British Columbians who are involved in a divorce with children may be interested to learn about an aspect of child support called ‘special expenses.” Special expenses are large, unexpected expenses, such as extraordinary medical costs or orthodontics, that may come up while caring for a child. Because these are not everyday expenses, parents will need to come up with an agreement about how to pay for special expenses that is separate from the agreement about regular child support payments.

Unless the parents come to their own agreement, tables in the Child Support Guidelines will normally be used to determine the amount of child support a payor will owe to the custodial parent. These amounts, however, do not cover all special expenses a child may need. In addition to the regular child support payment amount, the parents or a judge will need to decide what percentage of special expenses each parent will contribute towards when they arise.

In some cases, parents will decide to split the cost of special expenses evenly. The Child Support Guidelines recommends that parents instead split the cost of these expenses in a way that is proportional to each parent’s income. Although parents likely will not know what special expenses a child will have, it may be important to reach an agreement about special expenses ahead of time.

Parents may find that a prearranged agreement about special expenses is useful to have in the event that a child requires tuition at a school that meets their developmental needs. Speaking with a lawyer may be a good way to determine what type of agreement about special expenses would most benefit the child. Because every child’s special expenses are different, the information in this blog is not meant to be confused with legal advice.

Source: The People’s Law School, “Child Support in BC“, September 29, 2014

Laughlin & Company Lawyers Mediators
2755 Lougheed Hwy #710, Port Coquitlam, BC V3B 5Y9
(604) 945-4370

A 37-year-old British Columbia man was sentenced to jail on July 17 after he was convicted for fabricating evidence by having another person take a paternity test for him. According to the report, the man, who is an RCMP officer, reportedly had another officer take the paternity test in July 2013.

The man reportedly had an affair with a woman in April 2009 that resulted in the birth of a daughter in July 2010. The woman was reportedly paying for her daughter’s expenses when she lost her job two years later. She applied for assistance from the ministry, which then sought to recover the cost of the child support from the man in May 2013. The man allegedly made two appointments at a clinic to take the paternity test but did not show.

In July 2013, the man was accused of asking his fellow RCMP officer to take the test for him. The other man agreed, and he went to the clinic on July 19, 2013, to take the test where a photograph was taken. When the test came back negative, the ministry went after the accused man. Since then, the accused man has reportedly paid back the cost of the paternity test and was making attempts to repay the child support that he owed.

Non-custodial parents may be responsible for making Former Vancouver Island Mountie sentenced for trying to fake paternity test”, Louise Dickson, July 18, 2014

Laughlin & Company Lawyers Mediators
2755 Lougheed Hwy #710, Port Coquitlam, BC V3B 5Y9
(604) 945-4370

According to Statistics Canada, approximately 49.8 per cent of British Columbia children who are below the poverty line live in a single-parent home. Many of these families must rely on an assistance cheque from the government. Although this assistance is very limited, under current laws, whatever amount of child support that the non-custodial parent pays is taken out of these cheques. Some advocates are opposed to this idea because they believe that the support should go to the children, rather than back to the government.

Some child and youth advocates believe that child support is intended to provide for the children’s well-being rather than as income support for the parents, so clawing it back is tantamount to stealing from the children.

The support that individuals who receive assistance cheques is already extremely limited. For example, families with one child get about $955 a month in assistance, including $570 for housing. If there are six or more children in the household, the family gets just over $1,195, which includes $820 for rent. This is the maximum that any family can receive, and the rates have not been modified in the last seven years in spite of the increase in the cost of living.

In 2002, custodial parents could keep up to $100 a month in child support. Now, this money is clawed back. Advocates argue that the system creates a disincentive for individuals to pay their support obligations because they know the money is going to the state and not their children.

Additionally, the laws require custodial parents to assign their rights to the government to collect child support for their children. Then, they have to assign rights to enforcement, which can put parents in danger if they have fled abusive relationships. Last year alone, $18.4 million was clawed back from assistance cheques.

Individuals who are not receiving child support from a noncustodial parent or who are having difficulty paying because of tight funds could consult with a family law lawyer. Through this action, individuals may learn about their rights and options regarding support.

Source: The Vancouver Sun, “Daphne Bramham: Is clawing back child support good policy or just mean-spirited?“, Daphne Bramham, March 31, 2014

Laughlin & Company Lawyers Mediators
2755 Lougheed Hwy #710, Port Coquitlam, BC V3B 5Y9
(604) 945-4370