Daycare costs

[MrsK]

What is the name of your state? Louisiana

Here's a scenario:

Child support order up for review. Original order did not include daycare costs as CP wasnt working/child not in daycare. Support handled by SES, custody order (parties have joint legal custody) handled by family court in another parish (a parish is exactly like a county, FTR)

CP enrolled child in daycare about a year ago. Keeps child in daycare whether working or not. Currently working. CP never discussed putting the child in daycare, never even told NCP she had done this, nothing. He was given the info by a 3rd party & since there were no costs he was responsible for, he left it alone.

If daycare costs are added @ the mod, NCP will carry between 50-70% of the cost.

LA law states:

(3) The domiciliary parent shall have authority to make all decisions affecting the child unless an implementation order provides otherwise. All major decisions made by the domiciliary parent concerning the child shall be subject to review by the court upon motion of the other parent. It shall be presumed that all major decisions made by the domiciliary parent are in the best interest of the child.

§336. Obligation of joint custodians to confer

Joint custody obligates the parents to exchange information concerning the health, education, and welfare of the child and to confer with one another in exercising decision-making authority.

NCP's court order states:

Each parent must not ignore the authority and input of the other by the failure to communicate or use the child to inform each other of decisions on important matters.

and

All information regarding school, report cards, conferences, functions, etc etc will be furnished to the other parent as either one of them receives such information. The above types of information must be exhanged by the parents and discussed accordingly.

Also- CP has child in daycare that is costing approx $240 (with CCA) to $400 a month. There is a program (Head Start) that the CP/child qualifies for. It is free. The program also is not full, so the child could be accepted right away.

So, I'd like opinions/legal advice on if NCP will be responsible for costs of daycare due to a) the law b) court orders and c) the fact that daycare could be 100% free if CP would take the effort to sign up child with Head Start program. Or even if it could be requested that CP pay the large majority of the costs for not consulting NCP.

The law isnt neccessarily super clear about it, but the court orders pretty much state that CP must discuss and let NCP have input and authority in this situation and the CP did not, in any way shape or form. Not even to give info, receive input and then overrule input of NCP.

Also, I dont know if the fact that there would be free childcare could work similarly to how courts handle 'public school v private school costs' ie- how usually if one parent wants private school & the other doesnt, the parent wanting the private school must pay 100% of the costs.

Any help?

 

[fairisfair]

somehow I am doubtful that a court would force a parent to apply for what would be the equivalent of "benefits", especially when that would only occur in lower income families. So all parents who have lower incomes, would be forced to send their children to a certain day care system while others would be given a choice. I just seriously doubt that is going to happen. Obviously, as you pointed out, financially, it probably makes sense, especially, if that thought is based on the premise that the systems are equal, but I personally just don't see it happening.

 

[qurice]

If Dad wants to make an issue of Mom withholding information regarding the child and childcare, the time to address it was when it was first discovered. And since he was OK with the childcare while he didn't have to pay for it, why would he not be OK with it because he may have to pay for part of it now?

My 2 older sons go to a Head Start program, and my youngest son with my wife goes to a daycare at my wife's work. The quality of care between the two centers is like night and day.

 

[MrsK]

somehow I am doubtful that a court would force a parent to apply for what would be the equivalent of "benefits", especially when that would only occur in lower income families. So all parents who have lower incomes, would be forced to send their children to a certain day care system while others would be given a choice. I just seriously doubt that is going to happen. Obviously, as you pointed out, financially, it probably makes sense, especially, if that thought is based on the premise that the systems are equal, but I personally just don't see it happening.

Thanks for replying, Fair, I appreciate it

Anyway- I dont think the NCP is saying she needs to apply for free childcare, just that if she decides to continue in THIS daycare, since he was given no information or input like the court ordered, that she be required to continue paying the cost of the child care on her own.

I know that is how private school costs, when both parents dont agree, often work, so I was wondering if that principle could apply here, too?

 

[MrsK]

If Dad wants to make an issue of Mom withholding information regarding the child and childcare, the time to address it was when it was first discovered. And since he was OK with the childcare while he didn't have to pay for it, why would he not be OK with it because he may have to pay for part of it now?

