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.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 09:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,971
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Theres a difference between asking for advice and feeding the trolls. You're already going through a war in the court room, don't wade into one here. There are plenty of people on here who think nothing of attacking you. Whether or not your ex is right is moot. He thinks he is right and until a judge says differently, neither one of you will agree on that fact. My advice to stop posting these types of questions was for your own mental health. Remember too that your lawyer is being paid by you to tell you what you want to hear. Your ex could have a finished house by the time this whole thing is over. He could have started this process knowing he would be in a new house that benefits the kids by the time he is in front of the judge. What you believe is happening and what is actually happening are two different things. Let the judge decide.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:13 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Not sure why PH and I are being called trolls. She asked for advice and we gave it. Just because it's not the advice she wants to hear doesn't mean we're trolls that need to be fed. Geez.
She said the new house would be bad for him in court. Our opinion was no.

She said all he wants is trial. Just reminded her that there would be no court or trial if she at least "tried" a shared parenting regime. He doesn't want trial....he's being forced in to one.

She said the judge disagreed with status quo and advised her to give him more access .. I just asked if she was following the judges advice.

Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-26-2017 at 10:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,809
Pursuinghappiness will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Theres a difference between asking for advice and feeding the trolls. You're already going through a war in the court room, don't wade into one here. There are plenty of people on here who think nothing of attacking you. Whether or not your ex is right is moot. He thinks he is right and until a judge says differently, neither one of you will agree on that fact. My advice to stop posting these types of questions was for your own mental health. Remember too that your lawyer is being paid by you to tell you what you want to hear. Your ex could have a finished house by the time this whole thing is over. He could have started this process knowing he would be in a new house that benefits the kids by the time he is in front of the judge. What you believe is happening and what is actually happening are two different things. Let the judge decide.
I'm not attacking this poster...nor am I a troll.

She asked if building a new home had something to do with a lack of stability on her ex's part and the answer is no. Lawyers tell clients a lot of bull...especially when they're trying to keep conflict going to pad their bill. People build new homes all the time...and punitive measures aren't taken with regard to child custody issues unless the home is being built an inconvenient distance away.

If this poster has a valid reason for denying fair access, she simply hasn't demonstrated it here. Obviously her ex has to prove there's been a material change...and that's his challenge....otherwise, there hasn't been a valid reason for denial presented to this forum.

What is disturbing on the poster's part is the amount of badmouthing of the parental skills of the father...often with the kids involvement. I know the poster is justifying this but the reality is that courts don't look well upon that stuff...its just a fact. I don't think the poster sees her behavior as intrusive but observers do.

When people give you perspective on how they view what you're posting...you can take it or leave it. But because it differs from what the poster wants to hear...it doesn't make the advice attack-like in nature.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:48 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,971
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Im not saying you are trolls. My comments were directly to the poster and how she continues to start these threads and they just go down the path of posters being honest and her not liking what anyone has to say. I like hearing what others have to say but threads started by this poster become battles over who is right or wrong. I completely agree that her "fight" is completely based on both parties being unreasonable on what they feel is best for the children. The problem within this forum is that not a lot of people share her view and all it does is open the box of argument between all of us. We become trolls because she continues to battle against us.

As I said in another one of her threads, the majority of us disagree so stop getting into a circular argument with no end. Posting a new thread with a new topic on how she doesn't agree with her ex's actions just perpetuates that situation.

I agree with you guys, moving during litigation isn't an issue. He's doing what he can to create an ideal situation for the kids. He answers to the judge. Not Ange and definitely not a bunch of strangers on a forum.

I am hoping we can stop the ridiculous pages and pages of arguments before they start. Stop posting opinions as a "question" which just leads to disagreement.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:58 AM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,922
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

"The children should have maximum contact with both parents if it is consistent with their best interests". See: Gordon v. Goertz 1996 CanLII 191 (SCC), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27.

"The status quo will be maintained absent compelling reasons demonstrating the necessity to change to meet the child’s best interest": Perchaluk v. Perchaluk, 2012 ONCJ 525 (CanLII), para 29.

"To disturb the status quo, there must be compelling evidence to show the welfare of the child would be in danger in maintaining the status quo, namely the evidence must clearly and unequivocally establish that the status quo is not in the child’s best interests": Miranda v. Miranda, 2013 ONSC 4704 (CanLII), para 26.

In the end, I think this will be the central focus of litigation/trial.

