Changes to old parenting agreement

[TCG]

State is Illinois.  BM is CP, I am NCP.

Divorce was 8 years ago.  Since then, changes have been made "unofficially" to the parenting agreement (ex: changed PU/DO times, flipped some holidays in rotation, changed transportation details, that sort of thing)  

Most of these changes are in writing through letters/emails.  A number of them were signed by both of us, but were never officially entered into court.  Both parents were given a copy of this "agreement".  

Situation now, is that BM got upset about because I won't give up my Halloween (not a CO holiday - just falls on my day for the first time since the divorce) and said she'll no longer agree to any of the changes that have been in effect for a number of years.   After I finally agreed (so as not to hurt my daughter) she took it back saying "I was just mad"

Needless to say, this is a common occurrence here.
 
I have tried a number of times to get BM to agree to sign an updated parenting agreement - Just updating the old one to reflect changes we have agreed to over the years.  In fact, our original parenting agreement says that we should review and update it annually.   BM has always balked - she always wants to change something else/add limitations that are not in our daughter's best interests and have no legal basis.  She pretty much says it's "all or nothing" and refuses to sign a new parenting agreement that outlines the agreed-to changes.  

Basically, this gives her the ability to hold those agreed to issues "hostage". She threatens to go back to the CO every time she doesn't get her way about something, and honestly, it's getting old.

There is the complicating factor of a stipulated agreement recently signed and OK'd by the court.  I agreed to pay an insane amount for high school tuition if she agreed not to raise child support (already a hefty amount) past the current level.  Should I take the parenting agreement to court, I foresee her trying to hit me where it hurts financially.

What can I do to speed up this process?

1) Since trying to work directly with BM has failed, is our next step for our attorney to send her a copy of the "new" parenting agreement with all agreed-to changes included with a strongly worded letter that BM really has no good reason not to sign it?

2) If BM doesn't sign, what can I do? She has a history of cancelling mediation (court has ordered mediation before we take anything before the judge) so she doesn't appear to be "refusing".

3)  If she refuses to sign and cancels mediation again, what are the chances I can get this before the judge as a motion to compel (do I have the right term?) and he will force her hand as there is an abundance of documentation that she had agreed to and allowed these changes for YEARS and is just trying to be difficult.

4)  In order for her to get the financial agreement overturned/changed, does the ordinary "significant change in circumstances" apply, and if so - is that "change" since the most recent agreement was signed, or does it go back to the original figuring of CS amount?  I heard that she would have to prove "greater than significant change" since the agreement was outside of guidelines - is that true?

Thanks in advance, Soc - you guidance is always much appreciated.

[socrateaser]

>State is Illinois.  BM is CP, I am NCP.
>
>Divorce was 8 years ago.  Since then, changes have been made
>"unofficially" to the parenting agreement (ex: changed PU/DO
>times, flipped some holidays in rotation, changed
>transportation details, that sort of thing)  
>
>Most of these changes are in writing through letters/emails.
>A number of them were signed by both of us, but were never
>officially entered into court.  Both parents were given a copy
>of this "agreement".  
>
>Situation now, is that BM got upset about because I won't give
>up my Halloween (not a CO holiday - just falls on my day for
>the first time since the divorce) and said she'll no longer
>agree to any of the changes that have been in effect for a
>number of years.   After I finally agreed (so as not to hurt
>my daughter) she took it back saying "I was just mad"
>
>Needless to say, this is a common occurrence here.
>
>I have tried a number of times to get BM to agree to sign an
>updated parenting agreement - Just updating the old one to
>reflect changes we have agreed to over the years.  In fact,
>our original parenting agreement says that we should review
>and update it annually.   BM has always balked - she always
>wants to change something else/add limitations that are not in
>our daughter's best interests and have no legal basis.  She
>pretty much says it's "all or nothing" and refuses to sign a
>new parenting agreement that outlines the agreed-to changes.
>
>
>Basically, this gives her the ability to hold those agreed to
>issues "hostage". She threatens to go back to the CO every
>time she doesn't get her way about something, and honestly,
>it's getting old.
>
>There is the complicating factor of a stipulated agreement
>recently signed and OK'd by the court.  I agreed to pay an
>insane amount for high school tuition if she agreed not to
>raise child support (already a hefty amount) past the current
>level.  Should I take the parenting agreement to court, I
>foresee her trying to hit me where it hurts financially.

If you start asking quesitons before you start numbering your questions, then I may mistakenly believe that you're not actually asking a question.

>What can I do to speed up this process?

See above...;-)

>
>1) Since trying to work directly with BM has failed, is our
>next step for our attorney to send her a copy of the "new"
>parenting agreement with all agreed-to changes included with a
>strongly worded letter that BM really has no good reason not
>to sign it?

No, I'd just say that "Since approximately ??/??/????, we have been operating under the following voluntary modifications to our parenting plan, and we would like to stipulated to an order finalizing these modifications. Please review the attached proposed stipulated order and if you agree, sign before a notary and return. Otherwise, please tell us what other modifications you believe are appropriate. We would prefer to not create unnecessary litigation expenses, however if we don't receive a response by ??/??/????, we will ask the court to resolve the issue."

Something like that. I'm not big on "strongly worded letters." They make my client's feel good, but they piss off the other party, and that just juices up the war machine, which is good for my wallet, but bad for yours and your ex's.

>
>2) If BM doesn't sign, what can I do? She has a history of
>cancelling mediation (court has ordered mediation before we
>take anything before the judge) so she doesn't appear to be
>"refusing".

