Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Introductions

Introductions If you're new to the forums, drop by and introduce yourself.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2014, 09:11 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 994
FightingForFamily will become famous soon enough
Default

1. Her lawyer's argument has merit. Currently she doesn't have income and the children do need to be provided for. To me it unfortunately makes sense that *for now* you would bear the full burden.

2. I don't know her history or if she was previously employed or how much she was making before. If she is a student pursuing her first degree with the goal of being gainfully employed to support the children and her self then imputation won't likely work because this is an earnest effort.

That being said, choosing to go back for a SECOND degree is not the same at all, especially if she just finished her first one and hasn't attempted to turn it into a lucrative job yet.

Parents are allowed to pursue reasonable plans of education and self improvement without being considered underemployed. Reasonable being the key word.

3. For CRA you will need a properly worded separation agreement or at least a letter which outlines the children's access times and child support arrangements. Without an agreement/order/letter they generally allow only the mother to make most claims.

There are many other threads on this topic.

What you should be asking for:

-A continuation of the status quo but simply formalized into an agreement:

-Shared custody of the children with roughly 50/50 parenting time.
-Joint or parallel decision making (ie custody) for educational, dental,
medical, religious concerns. Joint if you can discuss and decide together
and parallel if there is too much conflict. Your call.
-Both parents will contribute to financial support the children and will
both exchange child support with each other according to the table amounts.
-Child support will be updated each year by July 1st after the parents
exchange income taxes notice of assessment and/or full tax returns.
-Note this means you will pay the full amount for now until she is employed.
-Neither party will take any steps to move the children from the region
of (insert city here) without the consent of the other parent.

In other words, if you want shared custody you better start planning to find another job because there is no way it will work if you move. In fact, 25 minutes away is a lot I would do what I could to relocate closer. Unfortunately divorce changes many things.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2014, 09:14 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 994
FightingForFamily will become famous soon enough
Default

Keep in mind for CRA the wording has to be very specific or you will end up in big trouble. BOTH parents have to state they are paying child support for CRA to recognize the shared custody designation. This is in addition to the 50/50 parenting schedule.

If only one person pays support, the other CRA rules state that person may not claim virtually anything for the supported child... EVEN if they have the kids half the time.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2014, 04:42 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 51
Ilovemykids is on a distinguished road
Default

"Both parents will contribute to financial support the children and will
both exchange child support with each other according to the table amounts."

This is my argument- she has not income to even register on the Child Support Table so there is not CS to "exchange." I still don't know if I can impute income. She finished one degree is going on to take a post granduate degree, so she could argue it is a continuation of her studies. She has worked for a few years before and has skills now.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2014, 04:50 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 Ilovemykids View Post
"Both parents will contribute to financial support the children and will
both exchange child support with each other according to the table amounts."

This is my argument- she has not income to even register on the Child Support Table so there is not CS to "exchange." I still don't know if I can impute income. She finished one degree is going on to take a post granduate degree, so she could argue it is a continuation of her studies. She has worked for a few years before and has skills now.
Lots of people work and go to school.

What money is she living off of. How is she paying for food/gas/housing.

She cannot have an income of $0

Argue for 24 hours of part time work @ minimum wage.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2014, 10:35 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 51
Ilovemykids is on a distinguished road
Default

She has investment income of a few hundred dollars and lives off the child support. I feel the argument of part-time work while going to school is probably my safest bet, though I am tempted to argue for more as supporting the children full-time is more of a priority then going to school for two more years to get a graduate degree. How did you come up with 24 hours?
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 05-07-2014, 08:20 AM
FB_ FB_ is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,407
FB_ will become famous soon enough
Default

24 hours is a pretty standard parttime workload.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2014, 04:45 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 51
Ilovemykids is on a distinguished road
Default

Thanks everyone for your responses. I have a plan now for imputing income and how to do it.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2014, 10:16 AM
Rioe's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,217
Rioe will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ilovemykids View Post
She attends University full-time and supposedly is graduating with a BA anytime this spring, but she won't answer my emails as to what her plans are this summer. From our afterschool provider she mentioned she is taking a few summer courses and is going back to school for another degree in Sept. She didn't work last summer and it appears she isn't this summer.

