The Maintenance Enforcement Program (MEP) is committed to ensuring that support obligations are honoured in order to assist Alberta families. Lawyers practising family law participate by drafting support provisions that are "enforcement friendly" and enable MEP to effectively carry out its mandate of achieving compliance with maintenance orders.

Section 7 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines and Section 7 of the Alberta Child Support Guidelines allow the court to order a debtor to contribute to child care, health care, education and extracurricular activity expenses. These expenses are also referred to as "Section 7 expenses," "special expenses,""additional expenses" or "extraordinary expenses." For MEP to be able to enforce additional expenses in a support order, the order should:

• state that one party pays the other party
• specify the type of expense
• state the amount payable each month. A fixed amount, rather than a percentage of an indeterminate amount, is preferred
• name the child(ren) for whom the expense is paid
• state the date of the first payment and the date the payment is due every month thereafter
• state the termination date or conditions for payment of the additional expense.

If the order addresses specifically-named additional expenses, MEP can only enforce the expenses if the support provision expressly requires the debtor to pay these expenses to the creditor. MEP does not enforce provisions such as "the parties shall share equally" certain expenses or "the parties shall be equally responsible for" certain expenses, as there is no requirement for one party to pay anything to the other. MEP also cannot enforce a provision that states that one party is to pay a third party, such as a school or health care provider.

Where a support provision clearly provides for the payment of additional expenses from the debtor to the creditor, the amounts are charged to the maintenance enforcement account and must be enforced through MEP, unless the creditor opts out of MEP. The amount should not be paid directly to the creditor or a third party. In exceptional circumstances, MEP may permit the creditor to acknowledge that the debtor has paid the additional expenses directly to the creditor or a third party rather than through MEP and MEP will then adjust the account.

Minutes of Settlement

Minutes of Settlement are not enforceable unless the document is incorporated into a filed court order. Therefore, MEP cannot enforce any additional expenses provisions that are contained in Minutes of Settlement unless these provisions are repeated in a court order or the Minutes of Settlement are specifically incorporated into a court order. MEP will enforce additional expenses contained in a Maintenance Enforcement Support Agreement, or in enforceable agreements made under the Parentage and Maintenance Act or Income and Employment Supports Act.

Fixed additional expenses amounts

While parties are entitled to express additional expenses in terms of percentages of indeterminate amounts, MEP strongly encourages that the parties agree on a fixed amount. For example, it is preferable for an order to require the debtor to pay $100 per month for hockey expenses, rather than 55 per cent of the hockey expenses incurred. This prevents possible conflict between the parties regarding MEP's collection of additional expenses and has the following other benefits:

• There is no need for MEP to obtain and review receipts.
• It eliminates the need for MEP to consult with the parties.
• Ongoing retroactive adjustments to the account are unnecessary. This ensures that the creditor will be able to obtain funds promptly. Delays in adjusting accounts may be experienced where MEP staff are asked to review and verify additional expense receipts provided by a creditor.

If an order requires MEP to determine the amount of additional expenses owing based on receipts provided by the creditor, the following difficulties can arise:

• There is often no way of determining from the receipt that the particular item or activity was specifically for the child named in the court order. For example, a receipt for skates could represent a child's hockey expenses or, alternatively, a gift for someone else.
• There could be a dispute that the item was returned for a refund.
• Where the debtor disputes the expense, confidentiality provisions of the Maintenance Enforcement Act preclude MEP from passing on copies of receipts and other personal information to the debtor.
• It may not be clear that the expenses shown by the receipts were intended to be an additional expense. For example, a debtor may not agree that end-of-year banquet costs, team photos, or hotel and food bills for out-of-town tournaments should be included as a "hockey expense."

These types of provisions can cause unresolveable disputes between the parties as to whether or not to allow disputed additional expenses claimed by the creditor. The result may be that the Director declines to enforce the ambiguous terms in the order regarding additional expenses.

See "Lawyer's Guide - What are some examples of provisions in court orders that are difficult to interpret or enforce?" to view examples of maintenance provisions that MEP may not be able to enforce, such as those relating to additional expenses.

Termination dates for additional expenses

Termination dates and/or the conditions of eligibility for additional expenses should be stipulated in the order. By way of example, a clause might state that a particular expense is due only for months during which the child is enrolled in a particular activity and may be reinstated when the child recommences the activity. Whether a particular activity may be substituted with a different activity might also be considered. Where an order is silent, MEP generally does not enforce expenses for activities a child is not doing.

Sample provision for additional expenses

A suggested clause regarding the payment of additional special or extraordinary expenses can be found in the Maintenance Enforcement Support Agreement.