couple of questions on S7

[HappyMomma]

My order states that we must consult and agree upon S7 expenses and that consent will not be arbitrarily or unreasonably withheld.

Obviously, childcare expenses must be split. We currently don't have a childcare provider - my ex isn't working and I've been bringing them to my work after school for now. Once summer comes I will need to put them in summer camp during the day. I have been led to believe that my ex will be sending the girls to a relatives on his weeks.

Q1 - How do I 'consult' with him on this? I know he will read the order and state that he doesn't agree and therefore, won't pay his percentage so I need to make sure that I word my email to him properly. Any suggestions?

Also - my order states that we will calculate over/underpayments of 'support' each year based on our NOA's.

Q2 - Are S7 expenses considered 'support'? The intent was for those to be adjusted as well, but I'm worried that the word 'support' will mean I can't adjust those contributions.

Q3,4 - Can S7 expenses be collected by FRO? If I'm the payor, can FRO collect S7 from my ex?

My order does not state that we need receipts.

Q5 - Can I be held responsible for expenses that my ex claims without a receipt?


Thanks !!!

[blinkandimgone]

Q1 - Why would he not agree - is he available and willing to look after the children during that time? If he is then great! The kids get to be in the care of a parent rather than a non-relative. If he isn't then he has little to no grounds to refuse, IMO.

Q2 - It is my understanding that is is not support, and is over and above support.

Q3, 4 - As the numbers vary, the FRO has no idea how much the amounts will fluctuate month to month and they won't get involved in trying to collect at a parent's request for special expenses.

FRO ? What we do | Ministry of Community and Social Services

As far as the numbers being adjusted, the percentage each parent pays based on their income would change, but this isn't something FRO would be involved in changing. They siumply enforce orders, not arrange them.

If it is a static amount, ordered by the courts, FRO would be able to collect that.

(someone please correct me, if I'm wrong)

Q5 - it should be stated in your order that not only do the parents have to agree to the expenses incurred prior to, receipts must be provided to collect. You should not have to pay anything without proof of payment having been made.

[HappyMomma]

As far as the numbers being adjusted, the percentage each parent pays based on their income would change, but this isn't something FRO would be involved in changing. They siumply enforce orders, not arrange them.

If it is a static amount, ordered by the courts, FRO would be able to collect that.

yes, but what happens when the order states that a new amount is to be collected yearly? Do they stop collecting every June? Or do they continue to collect the old amount until a new order is produced? My order specifically states that the amount is to be recalculated for June of each year.

Q5 - it should be stated in your order that not only do the parents have to agree to the expenses incurred prior to, receipts must be provided to collect. You should not have to pay anything without proof of payment having been made.

Right. But as I stated, it doesn't. So what happens then? Am I held responsible for expenses he CLAIMS to have but has no proof of?

[blinkandimgone]

yes, but what happens when the order states that a new amount is to be collected yearly? Do they stop collecting every June? Or do they continue to collect the old amount until a new order is produced? My order specifically states that the amount is to be recalculated for June of each year.

Yes, they continue to collect as per the orders they have. It is up to you to seek an adjusted order and submit it to them to enforce. They can only enforce what they have and if an old order is all they have, that's what they'll go by until they receive new orders or an order to stop collection.

Right. But as I stated, it doesn't. So what happens then? Am I held responsible for expenses he CLAIMS to have but has no proof of?

Nope, he can take you to court to collect if he wants, at which time he will be expected to provide proof of payments. If he does, you will likely have to pay so you may want to stash away some money now in the case it goes that way. If he doesn't, then there's only a very small chance you'd be made to pay, but very unlikely.

[stripes]

For Q1, how about something like:

Our children will require child care during the summer. I propose that we send them to [name of camp] for [dates of camp] at a weekly cost of [amount of camp]. I would appreciate your response to this suggestion. Summer plans need to be made by [date], so if I do not receive a response from you by [date], I will assume that you are indicating your agreement with this plan and your willingness to share the costs as required in para [number] of our divorce order. If you do not agree with this plan, please provide an alternate suggestion which is equivalent in cost and quality of care.