My question is this? Do I have a leg to stand on to impute income to her.
Personally, I think so, but I'm not a judge.

In an offset situation, the CS exchange due to a difference in salaries should be a supplement to the lower earner's income. It should not be the majority of, or certainly not the whole of, their income. If one parent chooses not to work, that is their choice, and the other parent should not be forced to subsidize that. Offset situations are one of the main reasons imputation should exist. Any parent should be working to their full potential to support their child. Potential differs vastly between people, of course, and offset CS minimizes any vast differences in the children's lifestyles between houses. But choosing not to work and expecting CS to increase is irresponsible.

Adults with children have a special responsibility to them. They must earn an income to support that child. Whatever else they want to do, such as attend school, is secondary. In an intact marriage, a couple might agree that one of them could attend school because the other's income is sufficient to permit that. In a divorced couple in an offset situation, one person's decision to attend achool should not be forcefully subsidized by the increased CS of the other person. The CS is not going to the child then, it is blatantly supporting both the child and the ex, which is not the intention of CS.

I would make an effort to have her income imputed to that which a person of her current education could reasonably make if they entered the workforce right now, instead of continuing in school. Full time minimum wage at the very least. She has a child to support; she can't just blithely keep being a student on your dime. That basically turns the difference between table and offset with income imputed to her into SS for her, which is not what was agreed to nor is it the purpose of CS.

If she still wants to attend school, that's fine, especially if it will someday help her earn a greater income. She can get student loans, apply for scholarships, work part-time, ask her family for help, etc, everything normal students do to afford school. But as a mother, her primary responsibility should be to support her child, not her education, and a decision to choose education over employment should not increase your financial responsibility to your child.

The fact that she does not seek summer employment like most students do just demonstrates that she is treating your CS like SS to support her education, and not as meant for the benefit of the child.

Start with trying to impute full time income for someone of her education and experience, and let her 'negotiate' you down to part-time for two years.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 05-08-2014, 11:32 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 51
Ilovemykids is on a distinguished road
Default

So what is the best way and easiest way to figure out how to impute income and thank you Rioe excellent post and really captures everything that is going around my head especially now that I am gearing up to request her lawyers consent to amend my answer.

She just completed a BA is bilingual and has some professional experience working for Parks Canada as an administrator (8 years ago). What is a solid way to present my argument.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 05-09-2014, 01:42 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 994
FightingForFamily will become famous soon enough
Default

You need to persuasively show that she should be making X dollars and is choosing not to.

Judges do not like "crystal ball gazing"; they do not make decisions based on possible future events. They must make decisions based on what has occurred before and what the evidence shows today.

You can present what she made 8 years ago as adminstrator, but that's probably not relevant to today. You can try and find out what sort of starting salary she could earn working in her field with her degree... but this is crystal ball gazing.

Generally most people have to settle with stating she has to pay her bills she could work at the bare minimum 24 hours per week at minimum wage. This is around 12,000 per year.

If she has 2 children and makes 12,000, her child support table amount is $94.

I don't see it as worthwhile to pursue imputing her income to save yourself $94 per month when you could lose and have to pay costs in the thousands.

It's your life though.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
custody, imputing, shared, student, university


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
Divorce is a Bitch Links17 Divorce Support 15 11-24-2013 08:58 PM
Online divorce? ExWife2Many General Chat 10 08-12-2010 08:15 AM
Surviving Divorce FPI Divorce & Family Law 2 04-29-2009 07:56 PM
Confused - Need Help -30 Days Up TODivorce Divorce & Family Law 1 12-22-2006 08:04 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:29 AM.