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.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 12:20 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 992
representingself is on a distinguished road
Default

Seems to me that g2bk either didn't realize or didn't care about her new husbands responsibility to his previous children, until it affected her personal finances and their "second family".

You knew he had children, and you should have considered what that meant before you decided to marry him.

The law applies to everyone.... if you have the kids less than 40% of the time, the CS guidelines determine the amount due. Extraordinary expenses are shared, proportionate to income. The CP (or support reciepient) qualifies for the income tax benefits, CCTB etc., and most NCP's pay their access costs.

Your husbands ex did not write these laws..so quit trying to make yourself a martyr. You can't cry foul, due to poor planning on your part.... Well you can but you are being unreasonable.

Your husband decided to allow the move, and you made the decision to tie the knot... No one forced you to marry him.

Your resentment of his ex wife and his children may eventually drive a wedge between the two of you... and I am sure that if the shoe was on the other foot, and you become an ex wife, you wouldn't be so opposed to child support.

Just my 2 cents....
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 12:30 AM
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 representingself View Post
Seems to me that g2bk either didn't realize or didn't care about her new husbands responsibility to his previous children, until it affected her personal finances and their "second family".

You knew he had children, and you should have considered what that meant before you decided to marry him.

The law applies to everyone.... if you have the kids less than 40% of the time, the CS guidelines determine the amount due. Extraordinary expenses are shared, proportionate to income. The CP (or support reciepient) qualifies for the income tax benefits, CCTB etc., and most NCP's pay their access costs.

Your husbands ex did not write these laws..so quit trying to make yourself a martyr. You can't cry foul, due to poor planning on your part.... Well you can but you are being unreasonable.

Your husband decided to allow the move, and you made the decision to tie the knot... No one forced you to marry him.

Your resentment of his ex wife and his children may eventually drive a wedge between the two of you... and I am sure that if the shoe was on the other foot, and you become an ex wife, you wouldn't be so opposed to child support.

Just my 2 cents....
I'll say..
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 01:59 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default

blinkandgo - can you read?! "$17640 per year is a huge difference between the $250 - $300 you're now claiming it costs. And I'm the one who needs to learn math?"

it costs about 1500 per trip. 2 trips a year, are you following?
We also had to pay for minors on flights, at 75$/way/trip/kid. Do you still follow?

1500+1500+300+300= 3600.

now, if you divide 3600 by 12 (there are 12 months in a year) you get $300/month, which is what I mentioned in my other post.

you know, instead of trying to prove I am lying, just admit you live off your ex-husband and kids, and you don't like anyone that challenges this.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 02:12 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default

Canada is a joke as far as giving NCP and rights, and you fools support this system just because it works for you now.

You do realize there are other alternatives that take into consideration the expenses of BOTH parents, right?

You people are so afraid of losing anything you have, you attack anyone that challenges this system. Sorry for you, but some change is coming. I hope that fact that your ex will get a fairer shake doesn't bother you too much.

Change like that in the Netherlands:

"All non-resident parents in the Netherlands must support their children. Where possible, parents are encouraged to arrive at voluntary arrangements for child support. If an agreement cannot be arranged, a child support liability can be decided upon by the District Court, using the TREMA tables. These tables contain complex formulae for the assessment of maintenance, and take into account the following factors:

1.assessable income, which is calculated by deducting amounts for living expenses (based on social assistance rates) from gross income;
2.allowance is made for the non-resident parent's costs of setting up a new home and the costs of contact with the children;
3.where the non-resident parent has a second family, assessable income is reduced by around 50 per cent, in recognition of the belief that people should be free to form new relationships;
4.whether the resident parent has entered into a new relationship, the decision about liability for maintenance between a step-parent and a non-resident parent is based on an assessment of the relationship between the child and the non-resident parent. Deliberations canvass issues such as whose surname the child bears and how frequently contact occurs. "
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 02:31 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 324
got2bkid is on a distinguished road
Default

Ahhh representingself you just can't stay out of things can you? You said "Your resentment of his ex wife and his children may eventually drive a wedge between the two of you... and I am sure that if the shoe was on the other foot, and you become an ex wife, you wouldn't be so opposed to child support"

Sorry, I don't believe in child support. I believe that the children are both mine and my husbands equally. I would never interfere with their relationship, or think I, just because I am a women, should have supreme control over the kids, and allow him "visits" with his children.

