I'm not sure that this belongs in Family Law, so I may need to post under Insurance too.

My two teenage kids live full time with their father, who has not registered his car this year. Given all his other "circumstances" it's probably safe to assume he didn't register because he doesn't have proof of insurance (it's very inexpensive to register a car in Oregon).

Both my kids want to obtain their driver permits, which concerns me if their dad's car is uninsured.

Is there anything I can petition within the court to assure their safety?

If the car is in their dad's name, and it isn't insured, there is no way they can drive the car uninsured, learning, or not learning.

Why don't you buy insurance for it if you want the boys to learn with this car.

Tick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tickle

Why dont you buy insurance for it if you want the boys to learn with this car. ?

tick

---

Hmm I didn't consider that as a possibility. I'm also paying maximum child support so am max'd out financially. Also, since I don't have legal custody, it's not my decision to make whether they are allowed to drive or not.

I suppose if their dad is riding next to them while instructing, the burden of responsibllity lies on him; not my children. However, if the children were injured, the claim would go against the medical insurance I provide.

Report it to the state that he has an uninsured vehicle and unregistered vehicle.

Hi mom. It isn't really good for any one of your boys to be behind the steering wheel of a car that is not insured. It doesn't make any difference if your ex is beside or not. In fact the charges, in case of an accident, would be severe for a learner plus driving without insurance. This type of charge could effect either one of your kids, like forever. Maybe dissenabling them from ever getting a drivers license. So you see where I am coming from ?

You must not allow them to drive even with your ex in the car with them unless the car is PROPERLY INSURED AND GIVEN PROVISION FOR A STUDENT DRIVER, DRIVING. Normally a family car would be used and the insured would call the insurance company alerting them that a student would be driving.

I hope this helps, now that you have explained your situation, which situation would not improve should something happen under student driving conditions.

Kindest regards

Ms tickle (been there and done that)

You can report the car as unregistered and uninsured. Also do your kids have jobs? I know when my brother and I wanted our drivers license we had to pay our own insurance (it was not that bad because we were on our parents policy not our own and we were both on the honor roll so we were able to get good student discounts). But that was our incentive to driving carefully (the amount that the insurance went up from adding us came out of our pockets.

For one thing Im not sure you can report it to police because it's a non issue until the car reaches a public street or right of way. Other then eye sore laws its legal to own a car unregistered. The only restriction is that it must remain on private property.

All you can do is ask your ex about it and it ends there. The courts can't force him to do the right thing they can only suggest it with consequences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottGem

Report it to the state that he has an uninsured vehicle and unregistered vehicle.

---

Thanks for everyone's response. I called a friend of a friend who is a police officer in a neighboring county. Seems if the car is parked in the driveway (private property) there is nothing they can do. Getting a permit won't require evidence of an insured vehicle; that will come when they take their driver's exam.

Sooner or later, ex will get pulled over for expired tags. Hopefully, the kids will never be affected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by califdadof3

For one thing Im not sure you can report it to police because its a non issue until the car reaches a public street or right of way. Other then eye sore laws its legal to own a car unregistered. The only restriction is that it must remain on private property.

All you can do is ask your ex about it and it ends there. The courts can't force him to do the right thing they can only suggest it with consequences.

---

This is what I've found out - it's only illegal once it's on the street. On private property, it's not hurting anyone.

Ex and I are not on speaking terms and if I even HINT that I'm asking him to do the right thing (i.e. assume that he's NOT), he will insist I'm harassing him. I think very carefully before sending him anything in writing. When I do, it is all above board and business-like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tickle

If the car is in their dad's name, and it isnt insured, there is no way they can drive the car uninsured, learning, or not learning.

Why dont you buy insurance for it if you want the boys to learn with this car. ?

tick

---

Actually tick - I found out that DMV will not ask about what car the kids will be driving; not for a learner's permit, anyway. Once it comes time to take the driver's test, the car being used during the test will be inspected for current registration and insurance.

I think in this situation, there is nothing I can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stinawords

You can report the car as unregistered and uninsured. Also do your kids have jobs? I know when my brother and I wanted our drivers license we had to pay our own insurance (it was not that bad because we were on our parents policy not our own and we were both on the honor roll so we were able to get good student discounts). But that was our incentive to driving carefully (the amount that the insurance went up from adding us came out of our pockets.

---

Neither of my kids have jobs. I had to pay for my own insurance too (or the pro-rata share of it) on my parents' policy when I got my license.

I haven't been here for a while so looks like I've got two questions today! :)

I'm in a bit of a quandary. I'll try to be simple with the background but some of you may ask for more detail.

Ex is the sole CP. I'm the NCP. I pay child support and provide all medical/dental/vision coverage for the children. Ex does not work but is still able to stay in the house (I assume his parents pay the mortgage for him.) I tried to get ex agree to use the residual arrears due last January (I was paying estimated support since ex wouldn't provide financials for almost 5 months) towards our daughter's orthodontia. Ex wouldn't stipulate to that so arrears went directly to him upon settlement. We had a consult with the orthodontist in January where ex asked if it could wait another 6 - 10 months (until he felt he could afford it). Orthodontist said DD could still be treated.

So... In June, I offered to pay for the entire out-of-pocket expense, using my FSA medical savings over a two-year period. Just needed ex to sign consent. Since ex never replies to any of my emails regarding school or medical info. after a week with no reply to my request for consent, I filed a motion with the court to order him to sign consent. Since he was being uncooperative (by not replying) I included the request for 50% reimbursement that our order allows for.

The day I filed the motion and left it for service, I learned from the orthodontist's office that ex finally called and scheduled the first two appointments. He had not been served with the summons yet, which would be delivered later in the day.

