University - the what ifs - case law help please!

beentheredonethis said:
@berner - he expected to contribute his RESP contributions....which is why he has continued to put money into their jointly held RESP since they separated.
It was all they EVER agreed to do to help the kids with...now the tables have turned.

Also berner - I urge you to be careful with adding. I will give you a scenario we are currently faced with. Your fiance will pay to the point that the child you add will do without. constantly. to the point that you will pay for your step children's education but not be able to afford to put a penny into your own child's education.
It's not that I don't want to help out. I can't afford to. I have my own children to support. It's not about sacrifice to make it happen, it's about "how to keep a roof over my head". Don't be perplexed.

@standing on the sidelines - 2 children are mine, 1 is ours. we have broken down a budget by my pay supporting 2.5 children, him supporting .5 of a child in our house all of his bills (ie child support) and a split on household bills (however it should probably be portioned so I take on a higher portion of the bills because I have more kids).
Click to expand...

I see his 2 children no different than if we had 2 children that were OURS and were adding a third. I am well aware that he will have to pay support every month, I am well aware he will have to pay for his children's education, but it still doesn't change my view. Everything I work for is for our family and that includes his first two children. His child support is worked into our monthly budget. We get paid on opposite weeks so every week we have a pay cheque coming in. He pays his CS weekly, so some weeks it is actually my paycheck paying for his CS. Doesn't bother me at all, his CS is part of our monthly bills and something we budget for.

We personally don't have his, hers and our bills, all we have is household bills. It has worked well for us and has made sure that all bills get paid, whether they are my credit cards, his CS or our mortgage, they all get paid.

I am still perplexed about how you speak of your step children because you were obviously well aware he was a package deal and that package deal came with financial responsibilities. I truly hope your husband isn't feeling like he has to choose between his children and his new family.
 
IMO, OP's has their issues/priorities backwards.

The OP is upset about having to pay for their step-child's education, as such funds will come out of the family income pool. But the OP isn't maximizing the family income pool by not seeking c/s from their own ex. OP and family would have more financial breathing room if OP filed a motion seeking c/s and s7 expenses from their ex, instead of burdening herself with the costs, thus depriving the family as a whole.

The reason why parents in divorced families are essentially forced to cover the costs of the child is because it puts the financial burden at the feet of those that created the burden, the father, the mother and the child. It is so that the taxpayers aren't stuck footing the bill for the kids to go through college/university. Yes, OSAP is a form of loan and in most cases is paid back. But the interest rates are low, and in many cases a portion of it is forgiven (for good marks or whatever). Thus, the taxpayer eats a portion of that amount, and gets a bad return on the monies that could've been investment in other things.

I don't entirely agree, as I also paid for my own college. My parents paid for 1 year, but I paid for the other 2. I also lived at home to be able to afford it. But as a taxpayer, I'd rather you pay for your kid and I pay for mine, then have end up paying for everyone's kid.
 
I went to court. A trial in fact. I was awarded the following:
The respondent will provide the applicant with his notice of assessment beginning in 2012. The respondent will inform the applicant if he obtains employment.

That's it. He's done neither. He's on welfare.

And I never thought of our budget seperately until the judge suggested we break our budget into our rightful responsibilities - of which my husband has none to my children (so says the court).

It matters not how it actually works (because my pay does pay child support to the first family) I'm just sharing how the court tells us how we should look at our family.
 
I'm disgusted reading this thread. All the backhanded comments and the whining. The OP is arguing with herself. How silly it must feel to be arguing with yourself post after post...

Here is the dealio:

Your husband is on the hook. Get over it.
Your household income will be affected. Deal with it.
Your attitude needs a good makeover. Put on your big girl pants and just suck it up.
If you think that is what the court told you, you need an interpreter.

On an aside, I could never fathom segregating my husband's children from mine or ours. Honestly, his kids and his first wife take up a lot of our budget. So be it. They get more money going to them directly or indirectly than my own and so be it. WHO CARES. I married a man with children and an ex and I knew that fully well when I accepted his proposal.

And if you are that strapped for cash that you have "no room" to meet your obligations (and yes post secondary is one of them) then you're irresponsible. And I say irresponsible because you have the means to make sacrifices to afford your liability and you have openly admitted them. I hope the first wife knows your handle on here and uses them in court. She'd be wise to.

Lastly, you say that everything was great with the first wife until your hubby married you...given you are cold towards his kids and have an overall pissy attitude about most everything - I don't blame her one bit.
 
odf6979 said:
If the child doesn't want to live with you even though you have a home for her then this can be argued. She can be held responsible for the residence expense.
Click to expand...

What are you basing this statement on? I actually went looking for something like this a few years ago and couldn't find one case that would agreed with your opinion.

What judge would insist a child must live in an acrimonious household to save a parent a buck (parents who seem to be higher earners, no less)? The judges have attended post secondary -the lawyers too-, they've in all likelihood spent their first year in res - and there are, quite frankly, benefits to the student in doing so.
 
OP, I don't think you are whining. In a non-divorced family you wouldn't pay for the tuition based on your financial situation why should you as a divorced family.

Hey, the judges are trying to make me pay my ex-wife's student loans before we got married so I am already paying university fees and my kids are still in elementary school

Family Court is a welfare office....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top