I 100% believe in shared parenting and would do whatever it takes to make it work. I would never take money in a shared parenting situation, we are both capable adults, able to support ourselves and our children equally.

I fundanmentally disagree with how the system treats fathers (disposable as dads, yet very useful as wallets). I think it is disgusting that so many women treat men as if fatherhood is something that they can do every 2nd weekend (if lucky).

I know, I know, all your ex-husbands were horrible and abused you, so please spare me the details about why YOU had to take the kids (and his money).

Fundamentally, what i really beleive, is our kids are so precious and valuable, that I actually think if any money changes hands, it should be the person who gets custody of the kids, paying the other for the priviledge of raising them.

But I did enter the relationship knowing CS was part of it, and if you ever read my posts, I do say that over and over, and I accept this and it is a non-issue for me.

What I do not accept are the tax laws around CS, in many cases the amounts (too high, becomes spousal support) and the fact that second families are dismissed. I've heard that some of these laws may be ammended soon. I sure hope so.

So you people can keep on trying to "shame" me, by saying I don't care about my step-kids or whatever, but you don't know a thing about me.

The only thing you know for sure is I am fully aware that the Guidelines are unfair to NCP's, and I'll keep on writing about it and hopefully opening some people eyes. NCP's (mostly fathers) and their kids are the ones that these guidelines hurt, so what CP's say is really of very little value to me.
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 07:44 AM
NBDad's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New Brunswick
Posts: 2,734
NBDad is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
1.assessable income, which is calculated by deducting amounts for living expenses (based on social assistance rates) from gross income;
2.allowance is made for the non-resident parent's costs of setting up a new home and the costs of contact with the children;
3.where the non-resident parent has a second family, assessable income is reduced by around 50 per cent, in recognition of the belief that people should be free to form new relationships;
4.whether the resident parent has entered into a new relationship, the decision about liability for maintenance between a step-parent and a non-resident parent is based on an assessment of the relationship between the child and the non-resident parent. Deliberations canvass issues such as whose surname the child bears and how frequently contact occurs. "
1. Canadian tables calculate based on your line 150 income amounts, which is the standard upon which ALL government calculations are performed. (including CCTB/UCCB.

2. Canadian laws also have allowances for this IF you ask for them. By the sound of your situation your hubby either ALLOWED the move to occur and did not challenge it, or did not ask for a reduction in CS due to the increase in costs due to her moving. IF he had of challenged things, chances are the kids would not have been permitted to move OR his CS amounts would have been reduced accordingly to allow for the increased costs of his access.

3.Canadian Law does not do this, as the family law takes the stance that support is the right of the child. In the event that a new relationship is formed, the children still retain the right of support. Personally I agree with you that this is not the way things should be done. I would be more inclined to argue about taking the total amount of children, and using that table amount and using THAT to recalculate support based on the number of children the NCP is responsible for. Keep in mind this works both ways, so if the CP has more children, THEIR proportional share would decrease, which opens up the whole ball of wax about the NCP feeling they are supporting another's child. (think mat leave..same argument.)

Income Assistance amounts are a joke....if you can support a household of 5 (1 adult and 4 children) off $900/month...then speak up now.

4. Again, Canadian law makes allowances for this. It sounds very similar to undue hardship.
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 08:42 AM
blinkandimgone's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lucknow
Posts: 5,175
blinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura aboutblinkandimgone has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
blinkandgo - can you read?! "$17640 per year is a huge difference between the $250 - $300 you're now claiming it costs. And I'm the one who needs to learn math?"

it costs about 1500 per trip. 2 trips a year, are you following?
We also had to pay for minors on flights, at 75$/way/trip/kid. Do you still follow?

