Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Financial Issues

Financial Issues This forum is for discussing any of the financial issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 12-13-2012, 10:29 PM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,245
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FB_ View Post
Based on what I have read I have no chance of proving living separate and apart (to the CRA) All bills are shared. Vehicles are still linked, Insurance still together / Joint expense account etc. So basically I will lose badly it sounds. Her lawyer has refused to deal with any one item on it's own and wants it all packaged as stated above.

So I guess I will have to keep track of everything and balance it in the end. HAHA Good luck to me.
Dude! Get those separated as best you can RIGHT NOW. Not only are they making it impossible for you to prove your separation to CRA, it's also dangerous! Your ex could have an accident and mess up your insurance, she could clean out your bank account, etc etc etc. Have you read nothing on this site about The List yet??

Close joint accounts, break apart that insurance (cancel everything down and get a new insurance company if you have to!), unlink those vehicles, whatever it takes.

Because you are not going to be able to balance those with your ex in the end. At best, you're going to help her prove she needs spousal support!
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 12-14-2012, 12:03 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rioe View Post
Dude! Get those separated as best you can RIGHT NOW. Not only are they making it impossible for you to prove your separation to CRA, it's also dangerous! Your ex could have an accident and mess up your insurance, she could clean out your bank account, etc etc etc. Have you read nothing on this site about The List yet??

Close joint accounts, break apart that insurance (cancel everything down and get a new insurance company if you have to!), unlink those vehicles, whatever it takes.

Because you are not going to be able to balance those with your ex in the end. At best, you're going to help her prove she needs spousal support!
My lawyer told me not to get my name taken off her vehicle until the joint loan is paid off. She refuses to pay it off. He said if I took my name off her car but not the loan I could be stuck with the loan and no asset. He also didn't recommend splitting the insurance until my name is off the vehicle he wanted to be sure I was legally covered for liability since I am personally liable for this vehicle still.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 12-31-2012, 10:50 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 78
katc is on a distinguished road
Default

Great - we live together in the same home, but just filled out the Marital Status Change - I'm told that is the first step to being "separated".

Guess not.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 12-31-2012, 12:43 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,241
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by katc View Post
Great - we live together in the same home, but just filled out the Marital Status Change - I'm told that is the first step to being "separated".

Guess not.
the first step to being separated is to have the conversation with the ex and say its done. Then separate all bills, joint bank accounts etc, anything that links you together. You have bills together, you will have a fight with CRA. I know I did. Once the papers were signed that I was buying him out of the house, I had no issues, before that, they wouldnt accept it.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 12-31-2012, 12:57 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,448
Mess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the rough
Default

Check out: Perron v. The Queen, 2010 TCC 547 (CanLII)
This case revolved around the receipt of the CCTC, but the issue is the same as yours. The couple were separated in every way, except were still living under the same roof. The court found that the CRA had to recognise them as being separated.

Quote:
[13] To determine whether the appellant was living separate and apart from Mr. Jacob even though she was living under the same roof as him, we need to refer to the factors stated by Kurisko J. in Molodowich v. Penttinen reflex, (1980), 17 R.F.L. (2d) 376 (Ont. Dist. Ct.), which were approved by the Supreme Court of Canada in M v. H,1999 CanLII 686 (SCC), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 3 (S.C.C.) and cited by this Court in, inter alia, Milot v. R., 1995 CarswellNat 1987, reflex, [1996] 1 C.T.C. 2247 (T.C.C.) at page 2250 and Aukstinaitis v. Canada, 2008 TCC 104 (CanLII), [2008] T.C.J. No. 64, 2008 TCC 104. See also Lavoie v. R. (2000), 2001 D.T.C. 5083 (Fr.) (F.C.A.) which followedMilot. The relevant points to be considered are as follows:

1. Shelter

(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?
(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?
(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available ac­commodation?

2. Sexual and personal conduct

(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?
(b) Did they maintain an at­titude of fidelity to each other?
(c) What were their feelings toward each other?
(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?
(e) Did they eat their meals together?
(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?
(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special oc­casions?

3. Services

What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:
(a) preparation of meals;
(b) washing and mending clothes;
(c) shopping;
(d) household maintenance; and
(e) any other domestic serv­ices?

4. Social

(a) Did they participate to­gether or separately in neighbourhood and community activities?
(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them toward members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?

5. Societal

What was the attitude and conduct of the community to­ward each of them and as a couple?

6. Support (economic)

(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the pro­vision of or contribution toward the necessities of life (food, clothing, shel­ter, recreation, etc.)?
(b) What were the arrange­ments concerning the ac­quisition and ownership of property?
(c) Was there any special fi­nancial arrangement be­tween them which both agreed would be determi­nant of their overall rela­tionship?