My 2 older sons go to a Head Start program, and my youngest son with my wife goes to a daycare at my wife's work. The quality of care between the two centers is like night and day.

I believe its not because he is not OK with the child being in daycare, but rather he cant afford an increase in support. And SES actually incorrectly calculated his support at the first mod, so he currently paying more than the guidelines allow for. He didnt know he could appeal, and since he was also never given paperwork at the time of the hearing showing how they came up with the figure, he assumed SES had done it correctly. He also didnt have a lawyer (stupid, stupid idea), obviously he was very ignorant of how the system & family laws work.

He is also worried that the CP will get the daycare money and do one of a few things
a) pull the child out of daycare and pocket the $ (he isnt sure if SES will allow it to be paid to the daycare directly since his support must go through them)
b) quit her job & keep the child in daycare (which she did for about 6 months last year, she didnt work but the child went to daycare every day...she wasnt searching for a job, she was just staying at home because she felt like it)
c) pull the child from daycare & enroll her in HeadStart or enroll her somewhere that the child care is cheaper, and not tell him, so that he is paying more than he should be.

NCP is also concerned that SES will order daycare costs and then will not have a hearing to remove them once the child goes to school in 1-2 years, because the amt of daycare being removed from the support costs doesnt meet their "25% rule" and that he may pay as much as $5k in daycare costs before the next mod comes up for a child that isnt in daycare.

I know the easiest way is for SES to let him pay the daycare directly, but I'm not sure how common that is around here, if SES allows that or not. I know they SHOULD allow it, but if they actually do...who knows. I couldnt find anything about it in the LA laws or SES website. And, he still wouldnt be able to stop paying if Mom stops working to stay at home again, because the child would still be in daycare, and then SES wouldnt want to hear the case b/c it hadnt been that long ago.

There is no actual proof that he knows that the child is in daycare, though. She has never told him and he's never brought it up with her.

Besides, wouldnt he need to file contempt in FAMILY court, not SES, for her not informing him?

Which leads me to another question- does Family Court have more...power, I guess, so to speak, than SES? Like if he felt family court would be more fair about this situation, could he file with family court to modify the support order and file contempt for a few things (lack of information about daycare, lack of information about the child being hospitalized or being majorly ill and needing medical attention, not informing NCP when she took the child out of town, etc) and then send it to SES and make them enforce it, therefore bypassing SES's hearing? Can you do that?

 

[fairisfair]

Thanks for replying, Fair, I appreciate it

Anyway- I dont think the NCP is saying she needs to apply for free childcare, just that if she decides to continue in THIS daycare, since he was given no information or input like the court ordered, that she be required to continue paying the cost of the child care on her own.

I know that is how private school costs, when both parents dont agree, often work, so I was wondering if that principle could apply here, too?

I don't see that the court order specifically addresses day care. Until dad is asked to pay for a portion of the day care, she may well have felt that it was not an "important issue" the other part of the order, it addresses school, day care is not school, however much it might be like school, it isn't. I think it is unlikely that the court will order her to continue to pay it all on her own. If mom works, most likely, dad will pay his share, at least for that portion of the charges, now as for the time she just drops the kid off, well, that is another story. and one that I would be preparing to argue.

I don't see the correlation between private school vs. public school in this situation. but again, that is merely my opinion, nothing more.

 

[MrsK]

I don't see that the court order specifically addresses day care. Until dad is asked to pay for a portion of the day care, she may well have felt that it was not an "important issue" the other part of the order, it addresses school, day care is not school, however much it might be like school, it isn't. I think it is unlikely that the court will order her to continue to pay it all on her own. If mom works, most likely, dad will pay his share, at least for that portion of the charges, now as for the time she just drops the kid off, well, that is another story. and one that I would be preparing to argue.

I don't see the correlation between private school vs. public school in this situation. but again, that is merely my opinion, nothing more.

I do appreciate your help & opinion, though, Fair. Seriously. NCP def. will be arguing to pay the daycare directly so she cant pull the child out, and for him only to have to pay when she is working. He needs to get a lawyer big time.

