Enforcing Section 7

[Challenger]

Hi,

I've got final court order, which specifies offset CS payment (me to my ex) and the proportions of Section 7.

I am paying the offset CS, but my ex refuses contributing specified percent for the Section 7. Final order doesn't specify limits of how much Section 7 we could have, but expense I am asking is very reasonable, and is a tiny fraction of what I am paying in offset CS. There are no financial issues, both are high earners, technically even my CS isn't necessary, but I pay of course.

I read that some parents just deduct section 7 from CS, but I don't want to be accused of not paying CS.

Do I have any options enforcing it without bringing a motion? I gave a call to FRO - apparently our court order isn't registered with them (I am paying CS direct to my ex). FRO says if I send them court order, they will open the case and will enforce the Section 7. Would it indeed happen, or I will only get myself a lot of time wasted with no results? Any potential downsides or costs associated for me by sending it to FRO? Ideally I'd want to avoid paying CS via them.


Thank you

[rockscan]

I don't believe FRO will enforce section 7 for the payor. They may have changed things though. Even if you did that your ex could still reject them and FRO will do nothing.

The problem with cases like yours is that enforcement is difficult and your ex knows this. Plus it is a small amount of money. You have to decide if a) this is the hill you want to die on and b) is it worth taking your child out of activities?

Keep sending your ex a reminder that they agreed to the expense and that they owe you xyz and if necessary you will seek relief through the courts as well as costs to do so.

You should also make sure you are getting agreement from them in writing. Most agreements lay out existing expenses but technically that is for the period in time. You can't assume it is agreed to once that time is passed. You would still have to get their permission going forward to have them pay the expense.

[Challenger]

I don't believe FRO will enforce section 7 for the payor.

Here where it gets interesting. I had 2 calls with FRO. Agent One told me just like you said they won't enforce it for the payor. Agent Two told me the will enforce it.

My argument to FRO with Agent One was that we have 50/50, and I am paying offset, means I pay X+Y, my ex pays me X. the value Y represents the offset. The Agent One told me if our final court order specified two amounts, they would chase my ex for section 7, but if it is specified as an offset they won't do anything. I wouldn't call it too logical, but it isn't the only thing in family law that isn't.

Agent Two with same input data told me it is enforceable regardless, thus I am wondering if anyone had first hand experience.

Finally, do I loose / risk anything by sending my court order to FRO?

[rockscan]

I have experience with enforcing support and attempting to enforce section 7. Their order only had a percent for section 7 which FRO can't enforce because it's not a set amount. The expenses were submitted as arrears but then disputed and FRO subtracted from the account.

FRO will tell you something different every time you call and when it comes to actually doing it they screw it up. I would caution against using FRO for that reason and also because if things change, you need a court order to update.

[Challenger]

I have experience with enforcing support and attempting to enforce section 7. Their order only had a percent for section 7 which FRO can't enforce because it's not a set amount. The expenses were submitted as arrears but then disputed and FRO subtracted from the account.

FRO will tell you something different every time you call and when it comes to actually doing it they screw it up. I would caution against using FRO for that reason and also because if things change, you need a court order to update.

A bit more detail to my situation. Presently S7 is a small expense, but it will grow eventually as child will. I am not looking for compensation for what I already paid - only want my ex to participate in the future expenses in accordance to percentage set in final order. Based on our final order contribution percent by parents won't vary ever, but I don't want FRO to start controlling me.

I guess if FRO sent ex a letter even without starting the court, that would've have an effect.

Would you or anyone else have more suggestions what to do aside of continue be a sole contributor to S7?

[rockscan]

FRO is not the best organization and they aren't independent thinkers so to speak. Case in point: my husband's cs ends next month and his order is clear on it ending. He called them last week to ensure they close the file on the date it says and they told him yes but call a couple weeks before to make sure.

Even with a percentage they can't enforce it because it is not a set amount. If your order says a monthly amount of say $200, they can enforce it. They do not calculate percentages. You would have to submit what is called a statement of arrears which would be your calculation and the receipt. THAT they will attempt to enforce but your ex can dispute it without a valid reason and the will not enforce it. FRO is not a magical entity or a judge. They need clear amounts in an order.

Not to mention, your ex doesn't have to agree to expenses going forward. By law one parent has to get written permission for anything that isn't necessary childcare, medical or post secondary expenses. Unless it was something that happened before the separation or it can be argued it is absolutely necessary, it may not be accepted. Thats why any lawyer worth their salt will say s7 is a grey area.

This is also where I tell you to start saving for post secondary and open your own RESP to get the grant money. Those are section 7 and will be enforced by the court. Might as well start putting away the money now to have it later.

The bottom line is you can't just subtract from the cs payments. Either you pay it all yourself or you keep a log and keep emailing and reminding them they owe money to be able to for it in court when it adds up.