Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Car Insurance, Section 7 Expense???

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

  • Car Insurance, Section 7 Expense???

    I have spent hours looking for some explanation on whether car insurance premium for the kids should be considered a section 7 expense.

    My X wife has no income except what I pay in support for her and our 4 daughters. She has 2 new vehilces and has no job. My oldest daughter has to be named as the primary dirver on one of the cars and thus her insurance is approx. $2000 for which my X is seeking me to pay 88% of (I have refused). My oldest daughter is away at University, out of town. She will be returning home to work for the summer and then has planed to move in with her boy friend in September for the next school year. I also payed 88% of all her first year University expenses (tuition, living, book expenses which included a bus pass).

    I was served last week with a court date in 2 weeks. She is seeking court order for me to pay 88% of any insurance premium for any of my 4 chilldren for any vehicle (s) she may own as a Section 7 extra expense.

    Should this be a Section 7 expense and where can I find court cases that have a ruling on this issue?

    Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

  • #2
    Something like that is case-by-case, there is no firm list of what is section 7. The amount should be an "extraordinary" amount for someone with your ex's budget.

    When a child is in university they should be paying a portion of their own expenses through pt jobs, scholarships and student loans. Usually you would argue a third. Then you and your ex should split the remainder.

    Again, this isn't carved in stone, but you certainly have a strong argument that the child should be paying part of her own expenses.

    Comment


    • #3
      the X's budget allows her to own a 2009 and 2011 suv, live in a new home, and completely fill it with new furnishings. I pay approx. $3500 / month in support and she has received over $200,000 in settlement moneys in last 6 months from a sale of my former business and profit sharing on top of moneys she received from former asset split. She is also seeking an order for me to pay 88% of all car insurance related to any of the 4 children on any vehilce she might own in the future. I think is is reasonable for her to pay the car insurance on her own vehicles.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mess View Post
        Something like that is case-by-case, there is no firm list of what is section 7. The amount should be an "extraordinary" amount for someone with your ex's budget.

        I have wondered about that ... So lets say a woman is making 50,000 a year work, plus full CS 1,400, plus DC 400. Could she then claim the need for swimming lessons, or other lessons when quite clearly she can cover the cost of that with her income, CCTB, GST, CS, etc. ????

        Yet, if she couldn't cover the cost of the extra expenses by above listed she can then claim additional section 7 expenses?

        Red, must be nice to have someone cover 88% of Uni costs. Another case of greed getting the better of people when perhaps they should be thankful for the incredible support they have been getting.

        Comment


        • #5
          I have read all the posts here..... I am sorry but from someone who well ran a manufacturing faccility with over 500 in the shop i have also found myself on the other end - where I am today which is the rest of my life on disability making 9k a year and three kids going to school - it kills me not to be able to do more for them but in the real world I know the kids are happy just to have a roof over their head, take advantage of the 6k i saved for each one and now they are doing for themselvs and will be stronger for it.

          So I understand the issue of trying to maintain a standard of living to what one is accustomed but I would hope that any court would conclude that there is something wrong here. You are being taken - and to an extent you are letting it happen. Have you talked with your kids? Really talk to them on anadult level and communicate your concerns directly. I am sure that if they love their Dad they will rise to your support in a way you may never have thought possible.

          Your ex - shame. There is no mention of time here but i do kow there is an expectation that she do for herself - even if it is a part time job at Wal-Mart as a cashier. (I have always thought that all work is admirable and As a Senior Manager earned the respect of all who came to work. The man with the mop cleaning the floor had just an important job as myself just with different responsabilities. Can you question the importance of the person who in the course of doing his job well, prevented hundreds of people from hurting themselves by slipping over garbage or water on the shop floor? Not much work will get done if half the people are on injury leave!!) If you take the moral of the above - your wife has a responsibiliy to make a contrbution to the new family unit and i beleive the court will agree. This is a case of the lowest form of spite..... your kids are being used as pons (spelling???) and your end is just as bad as your ex's. In a way, do you think you are teaching your kids to be honourable as they hide behind the free ride that your ex has sadly provided the great model for.

          Sorry for geting a bit preachy here but I am not sure what is worse - kids who are forced to do for themselves because their parents just can't provide the free ride, to or for, mom, dad, the kids in college/university or heck he family dog who used to have the forest behind the house to roam every day or in your case an ex who freeloads, dad who is trying to do the right thing but getting fleeced doing so and finally the kids who will one day have to face the real world where nothing is "free" and has mom or dad done all they could to prepare them for that day?

          So after all this where is your lawyer??