I know the private school v public school is sort of a stretch, I just wanted to see what other people thought.

I will have to tell NCP to def ask a lawyer about that, when he gets a lawyer, if he gets word that the CP is going for a mod. It may be that she will decide just to leave it alone because at best (by my very rough calculations) support might raise $100, but once daycare is gone, she probably will get LESS basic support since she's working now, and she got an OK job (better than min wage) so now she can never be imputed anything less than her highest paying job, since she has now proved she can make more than $900 a month.

Do you have any experience or thoughts about family court v. SES? I wrote about it in my reply to qurice, I believe. Do you know if they supercede SES?

 

[fairisfair]

I do appreciate your help & opinion, though, Fair. Seriously. NCP def. will be arguing to pay the daycare directly so she cant pull the child out, and for him only to have to pay when she is working. He needs to get a lawyer big time.

I know the private school v public school is sort of a stretch, I just wanted to see what other people thought.

I will have to tell NCP to def ask a lawyer about that, when he gets a lawyer, if he gets word that the CP is going for a mod. It may be that she will decide just to leave it alone because at best (by my very rough calculations) support might raise $100, but once daycare is gone, she probably will get LESS basic support since she's working now, and she got an OK job (better than min wage) so now she can never be imputed anything less than her highest paying job, since she has now proved she can make more than $900 a month.

Do you have any experience or thoughts about family court v. SES? I wrote about it in my reply to qurice, I believe. Do you know if they supercede SES?

um, yes, I have thoughts about family court vs. SES (here it is CSE) I have experience with both.

CSE - good for price and for getting the documents done in what seems to be a correct manner (of course that is really the OAG not CSE). Bad because they are Slow, Slow, Slow and what are legally the boundaries is not always their boundaries. Example it may be legal to take a NCP for enforcement when they are 30 days late on CS but CSE may not do that until they are 60 or 90 or more days late.

Family court.- Good, because it is faster to do on your own. Your only restrictions are that of the law, not of someone elses time calendar. Bad - you are on your own, filings, documents, procedures, all of it, it isn't easy, and as I have said before, pro se, it isn't for wimps. Bad too, if you have already had CSE involved in the case because you will be required to perform service on them as a party to the case. as well as serving the other person.

 

[MrsK]

um, yes, I have thoughts about family court vs. SES (here it is CSE) I have experience with both.

CSE - good for price and for getting the documents done in what seems to be a correct manner (of course that is really the OAG not CSE). Bad because they are Slow, Slow, Slow and what are legally the boundaries is not always their boundaries. Example it may be legal to take a NCP for enforcement when they are 30 days late on CS but CSE may not do that until they are 60 or 90 or more days late.

Family court.- Good, because it is faster to do on your own. Your only restrictions are that of the law, not of someone elses time calendar. Bad - you are on your own, filings, documents, procedures, all of it, it isn't easy, and as I have said before, pro se, it isn't for wimps. Bad too, if you have already had CSE involved in the case because you will be required to perform service on them as a party to the case. as well as serving the other person.

So it would be possible for the NCP to take this to family court in hopes that they will be more equitable and cautious (as I said before, they miscalculated his original order, whether that was on purpose hoping he would not notice, or by mistake, I am unaware) but you have to serve CSE/SES as well, and of course the CP would get notified. But will family court hear the case & deal with support and possibly contempt charges, or will they refer the support back to SES?

How does that work when you have a support case with SES but try to modify it in family court?

I guess I'm wondering what I should tell him as far as what would better serve him. He cant go to SES without a lawyer, definetly, because personally I think SES is more interested in collecting as much support as possible so they can get the 5% than they are interested in doing what is fair, esp with their 25% rule. But family court seems like it would be better as far as protecting himself from SES and the CP, but if its a huge hassel b/c SES will butt in...so I dont know what to tell him.

