Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

C7 and daycare

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • C7 and daycare

    I am looking for feedback on perceived obligation to pay Section 7 expenses relating to daycare in my situation.

    The mother of my children is the custodial parent with sole custody with which the children live primarily. She has chosen to move away from the neighborhood they grew up and went to school in since birth to a community 200km away this summer. Nothing is in our order saying that she couldnít move away. (But that is another story).

    However now she is requesting I reimburse her my share for childcare 3-4 days a week as part of Section 7 costs for when she works afternoons until 9 or 10pm at her new job. I work a straight days job, M-F.
    I do not think I should be obligated to pay this expenses since it is her choosing to move out of practical range of me caring for them in the evenings that she is unable to. It is my option that she has taken a new job that is not compatible with caring for the children herself and she should be responsible for paying these daycare expenses solely.

    What obligation do I have for these extraordinary expenses ?

  • #2
    It should only be the after tax portion that you'd be on the hook for. She's doing it as part of securing employment. You might get some consideration if the daycare provider is a friend of your ex.

    My friend agreed to pay x% of a nanny. A few months later the nanny bills jumped significantly as his ex was going on overnight booty calls and the nanny was charging overtime.

    So you could be in his shoes...

    Comment


    • #3
      The point I'm seeking clarification on is if she's chosen to move away from me with no valid justification to be in the best interest of the children why should I be obligated to pay for this new expense for care she has created?
      Previously in the original custodial residence that her and the children were in was less than 20km away from my residence. There was minimal to no daycare required because both for the children are in school full time. But I still had the option to care for them if she could not due to work or other circumstances.

      Comment


      • #4
        Did you make an attempt to stop the move or have the children returned to their habitual residential area? If not, it would seem that you don't object and have given implied consent to the move as well as the consequences of moving them.

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't think the court will care about the choices leading up to her need for childcare. Most people need childcare to some extent, and courts generally don't force a parent to use the other parent as childcare.
          Not worth fighting over.

          But make sure you only pay the after tax cost. To figure that out you will need to know her marginal tax bracket, because that determines the % tax reduction. E.g if she pays 33% tax on the last $1000 dollars of income then her $1000 childcare cost is really only $670.

          Do you have an agreed on %split for section 7 costs?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
            Did you make an attempt to stop the move or have the children returned to their habitual residential area? If not, it would seem that you don't object and have given implied consent to the move as well as the consequences of moving them.
            Yes I did try to bring a Motion to Change requesting they stay within their habitual residential area among other items to change.
            Several items where settled at a case conference but not this one. The judge gave me the impression that it was not a great decision on the mothers part but because nothing was in the existing order saying she could not move them out of their habitual residence it could not be ordered to have her return with the children.
            As being self represented the judge basically made me feel I should take what was settled at the case conference and withdraw everything else otherwise if I was not successful at the next stage I would be ordered to pay costs of my Ex.

            Comment


            • #7
              Yes, you have to contribute towards childcare. Your ex is not obligated to live near you so that you can save money on child support. She has sole custody of the children, and she has the right to move and to choose appropriate child care. If she needs child care for employment, that is a legitimate S7 expense. As the other posters say, you're only responsible for your share of the after-tax cost, so be sure that you exchange tax returns so you know her tax rate and can reduce the total cost of care by that rate.

              Comment


              • #8
                Did her move affect your access rights? Do you still have the same access as before? Was sole custody already a done deal or was this case going before the courts to argue custody.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I agree with dinkyface. Most people need childcare and the court generally donít force a parent to use the other one as childcare. You donít have to pay the extra tax and always make sure you pay only the after-tax cost. Other than making the other parent as childcare, when I had this situation I consulted a child care nanny services in Toronto called Diamond Personnel and hired an experienced nanny for my son. I didnít have any issues with their service and I was pretty much satisfied.

                  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