Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce Support

Divorce Support This forum is for discussing the emotional aspects of divorce: stress, anger, betrayal of trust and more.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:14 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,203
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
This is the EXACT wording. I can't help their lack of grammar. lol

Yep, very vague. But any future judge would get the gist (I would think), that she is to find work. There's another section that states that ex is to enroll D5 in a daycare if she finds childcare is hindering her ability to seek employment . This of course was before D5 began school.

The wording of the order is word for word what I wrote above though. I know .. a sloppy, quick legal aid SC type paragraph that's unenforceable I'm sure. But again, I'm sure any future judge would wonder why she didn't get a job. The wording clearly states that IMO. Kid's in school full days. Judges are pretty smart right?
while I agree with you it does state that she is suppose to find work but doesn't say when. She can use the excuse she was waiting till the child was in mandatory school, or something. No teeth in it. I think you maybe rushing trying to get stuff changed. I agree that she should find work, but will a judge agree that it has to be now? She may say that she wants to go to school to update her credentials or to be able to use her job skill in Ontario.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:16 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Incorrect. Offset is being paid if you truly understand how it works.

Parent A full table amount $1000.
Parent B full table amount $0.0.

Subtract lowest from highest.

Parent A 1000 - Parent B 0 = 1000 Paid to Parent B

Without the specifics of the order no one can truly help you.


If your agreement is marked FINAL and there is no option for the matter to return for further determination what you have are a bunch of words on paper. More than likely you have no recourse to return to court.

Again, we need the specific wording. The reality is no one can help you brainstorm as this is a very specific circumstance that needs all the ducks lined up very well or you face MASSIVE COSTS for being disruptive to the courts.

My understanding is your materials are marked "FINAL". So, you would need to demonstrate a material change has occurred. You settled the matter with her earning 0.0 in income that could be used for an offset calculation. Nothing has changed. Just your opinion that the other parent must work.

It sounds like your agreement is a bunch of "should do" and no "must do". Should is a strong suggestion but, not a requirement.

I hate to throw gas on the fire but, SoTSL and SnT are correct. It is hard to help without the exact wording.


Good Luck!
Tayken
That was the exact wording buddy.

Couldn't a Material Change of circumstances be financial hardship? I have 50/50 costs for the kid also. Why should she be able to not work and stay home on Welfare. I read a past thread you did on WD and you quoted the judge giving hell to the mom saying something like "I feel that the mother has stayed on social assistance unnecessarily, etc". SO WD had the same problem. Thought you might have a soft spot for this Tayken due to that.

I don't think "should" was in there. It says that the Respondent is currently seeking employment and that once she is employed for 30 days that she SHALL PROVIDE the applicant evidence of her income, and the CS SHALL be modified using the offset approach.

If they're going to allow her to simply stay on Welfare and not work the rest of her life than I have lost all faith in the system yet again.
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:20 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by standing on the sidelines View Post
while I agree with you it does state that she is suppose to find work but doesn't say when. She can use the excuse she was waiting till the child was in mandatory school, or something. No teeth in it. I think you maybe rushing trying to get stuff changed. I agree that she should find work, but will a judge agree that it has to be now? She may say that she wants to go to school to update her credentials or to be able to use her job skill in Ontario.
Great post. Agree with everything. Those are all my thoughts exactly. Or she may say that she needs to relocate to QC (like we all initially thought).

I'm not here to complain about Welfare etc ... I just need some financial relief and for her to take some damn responsibility for her child financially. This is a fully bilingual, educated woman who worked every day prior to pregnancy. Government jobs are all seeking employees like her right now. I really shouldn't have to work 3 jobs to keep my head above water while she works none.

I must be able to use that order to my advantage somehow. Order is vague .. but any future judge would cringe and tell her to work .. pretty guaranteed.