7. Children

What was the attitude and conduct of the parties con­cerning the children?

[14] If we apply these factors to the appellant’s particular facts, we can draw the following conclusions:

1. Shelter

There is no doubt that the appellant and Yves Jacob lived under the same roof, along with the appellant’s daughter, A.R. The appellant testified that they each had their own bed and their own bedroom.

The courts have acknowledged that the mere fact of living under the same roof is not sufficient to conclude that two people are common-law partners. In Kelner v. Canada, [1995] T.C.J. No. 1130, Judge Bowman (as he then was) in fact stated:

16 I start from the premise that it is possible for spouses, as a matter of law, to live separate and apart even though they are under the same roof.

Rip J. (then Associate Chief Justice) made the following comment in Aukstinaitis, supra:

23 The fact that the Appellant lived with Mr. Mongeon under the same roof is not fatal to her case. It is actually only one of the factors to take into account.

2. Sexual and personal conduct

The appellant testified that she had not had sexual relations with Mr. Jacob after June 19, 2006. She described their relationship as brother and sister. She acknowledged that she had occasionally eaten at the same time as him and had lent him her car when he needed it. She stated that Mr. Jacob never organized birthday parties for her or gave her Christmas or New Year’s presents.

To reiterate what Rip J. said in Aukstinaitis, supra, it seems that the contacts and exchanges between the appellant and Mr. Jacob were minimal and limited to what one would expect of anyone who has to live with another person, share certain spaces with that person, and try to live in a civilized manner.

There is nothing that suggests to me that this second factor damages the appellant’s position.

3. Services

On this point, only household maintenance tasks seem to have been shared. Mr. Jacob looked after the lawn mowing and the snow shovelling in winter. The appellant testified that she did not prepare Mr. Jacob’s meals and did not wash or mend his clothes.

As Rip J found in Aukstinaitis, supra, this factor does not seem to me to be decisive in determining whether the appellant was living separate and apart from her former common-law partner. It seems to me to be entirely reasonable for household maintenance tasks to be shared, given that the residence was co‑owned by the appellant and her former common-law spouse.

4. Social and
5. Societal

The appellant testified that she was not involved in any social activities with Mr. Jacob and he no longer visited her family. The testimony of the appellant’s uncle confirmed that in the eyes of the family, the appellant and Mr. Jacob were living separate and apart and were no longer a couple.

These factors certainly weigh against a finding that there was a common-law partner relationship.

6. Support (economic)

The evidence is that expenses relating to the house were shared equally, except for electricity, for which the appellant paid two thirds, given that her daughter also lived in the house. A joint bank account was used to pay for expenses relating to the house, such as the hypothec, property and school taxes and insurance.

In her testimony, the appellant stated that she also had a personal bank account into which she deposited the support paid by her daughter’s father and which she used to pay for expenses relating to her daughter (food, clothing, sports activities and school supplies).

It seems clear to me that Mr. Jacob contributed financially to the cohabitation with the appellant. The shared expenses related more to expenses relating to the house than to the personal expenses of the appellant and her daughter. In the circumstances, I do not believe that the sharing of expenses relating to the house can serve to show that there was a common-law partner relationship.

7. Children

In her Notice of Appeal, the appellant stated that Mr. Jacob had been the legal tutor of her daughter until June 19, 2006, but that after that date Mr. Jacob no longer had that moral responsibility. That question was not addressed at the hearing, but it would not be unreasonable to think that Mr. Jacob considered the appellant’s daughter to be his own daughter, given the length of the conjugal relationship with the appellant.

However, I do not believe that this criterion can have any influence on the nature of the relationship between the appellant and Mr. Jacob after June 19, 2006
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 12-31-2012, 01:05 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Check out: Perron v. The Queen, 2010 TCC 547 (CanLII)
This case revolved around the receipt of the CCTC, but the issue is the same as yours. The couple were separated in every way, except were still living under the same roof. The court found that the CRA had to recognise them as being separated.
Nice find.

The question is would the benefit outweigh the cost and time of fighting the CRA?
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 12-31-2012, 01:25 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,448
Mess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the rough
Default

Well, at this point if one had a similar case, the CRA would lose again and costs would be paid.

If it were me - and my ex and have had issues with proving our custody levels with shared custody - I would follow the criteria the judge gave point by point, collecting as much evidence and letters as I could. I would then contact the CRA helpline, ask what they needed.

Of course the first tier phone help will say that you can't live under the same roof. I would then start citing the court cases (the one I linked and the ones cited by that judge) and state the criteria ordered by the judge in tax court. I would then ask what the CRA policy is regarding obeying such court orders, and ask for their name so that I could quote them as an information source.

I am sure we would get passed on to a supervisor at that point.