 

[fairisfair]

So it would be possible for the NCP to take this to family court in hopes that they will be more equitable and cautious (as I said before, they miscalculated his original order, whether that was on purpose hoping he would not notice, or by mistake, I am unaware) but you have to serve CSE/SES as well, and of course the CP would get notified. But will family court hear the case & deal with support and possibly contempt charges, or will they refer the support back to SES?

How does that work when you have a support case with SES but try to modify it in family court?

I guess I'm wondering what I should tell him as far as what would better serve him. He cant go to SES without a lawyer, definetly, because personally I think SES is more interested in collecting as much support as possible so they can get the 5% than they are interested in doing what is fair, esp with their 25% rule. But family court seems like it would be better as far as protecting himself from SES and the CP, but if its a huge hassel b/c SES will butt in...so I dont know what to tell him.

See, that is a big mistake that ALOT of people make, they think that they have to accept the numbers that SES comes up with, they don't. You always have the right to refuse and to go before a judge. So who is wanting to modify, mom or dad? I would think that it is mom, why would dad? The numbers are the numbers, there is no guarantee that an SES caseworker is going to be any worse at math than a judge, but he does have the right to appear before a judge.

I haven't done a modification, I am currently in the middle of an enforcement that I am doing pro se, with CSE/OAG as a third party, basically, so far, they have just stayed out of the whole thing.

 

[MrsK]

See, that is a big mistake that ALOT of people make, they think that they have to accept the numbers that SES comes up with, they don't. You always have the right to refuse and to go before a judge. So who is wanting to modify, mom or dad? I would think that it is mom, why would dad? The numbers are the numbers, there is no guarantee that an SES caseworker is going to be any worse at math than a judge, but he does have the right to appear before a judge.

I haven't done a modification, I am currently in the middle of an enforcement that I am doing pro se, with CSE/OAG as a third party, basically, so far, they have just stayed out of the whole thing.

See, its my understanding that the judge WAS at the hearing. This is not my personal situation so I dont know all the facts. Apparently NCP brought his stuff, CP was present as well. NCP said he talked to this guy, gave him the paperwork and then sat down. The guy calculated the amt, NCP was called up in front of a judge (he said they announced her as the judge) they said did he understand what was going on, he said yes, they said "OK, this is the amt of support". and had him sign a bunch of papers. I took a look at the papers, there wasnt one with how they came up with the amt, just one stating that he owed X in retro support (from date of filing) how to pay $50 a month plus support to pay it off, and then another one that was the judgment, I suppose, and that one gave him the right to have the tax deduction certain years, gave instructions that the CP must sign that tax form for those years, how much he was to pay per month, how much the 5% fee is, etc. I do know that this was the first and only court date he went to, and because he agreed to the amt, there was not another one.

I took a look at the pay stubs he brought & then his W2 etc etc etc and I ran the numbers over and over and the only way I came up with that amt of support was that I figured out that they had overcalculated his support by about $3k per year AND had undercalculated the amt of health insurance he was paying. He knows there was no income for her and no daycare costs, and no parenting time calculated in.

I asked him if he had thought to check the #'s and he said no, he didnt think that SES would mess up (and again, whether the person calculating it made a mistake or did it on purpose, figuring he wouldnt know better b/c he didnt have an atty, I dont know), he figured that since it was their JOB to do this correctly, it would be accurate. Of course, he didnt know about the 10 day appeals window, and so he could do nothing about it, although it will be a point he will have a lawyer bring up when he goes back. He wants his support caculated from now on by his REAL salary, not on some amt they made up, that he yet to make in the few years since the order.

Honestly, I dont know if one of them will modify. NCP thinks CP will probably ask for a mod so she can get more $$ for daycare, NCP is confused about whether he should try for a mod or not. There have been changes in circumstances, followed by them miscalculating the support, and Mom working. But, if they add in daycare, the support amt may remain the same or raise some. I think CP might just leave it alone b/c she doesnt want to deal with NCP and all of this mess. She probably does not realize certain parts of the legislature allow for him to pay less support b/c she expense shares with her parents, his subsequent family, the fact that his job switched from salary to hourly & that his OT can be left off of calculations due to his subsequent family, etc. CP is probably just thinking that she makes money now, but its not much, but he would be responsible for the majority of the daycare costs. So he is wondering if she doesnt file for a mod, if he should leave it alone b/c of the daycare. But, if he went for the mod & didnt have to cover daycare, or got a reduction but had to pay less daycare so that his support obligation was about the same, then maybe he should go for it, because if they did allow him to forgo paying daycare b/c of her not following the c/o, he definetly would be entitled to a small reduction.