          Thanks for reading this far - this in a way has helped me remember what is right and at least for today remember that my kids do care and for that I love them.

          Comment


          • #6
            Have your tried searching www.canlii.org for cases such as yours?

            Canlii.org lists written rulings.

            I wonder if driving a car is a right or is it a priveledge. I bet in a lot of cases where a government body denies a person the right to drive the Government makes the arguement that driving is a privledge not a right. Hence is child support there to support a childs rights or to support privledges?

            Or course in the alternative if CS is there to offer to the child both rights and privledges then does not the CS are already take this into consideration? That is section 7 is there as different children to offer the child benefits however it does not mean that when there is an alternative to a cheaper benefit that confers the same or similar benefit upon the child this should not be taken.

            In the instance of piano lessons clearly this is section 7 for the child will get specific benefits from learning piano. however in regards to driving unlike piano lessons with driving there are multiple alternatives i.e. taking the bus, hoping a train, calling a taxi, walking, biking etc. With piano if one wants to get from point A being a poor piano player to point B being a good piano player there are virtually no alternatives to getting lessons. However in regards to getting from point A to B there are many alternatives to do this other than driving. In fact many people do not drive and easily find alternatives.

            Also prior to a child becoming 16 in addition to paying CS it would be ridiculous to have to also provide a separate payment for such things as bus fare, taxis, gas to go in the ex's car, etc. These expenses are covered in CS. Why then when a person hits 16 should these expenses, which will be obviously reduced for the ex-spouse, be then transfered to a section 7 expenes? CS takes into account transcportation costs. If not then a spouse should start idemizing gas put in car, keeping track of mileage when they drive a child for normal activities, oil changes etc. and then add these onto section 7 expenses. Conversally if this starts occuring then when a child is 16 they might use more electricity as they play the stereo more often hence this should be tacked onto section 7 expenses. If the shift in expenses due to a child turning 16 where meant to be in the child support guidelines then the child support guidelines would vary depending upon the age of the child.

            Just a thought.

            Canlii.org is the legal website that lists written cases. Of course when you go to court you must insist that any ruling be a written ruling that outlines what laws etc. have been applied.

            Of course this is all just my opinion and should not be construed as legal advice.

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't think that adding a child to an insurance policy is required to raise the child - they can take the bus etc. So from that perspective it is a section 7 expense, and by that account, you don't have to agree to that expense, as it is extraordinary and therefore discretionary.

              If the insurance company is demanding the child be added to the policy because the mom owns two cars, that is not your problem.

              Comment


              • #8
                I would fight car insurance tooth and nail?

                What is it these days? Parents should pay all their kids expenses until they're 40?

                What's wrong with KID paying his own insurance.
                I paid my own insurance on my parents car before I owned my own. So should your kid.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Every case if different and from experience in a middle of a Family Trial, swimming lessons is considered an extraordinary expenses. The car insurance is NOT, not in our case anyway. It is considered a "luxury", and yes mine are at college and university where there is public transit. When students apply for OSAP (governement loan, grants), the amount includes "transportation" to get to and from school including trips home if long distance from home. They don't expect a student who lives 4 hours away from hom to be going home on weekends. It would be unrealistic, as they are there to study, especially if living in residence which is expensive enough!. I have totally agree with holdthemaccountable and ddol1. The courts take into consideration the child's income. If they can afford to drive a car, they should be able to pay for the expenses. It looks like your ex wife has put the vehicle in her name but your child as the primary driver. You do realize if it was in the child's name, they would have to write they own the vehicle when applying for OSAP, getting less money. As much as I hate to say it, being a woman, there is always financial abuse which makes the rest of us look bad. I am trying to get my ex to pay 1/3 of the children's driver's education course which is apparently not under section 7 expenses, never mind car insurance and the rest!
                  It all comes down to the JUDGE who makes the decision. Don't waste too much time on Canlii.org as according to the many Judges we have had the past 10 years in Family Court, we have been told over and over that everycase is different although similar, you will likely NOT find a case which is identical to another. What is your lawyer saying?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    My former lawyer simply answers that it is a small amount to pay and it’s not worth litigating over so just pay it…this is why he is my “former” lawyer. There has to be some cut off. I have paid 88&#37; of driving instruction as well, for both of my older girls. I will be representing myself next week.<O</O

