Still trying to work out kinks in support/expenses...

[DecentDad]

Hi Soc,

We still don't have orders finalized regarding support/expenses.  Our May 2004 settlement discussion didn't include $$$, but opposing counsel threw it into the proposed judgment draft; opening the can o' worms.

Opposing counsel wanted to keep current CS amount, wanted to call my previously stipulated 50% contribution to "preschool tuition" now a flat guaranteed monthly amount to biomom for childcare/school.

Biomom and I argued (via email) about amount of time daughter should be in preschool.  I wanted half-days for daughter's increased socialization opportunity in her second year of preschool, Petitioner wanted less.  This is relevant in terms of providing biomom more time to earn $$, and her clear opposition to that.

In April 2004, biomom stated in deposition the following:

a) She has gone through about 10 babysitters, who she called her "support circle of friends."

b) She has earning potential of $300/day.  She agreed that someone with her education (Masters) and experience (10 years teaching Acting) could earn $5,000/month.  We reside in L.A. (i.e., opportunity).

c) She wants to be a full-time mother and has no intent to work full-time.

d) She hasn't pursued full-time work in past two years.

In the past three years, emails show that I've frequently offered to care for daughter when biomom can't, as my work schedule is flexible and I work a mile from biomom's residence (and I live 5 miles away).  She never availed herself of my offer.

To my knowledge, biomom works mostly in the evening and on weekends as this is when most of her clients are available.

Via email, biomom has recently advised me that a babysitter will start picking up daughter from my home on her behalf, at 7pm exchanges.  In past couple months, when I've called to speak to daughter at bedtime, babysitter has been there more frequently.

If biomom's self-admitted earning potential of $3500/month (from $5000 gross) is imputed as her net income, my monthly CS is reduced by $275.

Via stipulation signed in 2002, I pay up to $285/month for half of preschool tuition in addition to CS.  2002 order specifically said "preschool tuition payable directly to preschool", not mentioning elementary school nor childcare.  Biomom and I both live in excellent public school districts, each one of us in districts of elementary schools both ranked in top 10th percentile in the state.  No need for private school, which neither of us can afford.

I also pay 50% of medical expenses not covered by insurance.  If relevant, this has amounted to more than $3,000 in past two years.

If relevant, the CS amount I've been paying, plus the preschool amount I'm paying; is 25% of my net income.

If relevant, I have 35% timeshare, and we have joint custody as per the court's ruling (i.e., assignment of custody type was left to the court to rule on because it couldn't be settled).

I'm guessing that we'll need to return to court on the money issues.

If relevant, biomom has been taking daughter to a therapist but she apparently also has a babysitter at daughter's bedtime (i.e., if a 4 year old child is in therapy, perhaps only parents should be caring for child as much as possible).

1.  If biomom were to suddenly demonstrate that she's hiring a babysitter at a far greater expense than at time of trial settlement, what's likelihood that I'll be ordered to pay some of that?

2.  If answer to #1 is yes, as biomom's sole income is self-employment via private classes, what's to stop biomom from lying about her use of babysitter for income (i.e., if she colludes with one of her friends who is babysitting so that I pay more than 50% of necessary childcare)?

3.  Is it relevant that I can demonstrate the ability to care for daughter when biomom can't (i.e., either during the evenings/weekends, or if necessary to have testimony from my employer that my schedule is flexible)?

4.  Any other thoughts on how to keep expenses as close to solely to CS as possible?

5.  A long shot... if biomom is seeking childcare costs because she's been hiring a babysitter during evenings and weekends at a frequency higher than at time of trial settlement, is that a change of circumstance that can wind up in new orders on a custodial schedule, if we're before the court to argue childcare expenses?

Thanks, as always.
DD

[socrateaser]

>1.  If biomom were to suddenly demonstrate that she's hiring a
>babysitter at a far greater expense than at time of trial
>settlement, what's likelihood that I'll be ordered to pay some
>of that?

It's up to you to negotiate the settlement. If you go back to court without a settlement, the judge will order childcare as reasonably related to the obligee parent's employment or training for employment.

>
>2.  If answer to #1 is yes, as biomom's sole income is
>self-employment via private classes, what's to stop biomom
>from lying about her use of babysitter for income (i.e., if
>she colludes with one of her friends who is babysitting so
>that I pay more than 50% of necessary childcare)?

You can demand proof of her costs, and make her aware, that you will insist on a transcript of her federal tax return every year, and that it display the name, address and social security #s of all daycare payment recipients. Thus, if she doesn't report, you will report her, and if she does, her "friends" will be forced to pay taxes on their possibly phantom income.

>
>3.  Is it relevant that I can demonstrate the ability to care
>for daughter when biomom can't (i.e., either during the
>evenings/weekends, or if necessary to have testimony from my
>employer that my schedule is flexible)?

Absolutely. There is no reason why you shouldn't be granted "first opportunity" to care for the child in the absense of the other parent.

>
>4.  Any other thoughts on how to keep expenses as close to
>solely to CS as possible?

Redrum, redrum, redrum!

>
>5.  A long shot... if biomom is seeking childcare costs
>because she's been hiring a babysitter during evenings and
>weekends at a frequency higher than at time of trial
>settlement, is that a change of circumstance that can wind up
>in new orders on a custodial schedule, if we're before the
>court to argue childcare expenses?

An order for "first opportunity" (right of first refusal to care for the child) is di minimis, and the court could easily grant it, without opening a whole new bag of worms.

[DecentDad]

.