Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sections 7's

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

  • Sections 7's

    Hello!
    I have two scenarios I need help with please.
    1. My fiance's ex-wife (they have a 16 year old daughter together) is wanting to take him to court to get him to pay for regular school fees as well as things like (optional) driver training, etc. She claims these things are section 7 expenses. They have joint custody but not joint physical custody (he has her about 40% of the time). As such, he pays her 820/month in child support. She makes about 7,000 more a year than he does. He has refused up to this point to pay and she is now pressing the issue. Is she correct? He already gives more than enough money to cover his daughter's expenses (in addition to the fact that he has her every other weekend and Mondays and Wednesdays). In the summers the split is 50/50 but still he pays his full child support 12 months out of the year. It just seems so wrong that he needs to pay more? He has always covered his portion of extra curricular activities as well. We literally can't afford to give her more money. Help!
    2. Regarding section 7 splits, she has always made more money so the split has always been 40% (him) and 60% (her). However, last year she was given a paid leave to pursue her Masters and only received 65% of her salary. In good faith, he recalculated their Section 7 split while she was on a reduced salary (knowing that he could have based it on her previous year tax return). This year she is back to her regular salary and when he asked to revert back the section 7 split, she told him she would base it on her Tax return for 2013 (which would reflect her reduced salary). He is now refusing to pay section 7's (they need to be mutually agreed upon) until the ratio is fairly calculated. She is planning to take him to court for this too. Can she be this devious? Would the court base it on her 2013 tax return even though he negotiated the ratios to accomodate her last year already?

    Any and all replies are welcome.

  • #2
    Not an expert, not legal advice, my 2 cents:

    Regular school fees (you should probably specify) would be child support covered.

    Driver training should be s7. But they can agree on who and what. For instance and in class and then specific amount of lessons or young drivers etc. when i learned to drive i took the in class separate from lessons because it was cheaper than young drivers at the time.

    Also, if her income now is different than her income tax (i.e. Significantly higher) she should be providing that for s7 calculations. Especially if they lowered it outside of her tax form when it went down.

    You might have to specify what the school expenses are. Child support is supposed to cover a lot of expenses.

    Comment


    • #3
      Should also note that if they adjusted outside of tax time, she cant expect it to stay that way when she earns more. Either you stick to tax time and she had to pay more on her reduced salary or you dont stick to tax time and you adjust accordingly.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks so much for the reply!
        Yes - but even though it was adjusted outside of tax time she IS now expecting it to be adjusted using tax time (can't have both). My fiancee is now refusing to agree to any section 7's until it is recalculated fairly (they both need to agree to Section 7's). This is why she is taking him to court.

        As for school fees, they are regular school fees (about $300.00 for the year or so). There are no fees for books.

        For driver training, this is an optional course that costs 700.00 If teenagers in Alberta take it then they pay less insurance for their car. His ex-wife wanted him to pay for half but he said no because he is not paying for her insurance (which is his choice). He would never benefit from the insurance break so why pay for it? His ex is buying his daughter a car AND paying for insurance which is why she wanted her daughter to take the course. It has nothing to do with him.

        Comment


        • #5
          Ya no, she cant pick and choose. If he was reasonable to change it, she has to demonstrate good faith. Im sure thats why he lowered it knowing it was temporary and would go back up immediately.

          $300 over a year isnt that much especially if he pays $820 a month in child support. She should be able to cover $25 a month. Is it a private school? Did they change since the divorce?

          40% of $700 is only $280. And is it worth it to him to pay to make sure his kid knows how to drive?

          To me it sounds like her court threats are just blustering. Unless shes filed papers? My partners ex did the same thing. Have they gone to court? No. She ended up paying for the excess stuff herself.

          Read the stuff on the fed child support guidelines on what constitutes an extra ordinary expense. If its not specifically listed in their agreement it has to pass the "is this extraordinary or extracurricular" test.

          But again, just my two cents. Others might have a different view.

          Comment


          • #6
            Daughter is at the age where custody orders mean nothing. Your fiance's ex-wife is buying her a car to get daughter dearest to want to be at her house even more.

            I would suggest your fiance chip in for the driving lessons, and make sure that the daughter knows it, so that she feels he supports her in becoming an independent adult. Whether he is technically correct to dispute paying a part of it is a completely separate matter.

            Also, driving lessons can't hurt in terms of safety. He should want to help pay for them so that she takes the lesson, and becomes a better driver for it.

            Unless, of course, his philosophy is that she should work and save up for something like this, but that's another issue too.

            Comment


            • #7
              I guess his perspective is that he already gives more than enough to his ex for his daughter's expenses. And, his daughter now has a part time job and so his ex is making her pay for half of clothes, etc which drives him crazy because he is STILL paying her 820/month.
              Many parents here in Alberta opt out of this driver training. He did not feel it was necessary. He has spent many house practicing driving with her...

              Comment


              • #8
                He has talked to his daughter about living with him half time but she is scared of her Mom (his ex is very dominant and controlling). We are hoping she makes the decision to live with us half time but it will be up to her. In the meantime, still not sure what to do...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Yes, and ex is about to give herself even more control by tossing a car into the mix.