[blinkandimgone]

For Q1, how about something like:

Our children will require child care during the summer. I propose that we send them to [name of camp] for [dates of camp] at a weekly cost of [amount of camp]. I would appreciate your response to this suggestion. Summer plans need to be made by [date], so if I do not receive a response from you by [date], I will assume that you are indicating your agreement with this plan and your willingness to share the costs as required in para [number] of our divorce order. If you do not agree with this plan, please provide an alternate suggestion which is equivalent in cost and quality of care.

But...that isn't the case - it is stated in the original post that the ex is not working - therefore, one assumes is available to care for the children and care is not "required".

Care *would* be required if he refused to care for them - a portion of which he'd be expected to pay.

[stripes]

I agree, from the original post it sounds like the other parent may be available to care for the children. However, my thought is that it would be best if the offer to care came from that parent in response to a proposal put forward by the OP - "we don't need to pay for camp because I'm willing to take the kids" - rather than being put forward as a request by the OP - "can you take the kids while I'm working during my weeks with them?".

[SadAndTired]

FRO can collect on S7 (definitely from a payor but I don't know from a payee) but he would have to have a receipt and would have to have a notarized, sworn statement for the receipts. Also, the court order/separation agreement must clearly outline the responsibility for the expense.

[Rioe]

He may be available to care for the children, based on the fact that he isn't working, but he obviously chooses not to do so, otherwise he wouldn't be sending them to relatives on his weeks.

Anyway, childcare is one of those peculiar, specific section 7 expenses that MUST be paid, provided the parents need it so they can work or attend school, and it does not need to be agreed to before the expense is incurred.

[blinkandimgone]

He may be available to care for the children, based on the fact that he isn't working, but he obviously chooses not to do so, otherwise he wouldn't be sending them to relatives on his weeks.

Anyway, childcare is one of those peculiar, specific section 7 expenses that MUST be paid, provided the parents need it so they can work or attend school, and it does not need to be agreed to before the expense is incurred.

I'm not sure where it's stated that he is sending them to relatives (in another thread perhaps?) however, that is his choice to do so during his time with them. And really, if a relative is available and happy to care for them, why impose a situation that creates conflict about the financials?

I don't believe it's a need if the other parent is there and willing to care for them. That questions still hasn't been answered, a unilateral decision to go for daycare instead of asking or putting out the option to the other parent is just that - unliateral and the other parent shouldn't be on the hook for those expenses.

The other parent should be given right of first refusal before looking at options for care arrangements, and certainly before any expenses are incurred.

[Rioe]

Obviously, childcare expenses must be split. We currently don't have a childcare provider - my ex isn't working and I've been bringing them to my work after school for now. Once summer comes I will need to put them in summer camp during the day. I have been led to believe that my ex will be sending the girls to a relatives on his weeks.

From the original post.

[blinkandimgone]

LOL! I read and re-read it and missed it everytime! Thanks

[HappyMomma]

I agree, from the original post it sounds like the other parent may be available to care for the children. However, my thought is that it would be best if the offer to care came from that parent in response to a proposal put forward by the OP - "we don't need to pay for camp because I'm willing to take the kids" - rather than being put forward as a request by the OP - "can you take the kids while I'm working during my weeks with them?".

He's not working right now but expects to be by the summer (fingers crossed). However, he refuses to watch them after school so I don't imagine he'd be willing to watch them all day!

I think I will take Limer's suggestion and perhaps add the obligatory - "if you aren't working and want to take them...." statement even though I already know the answer.

Thanks everyone.

[blinkandimgone]

If he *says* he's not willing to watch them (if he doesn't end up working), then that's far different than assuming. You've got to give him the opportunity to say no before just deciding he would and putting them in daycare/camp - that's the unilateral part of it.

You're opening yourself up to the expenses being challenged if you don't give him the chance to say no.

[HappyMomma]

If he *says* he's not willing to watch them (if he doesn't end up working), then that's far different than assuming. You've got to give him the opportunity to say no before just deciding he would and putting them in daycare/camp - that's the unilateral part of it.

You're opening yourself up to the expenses being challenged if you don't give him the chance to say no.

Exactly. That's why I said I'd add the other line.