Not long after the orthodontist called, ex sent an email, thanking me for the gift of braces and stating he'd made the appointments. He added a condition that I not ever be present for any of the appointments. In other words, "Thanks for the money. I'll be taking her to all her appointments."

Since ex has effectively complied with moving forward with consent, should I drop the motion? Knowing the judge's tolerance for the underdog, I'm thinking that the reimbursement portion will get tossed. That's not why I filed anyway (it was sort of my own personal sanction). What really gets me is the "condition" that my involvement cannot go past my financial contribution. Is it really legally OK for the CP to promote this kind of exclusion of the NCP?

Notice I said report it to the STATE, not the police. The answer you got about what the police can do is correct. There is no law against having an unregistered and uninsured vehicle on private property. The state DMV MAY put out a bulletin about it however.

He can not make up conditions as he goes along. In your agreement it should say something about the NCP is suppose to be notified of all things such as school events, dr appts, emergencies, etc... I do think that that is there for the reason of the NCP being able to be there as well as included in helping making the decisions.
You should take him back to court and have it clarified for him to hear from the Judge if he is going to be impossible.
Unless he has a protection from abuse against you or the court papers say you can not be there then he is wrong.

If I understand your post correctly, your motion is now a moot point since the ex finally called and made the appointment. However, you state that your order allows for (which should be interpreted as "requires") 50% reimbursement, so when the hearing is scheduled you can appear in court and ask the judge to enforce that. As for you not being present at appointments, etc. do you have any kind of joint custody established? In your post you describe yourself as the "NCP." If you did not establish any kind of joint physical and legal custody then it is possible that he could bar you from being present at the appointments. It's mostly a matter of how far he wishes to push it. But you can ask the judge to allow that as well. Also, as N0help told you, you should get the order to include such things as you being advised concerning schooling, medical issues, etc. You may need to file a motion for modification of your original order. But any reasonable judge would grant such a request.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

He can not make up conditions as he goes along. In your agreement it should say something about the NCP is suppose to be notified of all things such as school events, dr appts, emergencies, etc.....I do think that that is there for the reason of the NCP being able to be there as well as making the decisions.
You should take him back to court and have it clarified for him to hear from the Judge if he is going to be impossible.
Unless he has a protection from abuse against you or the court papers say you can not be there then he is wrong.

---

We used to have joint physical and legal custody. After a long, drawn-out battle last year, I succombed to stipulating to letting him have custody. If we went to court, I would have lost anyway because the kids asked to live with him.

I am so confused by my new "status" and the supplemental orders. I mean: What stands from the original order? It's been my understanding that unless the supplemental order(s) specifically state(s) that a particular section of the original order has been vacated or has been changed, that the presumption is that that section of the original order stands. However, when you go from joint custody to no custody, I am having a hard time getting my head around what MY rights are as the parent.

If for any reason at all to keep this motion on the docket, I'd like to hear from the judge myself that ex can legally discourage my involvement with our daughter; particularly when I have asked to be involved and am not posing any threat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s_cianci

If I understand your post correctly, your motion is now a moot point since the ex finally called and made the appointment. However, you state that your order allows for (which should be interpreted as "requires") so when the hearing is scheduled you can ask the judge to enforce that. As for you not being present at appointments, etc., do you have any kind of joint custody established? In your post you describe yourself as the "NCO." If you did not establish any kind of joint physical and legal custody then it is possible that he could bar you from being present at the appointments. It's mostly a matter of how far he wishes to push it. But you can ask the judge to allow that as well.

---

Thank you. Yes - you understood correctly. If he wasn't being such a jerk about this, I would have dropped the order immediately. Now, however... I feel I should keep the hearing so that I know just exactly how far the court (our judge) will allow ex to push his CP position.

Our supplemental order is very ambiguous about Parenting time in that ex cannot be sanctioned if the children do not exercise parenting time with me. He is, however, supposed to encourage their relationship with me. I don't see how this action demonstrates that at all.

So basically you have given up your rights pretty much other than paying?
You have to follow the most current order.
What does it say as far as your being involved with your kids? Are you allowed to go see them in school events, go to their appts, etc..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by N0help4u

So basically you have given up your rights pretty much other than paying?
You have to follow the most current order.
What does it say as far as your being involved with your kids? Are you allowed to go see them in school events, go to their appts, etc...?

---

That's what it feels like to me - I am now simply a paycheck.

The supplemental order is short. Just says that parenting time is once a week for 3 hours and that the kids are allowed to schedule additional time with me and that there's no legal recourse if they choose not to exercise their time. No mention of changing attending school events, etc. From what I've read on sole custody though... the custodial parent has the final say on routine medical care. I would only be allowed to direct emergency medical attention.

Oregon will only award joint custody when both parties agree. Ex and I never agreed on anything over the past 9 years.

Funny that he wanted me out of the picture, then as soon as custody was settled, he emailed asking for help in making arrangements for doctor appointment, etc. for our son. I had to explain to him that as the NCP, I no longer have the authority to MAKE said appointments and that I'd already provided him with the necessary info to do that. His response was snarky, saying that I was demented :~

Once a court order is established, it stands until it is modified by the court. A verbal agreement between the parties to do things differently does not invalidate a court order. As such, whatever was stipulated in your original order still stands, unless it was actually modified by the court. This includes such things as child support, visitation, custody, etc. Typically, items for modification are considered on an individual basis. So if the provision that granted you both joint physical and legal custody was modified to give him sole physical and legal custody, that would not impact what was originally stipulated regarding child support or visitation, so these things would continue as per the original order.