Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2010, 08:22 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 64
nick2009 is on a distinguished road
Default "equalization of net family property" - a new issue from ex

Hi, guys,

ex's lawyer yesterday raised a new issue - equalization of net family property - which is part of Item 5 of Parts ISSUE of Form 17c Settlement conference brief.

we officially separated in January 2003 without physical contact and financial connection and split family property equally. Since then, i have been living in a very low standard condition in order to save some money for my daughter future education. somehow my daughter (12 year's old) told ex that i saved a lot of money. so ex wants to get some free money from me. Next Wednesday will be the second settlement conference which mainly focuses on SS. This new issue will be part of the ex's claim.

I do not know the real meaning of the 'equalization of net family property' and give me some rough ideas on how to deal with this new issue on the court.

Thanks

nick
july26, 2010
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2010, 08:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,723
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Net family property would be any property accumulated over the course of the marriage.

Your argument is simple, you are willing to divide any property during the marriage until the date of separation. All assets and savings accumulated post separation you will argue are not marital property. You have to argue that the date of separation is the cutoff point for marital assets and any attempt by her to gain from your frugal living would be unjust enrichment and nothing more then a transfer of wealth.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2010, 10:18 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 64
nick2009 is on a distinguished road
Default

Thank you HammerDad

you make me more confident on this issue.

one thing is a bit confusing. if ex emphasizes that we are still couple legally. (the judge said i have to solve all the issue then the divorce can be granted.). Then both sides of properties are marital property. On the other hand, I feel that, at the day of separate we practically divorce. but legally we are still couple.

Do not know how to get it clear.

Thank you

nick
july 26, 0201
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 07-26-2010, 10:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,723
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Ok, so she has a new house or car, that is now part of the family assets and you are entitled to 1/2 the value.....see how that flies.

Yes you are still legally married. However, you have a date of separation (so long as you didn't have sex with her at any time since separation) at which point the family assets were divided and you moved on.

When it is suggested that your assets are to be included, first you argue that, no you have a date of separation at which point two households were created and assets were divided. If that fails, see what she is bringing to the table and how much she likes that.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2010, 10:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 155
Cobourg is on a distinguished road
Default

Nick,
Check out the Family Law Act of Ontario.
Part 1, Section 4 (1) "Definitions"
Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3

“valuation date” means the earliest of the following dates:
1. The date the spouses separate and there is no reasonable prospect that they will resume cohabitation.
2. The date a divorce is granted.
3. The date the marriage is declared a nullity.
4. The date one of the spouses commences an application based on subsection 5 (3) (improvident depletion) that is subsequently granted.
5. The date before the date on which one of the spouses dies leaving the other spouse surviving. (“date d’évaluation”) R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3, s. 4 (1); 2006, c. 19, Sched. C, s. 1 (2); 2009, c. 11, s. 22 (1-3); 2009, c. 33, Sched. 2, s. 34 (1).

I think that should do it.
My Ex tried to get me to give her half of the increase in my pension from the day we separated to today.
He told her absolutely not going to happen.

Good Luck.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2010, 08:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 64
nick2009 is on a distinguished road
Default

thank you Cobourg,

the 'Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3' you refer it to me are wonderful. I should go through this ACT, so i would not raise some simple easy questions.

in my understanding, the family court should follow this Family Law Act without doubts.

I have already printed and read the Family Law Rule which is pretty good and give me a lot basic knowledge about how to handle the simple things.

Could you please introduce me something more about the family law issues, that may help me a lot go through my legal procedure and argument, like the " Family Law Act" you refer to me.

Thank you

Nick
july 27, 2010
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 07-27-2010, 10:42 PM
dadtotheend's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,644
dadtotheend will become famous soon enoughdadtotheend will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nick2009 View Post
Could you please introduce me something more about the family law issues, that may help me a lot go through my legal procedure and argument, like the " Family Law Act" you refer to me.

If you read the Rules of Procedure, then you have probably already googled Family Law Act and found Family Law Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3.

In Family Law there are only these issues to resolve:

1.Custody
2.Access
3.Child support
4.Spousal Support
5.Division of Family Property
6.Divorce

Everything you can possibly think of falls into one of those categories.

You seem to have a good start. Now go forth and read more Grasshopper.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 07-28-2010, 10:07 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 64
nick2009 is on a distinguished road
Default

Thank you very much dadththeend.

you gave me a lot help before, so thinks a lot

at the very beginning of the legal procedure, i hired a lawyer, however, after paying 5 grands, i had not even got first case conference and i did not know how much i would pay to finish this whole case. by the way the other party got a legal aid so ex felt free to keep playing this expensive game. i can not afford it based on my income.

so before the first case conference, i decided that i should and had to be self-represented. then i googled a lot stuff (somehow i missed the most importanat part -family law act). And i learn a lot from the simplest affidavit form6b to financial statement form 13 and conference brief. one of the important factor to help me to reach today is that you guys and this forum help me a lot.

i appreciated all your works for building this forum and helping others.

wish all of you the best

nick
july28, 2010
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
press release: Ontario's Family Responsibility office Peggy Parenting Issues 8 10-22-2010 11:20 AM
Ontario Justice Bruce Pugsley's recent comments in family court logicalvelocity Political Issues 7 09-22-2010 06:10 PM
Mother frustrated with family court Grover Divorce & Family Law 14 11-09-2009 01:30 PM
Infant Access and Breastfeeding quake Parenting Issues 31 02-01-2006 06:35 PM
Ontario law must apply in Family Arbitrations lammie Divorce & Family Law 0 11-20-2005 10:29 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:29 PM.