Poster's question w.r.t. moving has been asked and answered. Time to end the thread perhaps?
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 11:01 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,809
Pursuinghappiness will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Im not saying you are trolls. My comments were directly to the poster and how she continues to start these threads and they just go down the path of posters being honest and her not liking what anyone has to say. I like hearing what others have to say but threads started by this poster become battles over who is right or wrong. I completely agree that her "fight" is completely based on both parties being unreasonable on what they feel is best for the children. The problem within this forum is that not a lot of people share her view and all it does is open the box of argument between all of us. We become trolls because she continues to battle against us.

As I said in another one of her threads, the majority of us disagree so stop getting into a circular argument with no end. Posting a new thread with a new topic on how she doesn't agree with her ex's actions just perpetuates that situation.

I agree with you guys, moving during litigation isn't an issue. He's doing what he can to create an ideal situation for the kids. He answers to the judge. Not Ange and definitely not a bunch of strangers on a forum.

I am hoping we can stop the ridiculous pages and pages of arguments before they start. Stop posting opinions as a "question" which just leads to disagreement.
Gotcha...fair enough.

You just have to wonder if though if enough similar observations...posted over and over by different people...would start to get through to a vexatious litigant or whether they'll just keep "advice-shopping." (Which I classify as posting similar nonsense ad nauseum to find any one person that will validate with your unreasonable position...while ignoring the multitudes that don't.)
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 11:06 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,809
Pursuinghappiness will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
"The children should have maximum contact with both parents if it is consistent with their best interests". See: Gordon v. Goertz 1996 CanLII 191 (SCC), [1996] 2 S.C.R. 27.

"The status quo will be maintained absent compelling reasons demonstrating the necessity to change to meet the child’s best interest": Perchaluk v. Perchaluk, 2012 ONCJ 525 (CanLII), para 29.

"To disturb the status quo, there must be compelling evidence to show the welfare of the child would be in danger in maintaining the status quo, namely the evidence must clearly and unequivocally establish that the status quo is not in the child’s best interests": Miranda v. Miranda, 2013 ONSC 4704 (CanLII), para 26.

In the end, I think this will be the central focus of litigation/trial.

Poster's question w.r.t. moving has been asked and answered. Time to end the thread perhaps?
There's no doubt that the father will have to show a material change to be successful at trial. However, that wasn't the original question in this post.

All I see from the plethora of offerings from this poster is a father...who wasn't involved enough in the past...trying to fix his past mistakes and see his kids more. Personally, I hope for the children's sake he's successful.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 11:49 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,971
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
Gotcha...fair enough.

You just have to wonder if though if enough similar observations...posted over and over by different people...would start to get through to a vexatious litigant or whether they'll just keep "advice-shopping." (Which I classify as posting similar nonsense ad nauseum to find any one person that will validate with your unreasonable position...while ignoring the multitudes that don't.)


What are those sayings? Swallowing poison and hoping the other person dies and continuing the same action hoping for a different result? I think about those a lot with people in family law.

We are never going to change the views we have about maximum contact. Posting the same question "do you think he will win based on x" is not going to get a different answer. You're in litigation, the only person who can decide is a judge.

I say this to anyone posting, if you want someone to tell you what you want to hear, phone a friend or pay your lawyer. If you want the truth, post here but with the caveat that you may not like the truth you're given.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:10 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,922
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

I suspect that this will be more about the access schedule than custody. I am guessing the kids are around 10 years old or older and perhaps more independent but not yet at an age where they can be left at home alone or take public transportation? Mother works M - F and father has shift work. Both have had current employers for a long time? Kids have a set schedule (school, extracurricular activities). Mother has indicated in many posts that she has no problem with father spending more time with the children. So.... it stands to reason that the father should be trying to make arrangements with his current employer to alter work hours. I would think that a judge would ask if father has tried to change his work schedule.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:56 PM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,518
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Darn .. double post. Sorry

Last edited by LovingFather32; 04-26-2017 at 01:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Joint Custody; moving, notice of move, oppsed move, etc Stacy'sMom Divorce & Family Law 21 09-03-2014 11:35 PM
Moving closer to the NCP... Should I? stressedmama Parenting Issues 3 07-30-2012 01:38 PM
Is Moving costs section 7? cashcow4ex Financial Issues 33 03-09-2012 09:43 AM
Ex moving kids please help Desperate Dad Divorce & Family Law 8 07-24-2009 10:03 PM
Urgent need of HELP - Moving Issues CatvsLion Parenting Issues 4 10-20-2005 11:08 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:46 AM.