Adult Interdepenant relationship and C/S and S/S limitations

[Lainar]

Hi everyone

First off let me state that I am in Alberta and all this happened in Alberta so hopefully someone here knows a little about Alberta Family law.

My ex gf and I split up 1 year 11 monthes ago. We lived together for 3 and 1/2 years. We bought a house (She put down the down payment and i made the mortgage payments). She has a son who's biological father was killed in an accident in 2001 who is now 15.

Now i am sure you all can see where I am going with this.

When I left almost 2 years ago she threatened me with C/S and S/S even though she always PROMISED me she would never come after me for that because her boy was not my boy.

We got through selling the house with not too many issuses and we were back on freindly terms and she never came after me for anything though she would occasionally threaten me with it.

Now here is where it gets sticky cause i could be found to have stood in place as a parent because of the mortgage payments. I never paid directly for his clothing, school supplies etc etc and yes he did call me dad but really againest my wishes as i felt very uncomfortable with it. I was never involved with disciplining him as she stated he was not my son and she did not include me in most of the decisions when it came to him. I never introduced him as my son to anyone. He was always introduced as her boy. She also always filed widowed on her taxes and not common law and told me if I filed common law she would end the relationship ( wished i would have done it lol) so in essence causing both of us to commit a no-no with revenue canada and she used another address in her income tax returns.

My relationship with her boy has not been bad not has it been like a father son relationship. I never felt comfortable with pretending to be someones dad and have no desire to have my own children which she also knew from the start.

Now we have been freindly for the last year and have even tried breifly to patch things up from seperate residences. She just a month ago moved into the same apartment building i live in, in hopes of us moving in together at some point.

Now i do not want this and have told her so and now we are back with her threatening me for C/S and S/S. again. She does work but my income is 2 1/2 times more then hers.

After this length of time apart can she still come after me for this or am i stressing out for nothing and I should tell her to just go pound rocks. I know S/S would be very close to out of the question since she is self sufficient, however she is threatening that if i do not get back with her she will take me for everything she can cause she is looking after herself.

We were also engaged but that ended a year and 4 months before we became seperated.

I hope this gives a good idea of what has been going on and someone can give me some idea if she can even come after me this long after seperating

Thanks

Don

[Rioe]

A) I think you can tell by now what kind of person she is, and I would hope you don't let anything cloud your judgment and get back together with her!

B) Let her bluster; her threats are pretty much empty. Frankly, at this point, you might want to pay her a tiny bit just to prove you won't get back together with her and get her out of your life. But, and granted I'm not familiar with Alberta law, she's lasted two years without spousal support, and it was a short relationship to begin with, so I think she's doing okay and has accidentally created her own status quo of not needing it. As for her son, what kind of relationship did you have with him? Do you love him and miss him and still send him birthday cards? Does he look up to you and probably miss you? Would either of you be interested in hanging out without the ex along, doing father/son type things? You were with him from age 9 to 13 or so, not a huge length of time, but arguably a formative one. It sounds like you didn't really support him or act like a parent otherwise, especially with her tax arrangement, so I think she hasn't got much case to build on.

C) Bleh! Who wants to get back together with a woman who threatens to take you to court otherwise! Crazy!

D) Move out of the apartment building and across town. If she follows you again, have her arrested for harassment.

[billm]

I don't think she has any way to get you for SS or CS so tell her that you've got a lawyer and educated yourself and you are sure you have no financial obligation to her or her son. Then stop engaging it.

You have to learn to stay away from her. Moving might be the best idea.

I would not give her any money - 2 years after moving out etc - that does not make sense and may indicate that you feel you do have an obligation.

Did she really threaten you to get back with her or she will go after support payments? How romantic! Tell her you're seeing someone else, or that you simply don't feel that way about her anymore, it is for the best you are not together.

[Mess]

If you pay her money, you are teaching her that her tactics work on you.

If you pay her money, the courts will see this as you accepting that she has an entitlement. It takes away from your legal arguments.

The points you make are generally sound and you can put together a good legal argument from them.

There is no black and white law regarding in loco parentis (you being considered the father of a non-biological child). There is simply no way to say yes or no, it would come down to what kind of case can she put together and what kind of defense can you put together and then a judge will decide.

There is no use fretting about it. I agree with billm, you should tell her you have received legal advice, you have been informed that you owe her nothing, and she should leave you alone.

Don't engage with her in an argument or any further explanation. If she tries to get you involved in a discussion, tell her you don't want to discuss it, there is nothing to discuss and she won't believe your legal advice anyway. Just drop it and stay away from the subject.

The more you allow her to talk about it, the more she believes she has a point. Ignoring her is the absolute best defence.

[beebie]

Look at s.48 of the Family Law Act of Alberta.

Also consider that the son's biological father would be on the hook before you.

Also see below:


Determining whether a person stands in the place of a parent must take into account, objectively, all factors relevant to that determination. The court must determine the nature of the relationship by looking at a number of factors, among which is intention. Intention will not only be expressed formally. The court must also infer intention from actions, and take into consideration that even expressed intentions may sometimes change. The relevant factors in defining the parental relationship include, but are not limited to, whether the child participates in the extended family in the same way as would a biological child; whether the person provides financially for the child (depending on ability to pay); whether the person disciplines the child as a parent; whether the person represents to the child, the family, the world, either explicitly or implicitly, that he or she is responsible as a parent to the child; the nature or existence of the child's relationship with the absent biological parent; and the length of the relationship.

[beebie]

She has a pretty weak case for spousal support too given that she has survived 1.5 years without your assistance.

Oh sorry I missed that the bio father was deceased.

[Elle]

Sorry If I am not posting this properly!