And I thought it might be more beneficial for him to go to family court, where the judge would hear all of the stuff as far as her giving him NO notice of this daycare situation, and want to actually follow the laws, rather than him going to SES's hearing & them just saying "We're not considering any of this, this is your basic support obligation and here's a few more hundred in daycare you need to pay." And I dont know if SES will allow money to be paid directly to the daycare, while family court probably would.

I feel like I know a lot about LA family court laws, but I just dont know where to tell him to go with this. I guess to a lawyer, but I think he needs one who has had a lot of experience with SES in addition to family courts.

 

[qurice]

She probably does not realize certain parts of the legislature allow for him to pay less support b/c she expense shares with her parents, his subsequent family, the fact that his job switched from salary to hourly & that his OT can be left off of calculations due to his subsequent family, etc.

MrsK, can you please post a link to where the expense sharing is mentioned? I wasn't able to find it, but I did find the info about 2nd job / OT for subsequent family tho. Thanks

 

[MrsK]

MrsK, can you please post a link to where the expense sharing is mentioned? I wasn't able to find it, but I did find the info about 2nd job / OT for subsequent family tho. Thanks

Sure =)

http://www.legis.state.la.us/lss/lss.asp?doc=107373

Its hidden in this big long thing.

>>(5) "Income" means:

(a) Actual gross income of a party, if the party is employed to full capacity; or

(b) Potential income of a party, if the party is voluntarily unemployed or underemployed. A party shall not be deemed voluntarily unemployed or underemployed if he or she is absolutely unemployable or incapable of being employed, or if the unemployment or underemployment results through no fault or neglect of the party.

(c) The court may also consider as income the benefits a party derives from expense-sharing or other sources; however, in determining the benefits of expense-sharing, the court shall not consider the income of another spouse, regardless of the legal regime under which the remarriage exists, except to the extent that such income is used directly to reduce the cost of a party's actual expenses.

(6) "Medical support" means health insurance and the payment of the medical expenses of the child.

(7) "Net child care costs" means the reasonable costs of child care incurred by a party due to employment or job search, minus the value of the federal income tax credit for child care.

(8) "Ordinary medical expenses" means unreimbursed medical expenses less than or equal to two hundred fifty dollars per child per year. Expenses include but are not limited to reasonable and necessary costs for orthodontia, dental treatment, asthma treatment, physical therapy, chronic health problems, and professional counseling or psychiatric therapy for diagnosed mental disorders not covered by medical insurance. The schedule of support in R.S. 9:315.19 incorporates ordinary medical expenses.

 

[fairisfair]

See, its my understanding that the judge WAS at the hearing. This is not my personal situation so I dont know all the facts. Apparently NCP brought his stuff, CP was present as well. NCP said he talked to this guy, gave him the paperwork and then sat down. The guy calculated the amt, NCP was called up in front of a judge (he said they announced her as the judge) they said did he understand what was going on, he said yes, they said "OK, this is the amt of support". and had him sign a bunch of papers. I took a look at the papers, there wasnt one with how they came up with the amt, just one stating that he owed X in retro support (from date of filing) how to pay $50 a month plus support to pay it off, and then another one that was the judgment, I suppose, and that one gave him the right to have the tax deduction certain years, gave instructions that the CP must sign that tax form for those years, how much he was to pay per month, how much the 5% fee is, etc. I do know that this was the first and only court date he went to, and because he agreed to the amt, there was not another one.

I took a look at the pay stubs he brought & then his W2 etc etc etc and I ran the numbers over and over and the only way I came up with that amt of support was that I figured out that they had overcalculated his support by about $3k per year AND had undercalculated the amt of health insurance he was paying. He knows there was no income for her and no daycare costs, and no parenting time calculated in.