The point to this process is not just to annoy the CRA staff. It is to give them the information of the court order so that they cannot dismiss your request out of hand, to get a clear answer about what specific information they require to accept the claim, and to get a name of someone who is willing to take responsibility for that answer.

Ideally, get a senior staff to write a letter outlining the required information.

It is jumping through hoops, but it should actually take little more time than I just spent typing this. Get verified written notice of the required documentation so that if and when you are challenged, you can respond and shut down the challenge in one go; the documentation, the written response from CRA, and the list of court decisions supporting your claim.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2013, 12:33 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

I went online last March and updated my marital status. I never heard anything from them. I just logged back in and it says "married" still. I went to change it again and it gave me an error. They probably ignored my change last march and set it back to "Married"

Quote:
Error * CMM-33 You cannot update your marital status using this service unless you have filed a current-year T1 return. You can make your change or update in writing or in person at your tax service office or tax centre."
Looks like I will have to do it on my taxes this year.
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 01-07-2013, 01:02 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Check out: Perron v. The Queen, 2010 TCC 547 (CanLII)
This case revolved around the receipt of the CCTC, but the issue is the same as yours. The couple were separated in every way, except were still living under the same roof. The court found that the CRA had to recognise them as being separated.
I just read the decision again and not sure it would work.

The case was regarding a "common-law" relationship and one where the other person was NOT the father of the child.

I'm still doing some reading.
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 01-10-2013, 05:44 PM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

I called our previous babysitter and asked her to split our tax receipt according to how we split the expense. She said she would.

I think I'm willing to take the CRA to task on this.


1. Shelter:

(a) Did the parties live under the same roof?

Yes
(b) What were the sleeping arrangements?
stbx upstair myself downstairs. Locks on both doors
(c) Did anyone else occupy or share the available accommodation?
Children


2. Sexual and personal behaviour:

(a) Did the parties have sexual relations? If not, why not?
No, divorce application has been submitted
(b) Did they maintain an attitude of fidelity to each other?
No, confirmed by affair and stbx new relationship...Not that it would matter
(c) What were their feelings toward each other?
Talk as little as possible "HATE"
(d) Did they communicate on a personal level?
No
(e) Did they eat their meals together?
only on a couple of occasions such as our kids birthdays
(f) What, if anything, did they do to assist each other with problems or during illness?
Nothing other than watching the children
(g) Did they buy gifts for each other on special occasions?
No

3. Services:
What was the conduct and habit of the parties in relation to:

(a) Preparation of meals,
Meals were prepared for the kids leftovers were occasionally eaten by other party
(b) Washing and mending clothes,
Only the washing/mending of children's clothes were shared
(c) Shopping,
Groceries/meals were alternated every week for the "kids" no personal items were ever shopped for or shared. Although we didn't buy two ketchup's etc.
(d) Household maintenance,
We each cleaned based on who's time it was with the kids. Garbage, yard work was alternated
(e) Any other domestic services?
no

4. Social:

(a) Did they participate together or separately in neighborhood and community activities?
Only children events and extra curricular activities. Separate vacations and social events
(b) What was the relationship and conduct of each of them towards members of their respective families and how did such families behave towards the parties?
All communication has ceased except for my stbx and my mother as she frequently watches the children at my ex's request. Her family lives 700km away

5. Societal:
What was the attitude and conduct of the community towards each of them and as a couple?
This is a much harder question. There was certainly a divide of friends etc. I have no idea what others think. Some neighbors might think we are still together as we didn't put a sign on our front lawn. They must wonder who the "other" guy constantly picking and dropping off stbx is.

6. Support (Economic):

(a) What were the financial arrangements between the parties regarding the provision of or contribution towards the necessaries of life (food, clothing, shelter, recreation, etc.)?
Joint account for all household/children and expenses were split proportional to income. Personal accounts for personal expenses
(b) What were the arrangements concerning the acquisition and ownership of property?
It's under dispute with the court, I changed my will/poa and life insurance policies to go to the kids in trust instead of stbx. Not sure if she has done the same
(c) Was there any special financial arrangement between them which both agreed would be determinant of their overall relationship?
I don't get what this question asks

7. Children:
What was the attitude and conduct of the parties concerning children?
shared 50/50. Kids were free to go where they wanted when they wanted in the house
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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Claiming Legal Fees with Revenue Canada Looking4Answers Financial Issues 1 12-29-2011 10:36 AM
changing marital status with revenue canada standing on the sidelines General Chat 13 08-12-2011 12:49 PM
Revenue Canada Max22258 Common Law Issues 9 06-29-2010 09:25 PM
Direction to Revenue Canada Technodaddy Financial Issues 2 12-16-2009 09:14 AM
Revenue Canada wants proof luckyduck Divorce & Family Law 12 09-18-2008 02:00 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:01 AM.