. I can't understand the logic of claiming to pay 25% of the expenses and then demanding that I give her the money to pay it??? Is there no sane solution to this problem?
            No need to clarify here. Whether you pay 0% or 100% of the tuition fee is a personal decision you, and your daughter, should make. That amount is also not a measure of your love or commitment to your children.

            Perhaps your daughter could withdraw from parental control? Have you searched CanLII:

            http://www.canlii.org/index_en.html

            Comment


            • #7
              Here is an interesting case:

              http://www.canlii.org/bc/cas/bcsc/20...6bcsc1422.html

              Comment


              • #8
                I would tell the daughter to get her mom to fork over what you have to give her, and reduce the direct payment to your daughter, if you have issue with the total amount paid. Child support is for the child. If its not getting spent on her, its not being used right.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks for the suggestion however I have no control over how the support money is used and the court doesn't care either. I have 3 children and two of them have already finished school. The issue I have is with paying support when there are no children living with my ex-wife. My ex-wife has been using the support money to buy an investment property, a house she and her husband rent out. Her plan is have the rental income to offset the loss of support in 4 years when my youngest daughter finishes school. My ex-wife works 10 hours a week. She reduced her work hours to reduce the percentage of school expenses she would have to pay. The court is fully aware of all of this information but disregards it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You could explain to your daughter that the support money you give her mom is not meant for investment properties, and that she should ask for the exact amount you give her. If her mom chooses not to, there would be drama, and you can always slip her a few extra bucks later... but its a way within the legal framework to reduce your support amount.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      That's an idea but it won't work. The court order states that I must pay support and education expenses. My daughter gives the bills to her mother and she sends them to my lawyer and I have to pay them. The court has no concern for how support money is spent. A woman I worked with got a larger settlement for support from her ex so she bought a new SUV. When I asked her why she would buy a new SUV rather than invest the money for her childrens education her answer was, "I'll just go back to court later and get more money from him for that when the time comes". It's the system that needs to change.

                      Comment

                      Our Divorce Forums
                      Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                      Working...
                      X