                  Even with post-secondary looming on the horizon, the clock is now ticking on your fiance having to pay child support. One day, sooner than later, daughter is going to be an adult and living out on her own. Child support won't matter, just the relationship Sad to say, but helping daughter with the driver's training, if that is what she wants (forget about the ex for a moment), will become a future investment in their relationship. (remember when daddy ponied up the money for your driver's training without argument, and two months later, mommy threatened to take the car away because she went to visit daddy too much?)

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Pay for the lessons as it will give her more confidence and security. Im sure she will appreciate the vote of confidence. If it were me Id dispute the school costs.

                    As for the court threat, call her on it. Make sure he has all the emails where he agreed to lower the s7 when her salary went down and his offer to pay at their current income. Hes being reasonable.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Driver's Ed is an s7 expense most of the time. I've read more cases where it is s7 than it isn't. Search Canlii for custody and drivers education for reference.

                      Insurance on a car that the ex buys the child is not his responsibility. If the kid wants to drive the car, they need to show level of maturity and pay for it themselves.

                      Refusing to agree to reasonable s7 expenses is bad. It is actually worse than the ex being uncooperative in changing the pay scale back to the actual ratios. The courts will likely agree that the ex is being unreasonable, but he is being more unreasonable by refusing to agree to activities that are in the child's best interests. So instead of not agreeing, simply state that he agreed to alter the ratios outside of the tax term in good faith and he would expect her to reciprocate. That he agrees to the activities, but will only pay his proportional amount based on their current incomes and no more. And then he actually has to stick to his guns on it.

                      At the present moment the ex motion for drivers ed expenses and for legitimate s7 expenses will likely be successful. Why? Because you husband is using a sledge hammer to crush an ant hill. His actions are proportional to what needs to be done. For simply expenses for school, if they are less than $300 annually, I would state that these are covered in c/s. That s7 expenses have to be extraordinary in comparison to their incomes. And that $50 here and there, or even $100 one month is not extraordinary.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        His ex has paid for the course and his daughter has completed it. His ex is paying insurance costs for a car that his daughter is not allowed to take to my fiancee's house so the driver training was 100% for her to gain financially. Again, my fiancee had nothing to gain by putting his daughter in this course. It is an optional course (perhaps 20% of kids take it?) and was within his rights to say no (in our opinion).

                        We will be seeing a lawyer to fight the school fees issue. I too wonder though if she is postering about taking him to court. It would not be worth it to her.

                        Any ideas as to how he can get her to return to fair section 7 ratios? Aside from refusing to agree to any? What other course of action does he have? His daughter's club volleyball is very expensive and he does not want to pay more than he is supposed to.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Love2lift View Post
                          His ex has paid for the course and his daughter has completed it. His ex is paying insurance costs for a car that his daughter is not allowed to take to my fiancee's house so the driver training was 100% for her to gain financially. Again, my fiancee had nothing to gain by putting his daughter in this course. It is an optional course (perhaps 20% of kids take it?) and was within his rights to say no (in our opinion).

                          We will be seeing a lawyer to fight the school fees issue. I too wonder though if she is postering about taking him to court. It would not be worth it to her.

                          Any ideas as to how he can get her to return to fair section 7 ratios? Aside from refusing to agree to any? What other course of action does he have? His daughter's club volleyball is very expensive and he does not want to pay more than he is supposed to.
                          Your fiancée's daughter benefitted from the course. The very nature of Section 7 expenses is that they are expenses related to the CHILD, not the parent of the child. It's irrelevant who is paying insurance right this moment. The benefits of taking a driving course will benefit the child when she gets her own insurance as well. It also may keep her alive, but that's not even a scenario in your mind.

                          The primary point of Driver's Education is SAFETY. The only reason it is linked to decreased insurance rates is because it's about SAFETY.

                          Not once have you mentioned how the child benefits from any of these Section 7 activities.

                          Only 20% of children take a driving course? That seems like an extremely LOW number for the sheer volume of driver training agencies out there.

                          Did you take driver's training prior to be licensed? Did the fiancée?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I'm getting a little lost in the words in the OPs posts. I understand dad does not agree to how mom is applying ratios to S7 expenses. However I interpret your posts to say that dad has then refused to pay any S7 expenses until mom agrees to a different ratio for him and her. Why not just apply your own ratio with the best information you have? Of course she will take you to court if dad doesn't pay anything.

                            Drivers ed - why does it have to benefit dad? Does the banana the kid eats that he paid for and the designer hoodie she wears benefit dad directly? No.

                            It's not a bad idea to learn to drive. Its not a bad idea to learn from those whose business it is to teach people to drive. And if you are strapped financially or just don't feel like footing half the bill why not meet in the middle and throw them a bone and offer xx of $$ towards the cost (it's not too late).

                            You're going to a lawyer to discuss these issues. Have you considered that you may end up paying for these expenses several times over by virtue of having to pay lawyer bills, time off to attend court, and court costs if awarded? I personally would suck some of this up and pull out my wallet. Then again, my hubby did/does that and it didn't gain us any peace or cooperation...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Yes he has stated to her that he will pay his portion of S7's if the ratios are recalculated. Her reply: "No, see you in court." He has asked for it to be fairly recalculated and she has refused. This is why it is so odd what she is doing.
                              Again, what other course of action does he have? He is not refusing to pay S7's - he is refusing to pay that ratio of section 7's. Although you make a good point - I think he will simply tell her he will pay his 40% (fairly calculated ratio) of them.

                              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