Just need advice on what subsequent steps I should take......if any?
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:21 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,203
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
This is the EXACT wording. I can't help their lack of grammar. lol

Yep, very vague. But any future judge would get the gist (I would think), that she is to find work. There's another section that states that ex is to enroll D5 in a daycare if she finds childcare is hindering her ability to seek employment . This of course was before D5 began school.

The wording of the order is word for word what I wrote above though. I know .. a sloppy, quick legal aid SC type paragraph that's unenforceable I'm sure. But again, I'm sure any future judge would wonder why she didn't get a job. The wording clearly states that IMO. Kid's in school full days. Judges are pretty smart right?
I notice that in your response to Takyen you added something to what you said was "word for word" I knew something had to be missing. Its okay, we all make mistakes.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:23 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,486
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 LovingFather32 View Post
This is the EXACT wording. I can't help their lack of grammar. lol
If it is the EXACT wording it is UNENFORCEABLE. The court won't enforce or interpret orders they don't understand. You might as well draw a big fat black line through it all. Why? Because you agreed to the terms and the crappy grammar.

You are SHIT OUT OF LUCK. I am being VERY FRANK here. You have little to no recourse on anything. If you went forward with a Application and motion to try and have this clause enforced as written. The judge would through the matter out and slam you with costs.

I would never recommend you proceed on anything with that wording.
Reply With Quote
  #76 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:23 AM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,854
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Non-enforceable Order IMO.
Why work when the gov and/or you pay for everything?

Problem is that I believe people can stay on welfare until their children are in school. If she is working under-the-table she is breaking the law and should be bunted off of welfare. If you want her to work then you should simply report this activity.
Reply With Quote
  #77 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:25 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

A 14B perhaps to ask the judge to set a date? First of course sending an e-mail offering a deadline or I will have to pursue court? I dunno .. so sick of court. Maybe I'll just work day and night to pay for her lifestyle.
Reply With Quote
  #78 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:26 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Kitchener Ontario
Posts: 5,203
standing on the sidelines is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
Great post. Agree with everything. Those are all my thoughts exactly. Or she may say that she needs to relocate to QC (like we all initially thought).

I'm not here to complain about Welfare etc ... I just need some financial relief and for her to take some damn responsibility for her child financially. This is a fully bilingual, educated woman who worked every day prior to pregnancy. Government jobs are all seeking employees like her right now. I really shouldn't have to work 3 jobs to keep my head above water while she works none.

I must be able to use that order to my advantage somehow. Order is vague .. but any future judge would cringe and tell her to work .. pretty guaranteed.

Just need advice on what subsequent steps I should take......if any?
you cannot say what a judge will tell her to do. Face it there have been some rulings by judges. I think you need to wait till the child is back in mandatory school, then try to get things changed. Right now she will say that she needs to be home for the summer because she cannot get child care due to summer spots all filled up. Its just too early and you may fail.
Reply With Quote
  #79 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:26 AM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,486
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 LovingFather32 View Post
Couldn't a Material Change of circumstances be financial hardship?
No. You would have to claim "undue hardship" and you are clearly sitting in front of a computer or using a device that allows you connect to the internet to respond to this. You are not under any hardship at all. (In accordance with the requirements for making this claim.) You have to be living in poverty. Actual and real poverty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingFather32 View Post
If they're going to allow her to simply stay on Welfare and not work the rest of her life than I have lost all faith in the system yet again.
It isn't the system's fault though. It is your fault. You retained crappy counsel that didn't advise you as to what you were agreeing to. You agreed on consent to that.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #80 (permalink)  
Old 06-22-2016, 10:26 AM
LovingFather32's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 4,515
LovingFather32 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by standing on the sidelines View Post
I notice that in your response to Takyen you added something to what you said was "word for word" I knew something had to be missing. Its okay, we all make mistakes.
Not sure what you mean. The Daycare piece was another paragraph. The para on CS and offset is word for word (the one I put in he quote earlier). I left nothing out.
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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:22 PM.