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 11-07-2017, 05:53 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,231
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Then, the non-fun over working parent should work less and spend more quality time with the children.

Work less, spend more time with the children. Equality is not limited to income or time. Courts will often tell you that the QUALITY of time is more important than the AMOUNT of time. This is something you need to truly understand.
It's nice to say that, but what are some good ways to avoid having the higher income being imputed back to you in response to this reduction of work hours?

I still believe having a sliding scale for support based on access, which would eliminate the huge jump point at 40/60, would reduce a lot of fighting over access. In addition to the default presumption of 50-50 unless and until the parent wanting majority access proves it to be in the child's best interests, of course.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:34 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Martins View Post
I know what a good lawyer is as I've been in a ton of legal situations in business, which doesn't translate well to family law. And yes good or great lawyers are concise and also see resolution IMO.
You are correct, it doesn't translate well at all. That is why you need to go vertical when choosing a family law lawyer. You need one that specializes in the very complex and often overly emotional situation of family law. It is not like any other area of law when being applied in my humble opinion.

That is why you don't want a lawyer that does it on the side. There are lots in Southern Ontario. You just need to go to a court house and watch a few motions and see who they are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Martins View Post
In everything I have done in my life I started as a novice.. now not saying I want to do this with my kids future, but I do enjoy learning and the experience. I do wish I knew some things early on as I wouldnt have settled for access agreement. That said, that was after 5 months of no access so I probably would have agreed to anything at that point to see my daughter.
But, you didn't have to wait that long. A good FAMILY LAW LAWYER could have put the resolution in motion much sooner and negated issues you are dealing with now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Martins View Post
I had one motion go very well for me, and one go very bad. The bad one though it wasn't the right forum to seek what I was seeking. I don't plan to do law full time but even if I was fully represented I would want to learn as much as I can.
Well, being unrepresented means you need to be as experienced and knowledgeable as a lawyer. It will take you years (5+) to get to a point you can properly represent yourself. But, the emotional factor of you being in the situation will cloud it. So even if you are smart as a whip and have a law degree... You more than likely won't be successful.

A person who is their own lawyer has a fool for a client. A lawyer who represents themselves has a client who is an even bigger fool.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Doctor Martins View Post
How is the best way to include jurisprudence in pleadings? Just site the case or provide it as an exhibit?
In a Factum or Book of Authorities depending on the situation. This is where a lawyer can help. You should never use case law in your pleadings.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 11-09-2017, 11:32 AM
Hand of Justice
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Shadows
Posts: 3,143
Links17 is on a distinguished road
Default

I think no child support when children are 50/50 i the next bridge that needs to be crossed in family law.

I can see a lot of people supporting it.

(In)directly, child support in these cases has the effect of continuing to allow the former spouse benefit from the other. It's totally contrary to the principle of divorce and as long as the the children have the minimums how a parent chooses to train, work, educate, spend on their children is their choice - getting divorced should also means I'm taking care of the kids alone half the time. When parents get divorced they take the responsibility to raise the children a lone half the time emotionally, with their time etc.... why it doesn't extend to financially is beyond me.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 11-09-2017, 11:35 AM
Hand of Justice
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: In the Shadows
Posts: 3,143
Links17 is on a distinguished road
Default

@ Doctor Martens - I self represented myself and I won at the court of appeal at least 3 times overturning incompetent crooked judges decisions.

It can be done.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 11-09-2017, 10:53 PM
trinton's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,677
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Links17 View Post
@ Doctor Martens - I self represented myself and I won at the court of appeal at least 3 times overturning incompetent crooked judges decisions.

It can be done.
it's not for everybody. I wouldn't be able to do it. I would if I had to but the first hand emotions would make it difficult for me to remain focused.

Self-represented parties are a nuisance to the courts. That's how judges view them.

That being said, judges can't pull decisions out of their ass. They must be supported by the facts and by our laws.

Last edited by trinton; 11-09-2017 at 10:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 11-10-2017, 09:29 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 84
Doctor Martins is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trinton View Post
it's not for everybody. I wouldn't be able to do it. I would if I had to but the first hand emotions would make it difficult for me to remain focused.

Self-represented parties are a nuisance to the courts. That's how judges view them.

That being said, judges can't pull decisions out of their ass. They must be supported by the facts and by our laws.
Regardless of if they like it or not the trend is going to go in that direction because of the increasing cost and how drown out the system is. Most people can't spare 100k to go to trail. It's kind of turning the way of small claims court.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 11-14-2017, 12:37 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 508
sahibjee is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Child Support is federally mandated under the FCSG. It is a law! There is little to debate.
I beg to differ here, Laws can and have been wrong, I am not saying CS should not be mandated, it absolutly should; but to say because it is the law therefore it is correct is a fallible argument.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
You can search my threads for the Stats Can study where that info is hidden.
I'll look for the study but Stats & studies can be skewed any which way - just take all the stats that had put Hillary in a winning position, the results were different. we do need to rely on the stats, but very cautiously.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 11-14-2017, 12:48 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 508
sahibjee is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
It isn't hard to make things fair. But, it is hard to make them fair and equal. You can get close but, family law is not about "perfection". It is about resolving matters for children ... Not parents.



That is why they use the offset method to calculate child support in shared residency matters when the access split is around the 60/40 mark.

"Parent A" income = 100,000
"Parent B" income = 35,000

1. Parent B majority access support from Parent A is: $880/month
2. Parent A majority access support from Parent B is: $303/month

Now, let's see how fair this is...

In 1. Parent A is paying 10.56% of income in CS. In 2. Parent B is paying 10.38%! Gasp the inequality!

Now, lets apply the offset to this where the parents share residency at minimum to a 60/40.

$880 - $303 = Parent A pays Parent B $577

((577*12)/100,000)*100 = 6.92% of 100,000

Feel free to make a spreadsheet and put incomes of all types and you will get an average that produces the same %s roughly. Well, for anything 149,000 or less. 150,000+ changes the rules and game.
again, the above argument isnt very solid, the percentage calculation method dictates that 10.xx% of income is sufficent for a 3 year old child, as well as a 15 year old child. A normal 3 year old child does not have many needs, all a three year old needs is clothing, food and shelter etc; whereas a 15 year old has substiantialy more needs.

The law needs to change to take into account the child's needs and what that couple would actually spend on the child in comparison with the current one-size-fits-all yard stick.

Also the suggestion that the child support is the "right of the child" is correct, however there is NO way to ensure that the money being given as the "child's right" is actually being spent on the child. the law here is incorrect in assuming that a honest parent who's submissions are truthful is equally honest to an untruthful parent who has primary care of the child (remember, you don't lose custody for lying or swearing false financial statements etc) and will have equal accountability and ethics and will ethically spend the "child's right" on the child.

Last edited by sahibjee; 11-14-2017 at 12:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
child support, joint custody, shared custody, shared parenting


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
Retroactive Child Support Nadia Financial Issues 3 06-02-2013 01:38 AM
Who is responsible for Child Support momof3 Divorce & Family Law 16 05-12-2011 12:20 PM
Joint Effort to Change Table Amounts of CS 350_dad Political Issues 43 12-18-2009 02:01 AM
Offer to Settle Child Support - Is This Fair? #1StepMom Divorce & Family Law 4 10-27-2009 08:50 AM
Will I be Paying Spousal Support? North of You Financial Issues 5 10-21-2009 04:05 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:10 AM.