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      88&#37; of driver's ed? how can a lawyer justifies as being a small amount unless she knows you have the means financially! oh wow, someone is very lucky as I only asked for him to pay 50% of the driver's course, (no car insurance), and he is refusing to do so although a unionized formen electrician who hasn't paid for any expenses from year 2001 until 2007 when the order was made as my former lawyer didn't think of asking at the case conference at the time, she forgot...how nice! The last court date we had prior to the trial, the Judge made an Order for him to pay $200 per month for expenses instead of a % until the trial as he fights every receipts complaining I black out my credit card and banking info. on the original receipts tempering with receipts. If I had to redo it all over again, I would not spend what I spend on legal fees the last 10 years, but keep it for the children's education and other expenses as it's obvious there are flaws in our legal system, and the one that are good at playing the system, get away with it, simple as that!
                      I have a question for anyone to answer: how can one justify being a unionized electrician, being laid off as apparently there is no work due to the recession which is understandable, therefore, collecting EI benefits and sub plan for a full year, but not looking for a job, or putting their names on the list at the union hall as it might be a two year waiting period the list being too long, instead staying home waiting to be called back from the same company you have worked for the past 23 years; but purchased a $450,000 house while unemployed; refuses to disclose assets, money received from an inheritance; but can afford to pay $2,000 mortgage per month to his mother who holds the $200,000 mortgage on the house; and yes remarried during that time period but doesn't have to disclose her income or assets; and also keeps payments received from his insurance company for health care benefits claims for the children which I pay upfront (dentist, optometrist, orthodondist etc..) making money although there are three Court Orders he is to reimburse payments to me. How exactly does this work?? where is the justice. This is why we are at trial? and I am self represented and sure learn fast where the advice lawyers are at the Court house and learn how to search the internet real quick...lol...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I was wondering if someone has had a similar situation as mine. Any advice would help me out alot.
                        I will make a long story short.....My husband who has been in contact with his daughter for the past two years...always has paid child support...never was delinquent. So after being estranged for 20 years....they made contact...everything was going fine....until the mom decided she wanted more money from him....never in all these years did he take him to court....until now.

                        SO ...she wants double the money for post secondary....keep in mind my husbands income has come down tremendously since all those years ago...it never went up at all.

                        He also paid child support for 26 months after she graduated high school....she never started college until she was 20...for over 2 years she did nothing...no work...just partied. Nobody communicated to him that she was out of school....so when he called FRO he tried to get it stopped....but they would only stop it if the mother agreed....she told FRO that he was still obligated to pay because she was still in school....which was a lie.....she graduated high school june 2007 and returned to college sept 2009 and he paid that whole time.

                        What happens to that money that he paid ....should the courts not stop support when she is 22 (which is in July) that would give her 4 years out of high school....not laz around for 2 years and expect him to pay. He even offered to buy her a car and lease it for 3 years....but stop support...mother wouldn't go for it....he offered that 3 different times...the mother couldn't get the money she wanted....so she served him.

                        Also, if he wanted to help his daughter....oh by the way is not living at home....can he not send support money directly to daughter and not mother.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          does anyone has proof she was at school "full time" in high school or attending post secondary school? Did he not obtain copies of report cards when the she was in high school and if yes, did he not wonder what she was doing for 2 years? He can bring a motion to Court or try to reason with the mother to get retro active payments made for CS.According to the child support guidelines, one should be paying CS untilt the child obtains their first post secondary certificate/diploma, but are different circumstances such as: if the child has disability, or pursue a career in which a post secondary diploma is mandatory in order to keep on with studies such as physician, pharmacist etc..in which reasonable mature parents decide amongst themselves or the Court will decide.
                          My ex tried to sent payment directly but was suggested by my lawyer not too as once FRO is no longer involved as the parties choose going that route, a court order is required for them to be involved again if the payor decides to stop making payments or make payments when he wishes to do so.
                          The court do not like to have the child involved in this although my children are 17 and 19, the Judge though it is best not to have them involved with this, they have enough to deal with the stress of attending college/university and other day to day issues, without having them deal with parents not sending money and so forth. Unfortunetely, it is sad to see that yes some parents want the control of the money and perhaps is not spend where it should, but what can I say...

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi TLCRN
                            Thank you for your reply. Well actually the case is going to court May 13th. That is one big issue that is going to be addressed....the school records....day she started....until the day she graduated. Because we know for a fact that she didn't do nothing for 2 years....those were words right from the daughters mouth...how she bragged to us about partying and sleeping in until noon everyday. The problem was....we never had no clue as to her going ons until feb 09....he has only been in contact for 2 years. But when we did have contact....we found out alot of things that went on and we had no clue.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              How do the courts handle a situation when the payer can't afford post secondary? I don't think we want to be living in a card board box!

                              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