What constitutes a legal decision?

[EFW]

NY: My ex and I verbally agreed to split our kids' colleges cost with me paying 1/3 and her paying 2/3. (We have no custody or other legal agreements.) If we just write this ourselves and sign it, would it be legal back-up? If not, what do I need to do? Thank you!

 

[Zigner]

NY: My ex and I verbally agreed to split our kids' colleges cost with me paying 1/3 and her paying 2/3. (We have no custody or other legal agreements.) If we just write this ourselves and sign it, would it be legal back-up? If not, what do I need to do? Thank you!

Get thyself to court to have these matters memorialized.

 

[quincy]

NY: My ex and I verbally agreed to split our kids' colleges cost with me paying 1/3 and her paying 2/3. (We have no custody or other legal agreements.) If we just write this ourselves and sign it, would it be legal back-up? If not, what do I need to do? Thank you!

Writing out your mutual agreement and having both of you date and sign the agreement can be legally binding.

Because disputes can arise, having the agreement personally reviewed by an attorney in your area is wise and advised.

 

[Zigner]

Writing out your mutual agreement and having both of you date and sign the agreement can be legally binding.

Or it might not be...and it's more likely to not be. The OP needs to do this correctly because "I promise to pay 1/3 while she promises to pay 2/3" is not a legally binding agreement in and of itself.

 

[LdiJ]

Writing out your mutual agreement and having both of you date and sign the agreement can be legally binding.

Because disputes can arise, having the agreement personally reviewed by an attorney in your area is wise and advised.

I agree. People write up contracts between themselves all of the time. A contract that is properly written up can be legally binding. It does not require court action. However, it would not be enforceable as a family law court order. If someone breeches a contract they have to be sued to enforce it.

One thing that you could do however, if you wanted to add an extra layer of protection, is to draw it up as a stipulated agreement, and see if the family law judge will just sign off on it, making it a family law court order.

 

[quincy]

Or it might not be...and it's more likely to not be. The OP needs to do this correctly because "I promise to pay 1/3 while she promises to pay 2/3" is not a legally binding agreement in and of itself.

It depends on how the agreement is written but an agreement of the sort proposed can be binding on both parties. An attorney can review their agreement to add any necessary details (e.g., what costs are covered) and conditions (e.g., how paid and when).

 

[Zigner]

It depends on how the agreement is written but an agreement of the sort proposed can be binding on both parties. An attorney can review their agreement to add any necessary details (e.g., what costs are covered) and conditions (e.g., how paid and when).

Yes, I agree. An agreement such as is proposed can be legally binding if done correctly.

However, as proposed by the OP, it would not be. The OP should have a pro to advise on and/or draft such an agreement in order to ensure its validity and to help it stand up to any challenges in court.

 

[quincy]

Yes, I agree. An agreement such as is proposed can be legally binding if done correctly.

However, as proposed by the OP, it would not be. The OP should have a pro to advise on and/or draft such an agreement in order to ensure its validity and to help it stand up to any challenges in court.

I agree that it helps to have a legal professional involved in the drafting of the agreement to better ensure there is no misunderstandings in the future as to what exactly is expected of each party.

But as to the original question, a written and signed agreement between two parties can be legally binding on the parties. The clearer the terms of the agreement are, the less likely it is that the agreement will be challenged (or challenged successfully) later.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

And in this case, realize that with all this 1/3 2/3 stuff you are binding yourself to a contract that in which you agree to pay an unknown amount at some point in the future. The plus side is your ex is binding his/herself to an unknown amount that is twice what you did.

 

[Zigner]

...and what if one stops paying?

 

[Zigner]

I wonder - how old are the kids?

 

[quincy]

Although not necessary to the question asked, it would be nice to know how close ...

That was going to be what I wrote, Zigner.

I was curious how close the kids are to entering college.

Michigan has a really nice state "education trust" that parents can contribute to as a way to fund their kids' college educations in a state school - but I don't know if New York has anything similar.

 

[Zigner]

My thoughts are that, if the kids are already out of high school and no longer of the age for child support orders, then there really is no court to go to at this point. The parents would have to rely on this agreement. However, if the kids ARE still of age to be under the jurisdiction of the family courts for child support matters, then it really would be wise to have such an agreement entered through the court. It would give the parties more options if one or the other of the parents fails to fulfill their obligation.

 

[LdiJ]

There is also one other thing to possibly consider in this arrangement. In my state, (Indiana) when a judge does order college support it generally works one of 2 ways, either its 1/3 dad, 1/3 mom and 1/3 child (after scholarships and grants, but not student loans). Or its simply 1/3 dad, 1/3 mom and 1/3 child and the child can pay their share with student loans or their own savings.

The idea of that is that the student has better "ownership" of college if he or she has to spend some money on it. The student is less likely to major in "party". However that has nothing to do with a parenting agreement where the parties agree to pay according to their abilities.

 

[Taxing Matters]

However, as proposed by the OP, it would not be.

And what is your reason for saying it would not be? It would appear to meet the basic requirements for a contract after all.