See above. You can always just continue on the path you've been on.

>
>3)  If she refuses to sign and cancels mediation again, what
>are the chances I can get this before the judge as a motion to
>compel (do I have the right term?) and he will force her hand
>as there is an abundance of documentation that she had agreed
>to and allowed these changes for YEARS and is just trying to
>be difficult.

You can't force her hand. Only the judge gets to decide these matters where a dispute exists. If you prove that this is the status quo, that probably will win the action, but, there's no guarantee.

>4)  In order for her to get the financial agreement
>overturned/changed, does the ordinary "significant change in
>circumstances" apply, and if so - is that "change" since the
>most recent agreement was signed, or does it go back to the
>original figuring of CS amount?  I heard that she would have
>to prove "greater than significant change" since the agreement
>was outside of guidelines - is that true?

I don't know IL law on this issue. In CA, for example, any change of support greater than $0.01 upward qualifies as a material change in circumstances affecting the child's best interests. You'll have to ask your attorney on this question.

[Miller]

I'm in IL and the CS can be modified if the NCP is making more money.  There really isn't any "significant change of circumstances" requirement.  The significant change could just be that the NCP is making more money.  Does your order specifically state that you are paying lower CS because of your agreement to pay the school tuition?  Or is the school tuition just listed in there separately?  If it's separately, then that's bad for you.  A friend of mine had agreed to pay higher on certain expenses of the child's (medical, school, etc.) and his ex agreed to a lower CS amount.  This was fine for many years until just recently when she decided she wanted more money.  Now, he's paying guideline CS (double what he was paying before) and still having to pay the other expenses.

[socrateaser]

I concur with your observations. It is always bad to agree to anything in lieu of support, unless that something has some appreciating property associated with, e.g., paying a mortage in lieu of support is smart, because you'll get your support money back when the property is eventually sold.

But to incur any other out of pocket expense in lieu of paying support -- bad idea.

[TCG]

Our agreement actually states that

1) The father pays for tuition....at specific school for four years blahblah)
2) "The father's child support obligation shall remain at $xxx per month as previously ordered by the court."

So, I don't know which way it can be interpreted.  No, it doesn't say that the CS will stay at that amount BECAUSE of the tuition, but the only things in the order are thr tuition and the child support - so it's pretty obvious.  Of course, we all know obvious means nothing in the family court system, so we'll just go on hoping that she's not motivated enough to challenge it.

Thanks for the guidance, though!  

[Miller]

with the courts in IL...she could get an increase in CS and the school tuition wouldn't automatically be a consideration.  The way it is worded does not have the two linked.  Of course, you could always argue that your reasoning for agreeing to pay the school tuition was because the CS would remain at the same amount.  How much longer until the four years are up?  I'd definitely expect your ex to go back for more CS at that point.

[socrateaser]

>with the courts in IL...she could get an increase in CS and
>the school tuition wouldn't automatically be a consideration.
>The way it is worded does not have the two linked.  Of course,
>you could always argue that your reasoning for agreeing to pay
>the school tuition was because the CS would remain at the same
>amount.  How much longer until the four years are up?  I'd
>definitely expect your ex to go back for more CS at that
>point.

OK, just because you label somthing as your experience, doesn't mean that your post is actually from your own personal knowledge. You're now speculatating about what the person could get in the future, and further interpreting the text of the court order, which, as I'm sure you're aware, I do not permit on my board.

So, stop immediately, or face banishment into the eternal fires.

[TCG]

Who knows really - we're talking about Illinois after all.  

The way we figured, we could go to fight it in court at the low price of 10 grand, which is what it usually costs with her, have CS raised, and most likely end up paying half if not all of the tuition anyway on top of the raised CS. Or we could try to strike a deal with her and hope she didn't get all greedy in the next few years.

We knew that the agreement wasn't a set in stone sort of thing - there is no such monster in Illinois courts, unfortunately.  We were hoping that (a) she wouldn't question that lovely fact - or (b) that she was bright enough to understand that dragging this into court after agreeing to the offer would make her look a tad greedy given that the CS she already gets allows her to stay home and watch TV all day.  Can't exactly impress the judge when you're asking dad to pay for everything yet contribute nothing because you refuse to work.

Anyway.....it's been a pleasure, Soc.  Thanks a lot!

[Miller]

but my experience is from my own personal knowledge of what happened in an IL courtroom just a few months ago.  The court order was written like the one posted here where CS had been kept at the same amount because the NCP had agreed to cover other expenses of the child's.  After a few years, CP went back and asked for an increase in CS.  The CS was increased yet the NCP has to keep paying the larger portion of the other expense of the child's.  The court order was not written to technically "link" the two things so they weren't considered together.

I don't know what county is being used in this case so it's very likely not the same as the county that I'm in.  But, I would think that most IL courts are somewhat alike.

Again, definitely not trying to give any legal advice and just wanted to share my first-hand knowledge of what happened recently in a similar case in IL.

I'd post on the IL boards about this, but I can never get them to come up.

[socrateaser]

Under the Rules of Professional Conduct, I have a legal duty to not engage in or to aid others in the unauthorized practice of law. If I allow you to interpret law so as to give legal advice, I violate my duty and I can be subject to discipline by the State Bar. So, If I read something that appears to be more than just personal experience, I must attempt to stop it, because i don't want to be suspended from practice.

Thanks for your clarification.