1500+1500+300+300= 3600.

now, if you divide 3600 by 12 (there are 12 months in a year) you get $300/month, which is what I mentioned in my other post.

you know, instead of trying to prove I am lying, just admit you live off your ex-husband and kids, and you don't like anyone that challenges this.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can read very well. Just like when I read YOUR first post in this thread where you claim your husband is spending $1470/month on airfare.

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post

We pay for the airfare accross the country (-1470/month)
Multiply that by 12 and you get $$17640. Changed things so many times you can't remember what you posted where?

You're one of those people that assumes everyone who disagrees with you MUST be just like the person you despise. I disagree with you therefore I must live off my husband and kids? I work full time to support my kids, don't get a cent in CS or SS but I also don't spend all my time whining about it on a message board if I'm not going to do anything about it.

Quote:
I 100% believe in shared parenting and would do whatever it takes to make it work. I would never take money in a shared parenting situation, we are both capable adults, able to support ourselves and our children equally.
It's a shame your husband doesn't agree with you or he'd have done something to stop her from moving the kids away.

Quote:
I fundanmentally disagree with how the system treats fathers (disposable as dads, yet very useful as wallets). I think it is disgusting that so many women treat men as if fatherhood is something that they can do every 2nd weekend (if lucky).
Parents, not men, not women - parents. Custodial Parents can be men just as well as they can be women.

Quote:
Fundamentally, what i really beleive, is our kids are so precious and valuable, that I actually think if any money changes hands, it should be the person who gets custody of the kids, paying the other for the priviledge of raising them.
Gosh, then you could really control who you'd allow to spend time with them couldn't you?

Quote:
But I did enter the relationship knowing CS was part of it, and if you ever read my posts, I do say that over and over, and I accept this and it is a non-issue for me.
I read a bunch of your posts. You say over and over again how disgusted you are that your husband has to pay for HER children which takes money away from yours. Bitterness seethes from every post you make despite the fact that your situation is that of your choosing, you choose to blame the ex-wife for all your issues.
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 09:29 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ontario
Posts: 992
representingself is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
Ahhh representingself you just can't stay out of things can you?
hahaha... what would be the point in that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
Sorry, I don't believe in child support.
How nice for you... Considering the fact that you are standing on the "paying" side of the fence, I am not suprised.

You try and come off as a advocate for fathers...when the truth is you are just bitter about the money. I find it amusing that you can spend hours on an internet forum, bashing your husbands ex.... without him.

They are his kids, and his financial obligation... why isn't he on here stating his case and looking for help?

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
I 100% believe in shared parenting and would do whatever it takes to make it work.
Everything you could... including allowing the children to live on the other side of the country, and throwing a fit because they need orthodontics, and then complaining endlessly about the costs of spending time with them...

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
Fundamentally, what i really beleive, is our kids are so precious and valuable, that I actually think if any money changes hands, it should be the person who gets custody of the kids, paying the other for the priviledge of raising them.
BAHAHAHA..... your true intelligence has been demonstrated with this comment... nuff said on that!

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
But I did enter the relationship knowing CS was part of it, and if you ever read my posts, I do say that over and over, and I accept this and it is a non-issue for me.
Ummmm ok.... sure

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
What I do not accept are the tax laws around CS, in many cases the amounts (too high, becomes spousal support) and the fact that second families are dismissed. I've heard that some of these laws may be ammended soon. I sure hope so.
Do you not claim your children on your taxes?? Receive CCTB when they were little? Why demonize CP's over something they have no power over? Should she refuse to claim the children and accept benefits just to appease you???

Come to think of it.... YOU can't claim HIS children at all... So again, shouldn't it be HIM on here... "not accepting" the tax laws? Ahhh no... it's just you again... and your still p*ssed because YOU are losing out on some of HIS money...