I asked him if he had thought to check the #'s and he said no, he didnt think that SES would mess up (and again, whether the person calculating it made a mistake or did it on purpose, figuring he wouldnt know better b/c he didnt have an atty, I dont know), he figured that since it was their JOB to do this correctly, it would be accurate. Of course, he didnt know about the 10 day appeals window, and so he could do nothing about it, although it will be a point he will have a lawyer bring up when he goes back. He wants his support caculated from now on by his REAL salary, not on some amt they made up, that he yet to make in the few years since the order.

Honestly, I dont know if one of them will modify. NCP thinks CP will probably ask for a mod so she can get more $$ for daycare, NCP is confused about whether he should try for a mod or not. There have been changes in circumstances, followed by them miscalculating the support, and Mom working. But, if they add in daycare, the support amt may remain the same or raise some. I think CP might just leave it alone b/c she doesnt want to deal with NCP and all of this mess. She probably does not realize certain parts of the legislature allow for him to pay less support b/c she expense shares with her parents, his subsequent family, the fact that his job switched from salary to hourly & that his OT can be left off of calculations due to his subsequent family, etc. CP is probably just thinking that she makes money now, but its not much, but he would be responsible for the majority of the daycare costs. So he is wondering if she doesnt file for a mod, if he should leave it alone b/c of the daycare. But, if he went for the mod & didnt have to cover daycare, or got a reduction but had to pay less daycare so that his support obligation was about the same, then maybe he should go for it, because if they did allow him to forgo paying daycare b/c of her not following the c/o, he definetly would be entitled to a small reduction.

And I thought it might be more beneficial for him to go to family court, where the judge would hear all of the stuff as far as her giving him NO notice of this daycare situation, and want to actually follow the laws, rather than him going to SES's hearing & them just saying "We're not considering any of this, this is your basic support obligation and here's a few more hundred in daycare you need to pay." And I dont know if SES will allow money to be paid directly to the daycare, while family court probably would.

I feel like I know a lot about LA family court laws, but I just dont know where to tell him to go with this. I guess to a lawyer, but I think he needs one who has had a lot of experience with SES in addition to family courts.

sounds more like an establishment hearing to me. No judge there. Just the caseworker ( a glorified caseworker but a caseworker none the less) and he and she and their attorneys. The judge, if there is one, simply signs the papers in a back room, later after dad has already put his john han**** on there.

I doubt that there is going to be any retribution to mom for not notifying dad about day care. I wouldn't base alot of hope on that. should she tell him, of course she should, is it contempt. no.

Have him go for a 30 min. consultation with a family lawyer. It can't hurt. He just needs to be very aware that if it is just a question of running the numbers and there is nothing really to litigate, well, that is a pretty cakey job for a lawyer.

 

[MrsK]

sounds more like an establishment hearing to me. No judge there. Just the caseworker ( a glorified caseworker but a caseworker none the less) and he and she and their attorneys. The judge, if there is one, simply signs the papers in a back room, later after dad has already put his john han**** on there.

I doubt that there is going to be any retribution to mom for not notifying dad about day care. I wouldn't base alot of hope on that. should she tell him, of course she should, is it contempt. no.

Have him go for a 30 min. consultation with a family lawyer. It can't hurt. He just needs to be very aware that if it is just a question of running the numbers and there is nothing really to litigate, well, that is a pretty cakey job for a lawyer.

Yeah, that was probably it, it was to establish the order.

I'm not sure if the NCP will file contempt charges for all that stuff, but I think he figured if he went to do the support thing, why not. Apparently there is a lot, esp medical. The child even had minor surgery & she didnt get ahold of him about it.

So do you think its good to get a lawyer then? I think its his best bet, but I know he is worried about the expense, which is why he hasnt filed contempt for things going on for the past 1.5 yrs. I just think he needs to protect himself & I told him he should find a lawyer who would be willing to bill for their time, rather than giving that big retainer, if its just for 1-2 SES hearings.