College and CS

[tlwa]

I have read a couple other posts about this topic and I would like to get a little more info on the actual process. My son who I pay $640.00/mth child support for is going to be starting college this fall. He has asked his mother if he can have this money to cover his living expenses while he is in school. She has outright refused to give it to him. First, does she have the right to keep this money if he is not living at home? Second if not what do I/He have to do so that he can receive the money? I am by no means trying to get out of paying my child support obligation. But in his current circumstance I believe he should be the one receiving it. Does anyone have similar experiences out there that might help me out on this?

[blinkandimgone]

I believe that residence, food, and travel costs are included in the total amount with tuition and books that gets split in thirds, proportionate to income under section 7 guidelines.

If he will be living away during school months but returning home on the off months, there is still a cost associated for his mother to maintain a home for him to return to in the off months.

Not 100% sure but perhaps someone with more knowledge will correct me if/where I'm wrong.

[Janus]

Could the son just state that he is living with his father? Then, not only could the father give the money directly, but the mother could pony up some money to the father that he could funnel to his kid as well. A win all the way around.

[blinkandimgone]

Are you suggesting having the child lie about his living arrangements?

[Janus]

Of course not, I'm suggesting the son actually move in with his father.

He's old enough to make that decision.

[blinkandimgone]

They would have the same exact scenario but in reverse, which doesn't address the actual issue.

[Janus]

The mother is keeping the money intended to support the son. Assuming the father would not do the same, then reversing the situation would indeed address the issue, would it not?

Just so you know, I'm not trying to be difficult here, sometimes that can be hard to get across in an online environment. I'm not personally involved in this particular scenario, so I'm just curious.

[MrToronto]

lying in family court..never heard of that before....regardless, start a motion to change...time for paper work...who's claiming the tax stuff?.....does your kid have a budget.has he applied for grants and bursaries..is he applying for osap...wats his income..get the tuition book amounts....yeah you can pay the child directly..it's easier when the ex is just enriching herself and being un co-operative there's caselaw for it. anyways your lucky it's college (max 3 years).. and only one child......the ex is not entitled support if the child is out of the house so there's retroactive support there..if you get busy now perhaps you can also squeeze a termination date for support in your order....regards

[Janus]

Holy cow.

I would never counsel to lie. I meant that if the son is feeling like he is getting ripped off by his mother, he can simply start to live with his father, can he not?

I could be wrong, but mischaracterizing my point so horribly is a little disconcerting.

[blinkandimgone]

The mother is keeping the money intended to support the son. Assuming the father would not do the same, then reversing the situation would indeed address the issue, would it not?

Just so you know, I'm not trying to be difficult here, sometimes that can be hard to get across in an online environment. I'm not personally involved in this particular scenario, so I'm just curious.

Of course she is. The money is intended to support the son and maintain a home for him, which she is doing despite the fact that he isn't there during school months. There are still expenses associated with maintaining a home for him to return to and she has every right to keep the money.

The extra costs associated with the kid going to college are over and above child support and should be split in thirds proportionate to income.

If the kid was permanently moved out of his mother's house then yes, CS would stop and the father could give the money directly to the son if he wished to contribute to his living expenses.

[Janus]

If the kid was permanently moved out of his mother's house then yes, CS would stop and the father could give the money directly to the son if he wished to contribute to his living expenses.

Even better, the mother would be required to give CS, and the father could give both his amount and the mother's amount to his son. Hence the reason I suggested that this would be a solution to the OP's situation.

[blinkandimgone]

Even better, the mother would be required to give CS, and the father could give both his amount and the mother's amount to his son. Hence the reason I suggested that this would be a solution to the OP's situation.

Neaux.

If the child mves out permanently there is no CS as the child is no longer considered a child of the marriage and is responsible for supporting himself. If the father or mother CHOSE to support him that is up to them, but definitely not mandatory.

If there is nobody supporting the child, there is no need for CS to be paid.

[Janus]

What if the child moves into his father's house?

[blinkandimgone]

Then they would have the same situation but reversed. And the father would be a dick for convincing the kid to disrupt his life and move in with him to avoid paying monies he should be paying anyways.

Whether the kid lives with mom or dad is irrelevant, the part you're missing is the ADDITIONAL expense of the child living in residence, over and above current CS.

If the kid moves in with dad then dad is paying to maintain a home for him, mom pays CS and BOTH parents contribute to the additional costs of the kid living in residence.

Exactly the same....but reversed,

[KW_Divorced]

Of course she is. The money is intended to support the son and maintain a home for him, which she is doing despite the fact that he isn't there during school months. There are still expenses associated with maintaining a home for him to return to and she has every right to keep the money.

The extra costs associated with the kid going to college are over and above child support and should be split in thirds proportionate to income.

If the kid was permanently moved out of his mother's house then yes, CS would stop and the father could give the money directly to the son if he wished to contribute to his living expenses.

I hear this all the time, that if a child moves away for university/college, the NCP must contribute CS in order for the spouse to maintain the matrimonial home. However, and as much as I can guess the response will be, that makes little sense. The MH is being maintained by the STBX, but given that she refuses to sell, cannot afford to keep it and that every penny of CS will be used to support her while her son is away at university for 8 months, how can this be considered child support?

When our son will return, he intends to split his time equally between the SBTX and myself so I fail to see how CS needs to be considered. He is financially self sufficient (good savings, bursaries, scholarships plus a bit from OSAP) and we have contributed to his extra expenses in proportion to income.

My lawyer has also said the exact same thing in that given these circumstances, it is very likely that CS is not required for these, plus other reasons which I don't necessarily want to post here given we are in litigation at the moment.