You are whining about him paying CS for HIS children, because it takes away from YOUR children... and you are completely contradicting yourself!!

By helping support YOUR children, isn't he in essence, paying CS within his own family unit? They aren't HIS kids... they are his STEP-KIDS.

If you were being honest in your ramblings.. then his financial situation would have no bearing on his step-children at all, because those kids are YOURS and YOUR EX's... and according to you, you are an adult who is capable of caring for your children on your own....without financial assistance.... right?

Maybe if you had asked your ex for CS to help you raise your kids, you wouldn't be so financially burdened and forced to allow your new husband to pay for YOUR kids.

If you don't want his CS payments and the like to affect your kids, maybe you should get off your "capable" azz and get yourself a second job.
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 09:52 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 3,717
HammerDad will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by got2bkid View Post
Sorry, I don't believe in child support
Unfortunately for you the law does, as it is in the best interests of the child.

Quote:
I 100% believe in shared parenting and would do whatever it takes to make it work.
So do most others here, including myself and a few you are arguing with.

Quote:
I fundanmentally disagree with how the system treats fathers (disposable as dads, yet very useful as wallets). I think it is disgusting that so many women treat men as if fatherhood is something that they can do every 2nd weekend (if lucky).
So do I, being an NCP dad. The difference is I don't complain on a message board, I take my ex to court or mediation to improve my situation. See, what you need to do is encourage your spouse to take his ex to mediation and failing that court, to have either a) his ex pay for the cost of access as she is the one who decided to move or b) have his CS reduced by an amount equal to the cost of access.

But this was something he really should've done at the time when she proposed to move, as now he's got many years of status quo to fight.

Quote:
I actually think if any money changes hands, it should be the person who gets custody of the kids, paying the other for the priviledge of raising them.
So the parent who will have significantly the largest bill should pay the NCP to raise them???? And this is in the best interests of the children how???

Unfortunately that argument doesn't pass the smell test because the you fail to understand that everything is determined by what is in the best interests of the children, not their parents or their parents new families.


Quote:
What I do not accept are the tax laws around CS, in many cases the amounts (too high, becomes spousal support) and the fact that second families are dismissed. I've heard that some of these laws may be ammended soon. I sure hope so.
They are what they are. Yes, there is a portion of c/s that has been found to be a wealth transfer, but it is only a small portion. The current c/s system was set up to help provide the children with a similar cost of living had both parents not split up. This does seem a little nuts, as the kids lives will change no matter what due to their parents breakup.

Also, when you determined that you only spend $600 a month for the kids and that you believe that is all the ex should be getting, did you also include the costs associated with a) having a residence that has enough bedrooms for the children b) cost of utilities like heat, hydro, gas, water etc etc. c) clothing the kids d) cost of school supplies and the various other matters that are associated with the day to day living, all of which are necessities for the children and in the best interests of the children??? No, it is pretty obvious you only took into consideration food, a few outfits and entertainment.

And no, from what I've read/heard etc. the guidelines aren't going anywhere, and if anything they will be increased again in a few years. Although there has been a slight shift towards share parenting.
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 08-19-2010, 10:46 AM
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

got2bkid you don't seem to understand that the the table amounts for CS do contemplate the fact that NCP have costs too. Whether you agree with it or not, a lot of research went into the formulation of the table amounts and IMO it's naive to conclude that the tables were developed without any consideration of the financial burden on NCP while the children are with them.

The shortsightedness of your claim is remarkable.

And then you get all pissy at people who disagree with you.

Going out on a limb here, but you aren't the only step mom who has been here and made that argument. Coincidentally, those other step moms also had kids of their own and they felt that their own kids' well being was compromised by having to support that their husband's evil ex while her own kids are being towed around behind the car and are sleeping in tents.

Sounds like your maternal instincts to protect your own kids are causing you to keep on bitching about it notwithstanding that most posters here disagree with you.
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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 AM.