Eve
member
Reged: 11/28/05
Posts: 112
|
|
When our twins were born my father in law called me and told me he had put a significant amount of money for each of our twin babies in a stock. He said he wanted it to be used for their education after high school, whether it was a trade school, college, he did not care, as long as it was toward their career goals to make them self sufficient adults.
He put his oldest son, not my husband, in charge of this to oversee it and distribute it when the time came.
He passed away a couple years ago, and the twins are 16, thinking of college. Our divorce settlement says we will each contribute equally, as we reasonably can, toward our children's college education.
The stock my father in law left for the twins has grown substantially and will probably take care of at least the first two years for both of them. My ex now says, "Well, that money will take care of my share, not yours!" I replied, "Your dad bought those stocks for the twins, not you, and we will share what the worth of those stocks does not cover."
I told him, if I had to go to court over this, I would. Has anyone here had something like this happen? If we had to go to court, any idea what a judge would say???? Just curious as to your opinions and experiences. Thanks!
|
Renny
addict
Reged: 09/24/11
Posts: 479
|
|
Was the stock placed in a trust account for the benefit of the boys? Does the divorce agreement reference that account in ralation to college expenses?
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30196
|
|
I am interested to see the various responses, as there was another poster on here (Susan) who's parents left the children money for school, and she felt that it should cover HER part, and not her ex's part.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
annieo
veteran
Reged: 07/07/10
Posts: 1410
Loc: Pacific Northwest
|
|
I'm really curious too - I would think the stock would cover the ex's portion given it is his "side" that is contributing the funds which would make it from the ex.
|
gr8Dad
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/07/04
Posts: 30196
|
|
Actually, since it was willed to the kids, it should be used for the tuition and the balance split equally.
--------------------
Why give a "senior" discount, they have had plenty of time to raise the money...
|
hanzblinx
enthusiast
Reged: 08/13/10
Posts: 380
|
|
The will has precedence. It's not in the divorce agreement. I think it depends on the will. If the money is not clearly for the twins in the will, the older brother can legally blow it in Las Vegas on himself. Or give it to the father, to spend on his half of college.
If it's in the will for the kids, then you may have a case.
|
Renny
addict
Reged: 09/24/11
Posts: 479
|
|
The will would only control a testamentary trust. If the stock was placed in a trust of some other kind, the will would have no effect. It does however sound like the trust was not just for college and the trustee can spend it anyway he wants for the children's benefit, including giving the H his half for college, which would leave the W responsible for the other half.
|
Eve
member
Reged: 11/28/05
Posts: 112
|
|
I will be trying to find out exactly how it was left. I did speak to a lawyer friend, and he said if it was left for the twins education, and not left to their father, my ex would not be able to consider it his to use for their college expenses. My father in law was pretty savy about these things......and smart for not having my ex in charge of it! He was very clear when he told us he was buying stocks "for the twins" and he felt it would grow and was to be used for their after high school schooling. It was not bought so my ex could use it for their schooling.
Edited by Eve (01/09/12 12:04 AM)
|
annieo
veteran
Reged: 07/07/10
Posts: 1410
Loc: Pacific Northwest
|
|
"It was not bought so my ex could use it for their schooling."
It was bought for their schooling and will go to their schooling so the ex using for their schooling is what is is for - you just do not think it is "fair" for him to be able to use it for his half of the costs and you have to come up with your share.
I still think the court (unless spelled out in the twins names only - as in they get the actual dollars and even then...) will allocate it to the ex as his share and whatever his share and your matching share does not cover - the ex and you will need to spit.
Su@ks in a big way but it is the ex's family that contributed and should (imo) go to the ex's share of the costs.
Good Luck
|
Sherron
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 11/25/06
Posts: 20056
|
|
"Su@ks in a big way but it is the ex's family that contributed and should (imo) go to the ex's share of the costs."
Curious if the same theory applies to medical expenses. I carry the insurance on ds, no reimbursement for the premiums from ex. Since I'm the only one contributing to the premiums (despite the co ordering him to carry insurance)... do I ask ex to pay his half before insurance reimbursements or after?
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
