">
Courts typically view expenses for a child’s post-secondary education as an expense that child support should cover. Parents can be responsible for post-secondary education costs for their adult children because there is no fixed end date for child support payments. However, the entitlement to financial support and the specific expenses that are covered can vary in each case. Parents will frequently contribute in proportion to their income, and courts can look at both the parents’ and the child’s financial means.
Father Seeks Reimbursement of Post-Secondary Education Expenses
In Runolfson v. Runolfson, the parties had three children, aged 16, 21, and 23. Among the issues to be decided in their divorce proceeding, the father sought reimbursement from the mother of post-separation and education expenses that he claimed were owed to him. The two oldest children were enrolled in university, and the father was responsible for their university budgets and costs. He wished to be reimbursed $62,423 from the children’s Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP). According to the father, the parties had signed a Settlement Memorandum of Understanding in which funds from other RESP accounts were deposited into their joint bank account so that they could cover the children’s university expenses. However, the mother refused to allow the father to withdraw the funds. This resulted in him personally paying the costs. He then informed the mother that he expected to be reimbursed when an additional RESP investment became due. He continued to make multiple requests, but the mother failed to repay him.
Section 31(1) of the Family Law Act states that every parent has an obligation, to the extent that they are capable of doing so, of providing support to minor children or children who are enrolled in a full-time program of education, unless the child is sixteen years of age or older and has withdrawn from parental control. The judge explained that a child’s entitlement to financial support and the specific amount that should be contributed from each parent is fact-specific. In Housh v. Rayvals, the court found that this required considering the educational program and its associated costs, the various funding sources available to the child, and the means of the child and each parent.
RESPs Can Reduce Parental Contributions to Education
In Menegaldo v. Menegaldo, the court considered the issue of entitlement to support for an adult child enrolled in post-secondary studies. That case held that the mere fact that an adult child was still engaged in educational studies was “not in and of itself determinative of the issue of entitlement to child support”. And that entitlement depends on the facts of each case. But generally, courts can consider whether the “educational plan is reasonable in terms of the child’s abilities, the plans and expectations of the parents in regard to the child’s post-secondary education, and the needs and means of the child and the parents”.
In Runolfson, Justice Somji explained that once entitlement to support is established, the quantum of support each parent should pay must be established. The amount may be determined according to the tables set out in the Child Support Guidelines, otherwise section 3(2)(b) of the Guidelines, states that the amount of support will be the amount which the court considers appropriate “having regard for the conditions, means, needs and other circumstances of the child and the financial ability of each spouse to contribute to the support of the child”. The judge noted that children may be expected to contribute to their post-secondary education and that parents may use RESPs “with the expectation that they will be used for post-secondary costs and thereby reduce their own parental contributions”.
In this case, the judge noted that RESPs were available to help pay for the children’s expenses. Also, both children had been working and contributing to their university costs. It was also true that both parents had the financial ability to contribute to their children’s post-secondary education expenses.
Mother Disputes Which Costs Should be Covered by the RESP
Justice Somji looked at the correspondence between the parties. This revealed that the mother did not dispute that the father should be reimbursed from their RESPs for paying university costs. Nevertheless, she did question some of the amounts being claimed. In her exchanges with the father, she stated that she did not believe it was necessary to pay for items including “Starbucks coffee, cell phones, and car insurance.” She also requested that the father provide receipts for school-related expenses. She was also concerned that if the father was reimbursed the amount he requested, only $45,000 would remain in the RESP for the youngest child.
When the father replied to the mother’s concerns, he explained that he believed the children’s monthly budget was reasonable, that the children would make contributions from their own employment, and that his payments for tuition and other school expenses were clearly documented in bank and credit card statements. He also indicated that the RESP funds stemmed from their careful planning and that he still intended to invest and make funds available to support their youngest child when she attended post-secondary education. Despite the father’s explanation, the mother still did not specifically identify which expenses she believed should not be covered by their RESP. Justice Somji noted that reconciling some of the expenses would have been possible if she had done this. However, she failed to address the father’s request for reimbursement and only stated that she objected to paying for 90% of the children’s education expenses, which she claimed was disproportionate.
Delay in Addressing Costs of Education Resulted in Financial Prejudice
The judge concluded that the mother’s conduct was unreasonable, noting that she could have determined much earlier if the children’s school budgets were excessive, and what amount she was willing to pay from the RESP. The judge felt that if she had taken these actions, the father would at least have been notified that the mother was not willing to fund the two oldest children’s university expenses from the RESPs. He would have understood that if he paid any amounts for their costs, he would do so on his own. But she did not take those steps. Additionally, when she reviewed the father’s table of expenses, she could at least have identified the costs that she agreed should be reimbursed to him from the RESP, leaving the expenses that she found excessive aside. That would have allowed the father to recover the fees that were not being contested. But she did not permit that either.
The consequence of the mother’s actions was to cause delay and financial prejudice for the father. He had paid the university costs for the two older children from his personal income and line of credit, which required him to make interest payments, when the parties had $100,000 in RESP funds available to fund their children’s post-secondary education. The judge also found that the father’s expenditures on university costs, such as tuition and books, were reasonable, and his monthly budgets were also reasonable given the living costs. He assessed that the expenditures aligned with the projected annual fees for a university in Ontario. Ultimately, the judge made a temporary, without prejudice, order for the father to be reimbursed $50,000 from the children’s RESP for the post-secondary expenses he incurred. However, he did hold back $12,423 and gave the mother 30 days to identify the specific costs she was contesting that should not be reimbursed from the RESP. And these were to be litigated at trial.
Post-Secondary Education Expenses are Often Claimed Under Child Support
Courts will only require expenses for a child’s post-secondary education to be paid if the child remains entitled to support. This case also clearly states that parents should take reasonable steps to resolve financial matters and that delaying doing so can cause financial prejudice.
Experienced Windsor Family Lawyers Helping You Navigate Post-Secondary Expenses in Child Support
Planning for your child’s post-secondary education can be a complex issue in a divorce or separation. If you need assistance navigating child support matters, including expenses for university or college, our experienced Windsor family lawyers can help. At Johnson Miller Family Lawyers, we provide strategic legal advice tailored to your unique situation, helping you understand your obligations and options. To discuss your case, contact us online or call our office at 519-973-1500 to schedule a consultation.
