Family Law Questions? Ask a Family Lawyer Online.
Thank you for using JustAnswer. I am researching your issue and will respond shortly.
Pardon my spelling. Under "already tried"...yet she wants payment for 3 full weeks
Since there is an ambiguity in the contract, the court is going to attempt to resolve the ambiguity in a way that does not negate any of the provisions of the contract. That is, they are going to read the first clause and read the second clause in a way that does not conflict with the first clause, if at all possible. But ambiguities are going to be interpreted against the drafter of the contract (which sounds like her). It sounds as though she is talking about "subsidy payment", which probably means subsidy through a government, agency, etc..., and the requirements for those are that the child must attend the entire week, in that she does not get paid (from the subsidies) if the child is not there the entire week.
Now that is a valid way of interpreting the contract, and as such, it does not conflict with the prior clause.
This would be the most likely interpretation by the court.
Should it go to court.
And if so, it would determine that you were financially responsible for the amount owed (the full three weeks).
I know this is probably not what you wanted to hear, but it's the law. I hope that clears things up anyway. Good luck to you!
Thanks. I forgot about the gov subsidy . That blows, because of her notice of termination, I had no choice but to get my child with another provider and I'm having to pay BOTH parties. I'm satisfied w/the answer even though I don't like it. Thanks again.
Is there anything else I need to do other than hit "accept"?
I'm sorry that I couldn't give you a better answer. You could continue trying to negotiate, but legally speaking, she has the right to this amount.