Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Family Responsibility Office - Serious Mistakes

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Family Responsibility Office - Serious Mistakes

    If I didn't have bad luck, I would have no luck at all!


    The Family Responsibility Office (FRO) garnished the wrong person! I just can't believe it.

    There was no child support order in effect of any type. I have had sole custody of the kids since summer 2009 (Winter 2005 for one). Ex has refused to pay child support in any amount or even send a birthday card with $5 in it for the kids.

    The court granted a Temporary Child Support Order until the trial in November 2011 where "The Respondent, Rita ***** will pay the Applicant child support in the amount of ..... (and so on)"

    I opened up the FRO mail the other day, apparently now, I am the payer! I am in the Canadian Forces, therefore the garnishment is easy. It will be effective on my end month April pay. WOW.

    I am sure this can be addressed. I have an original order to the contrary. The point is, FRO refuses to change the payment order or even investigate the mistake. I have to do all the leg work. In the meantime, my Ex is about to receive $1,800 that she is not entitled to, and will likely refuse to pay back.

    I am not only (court recognized) as $5,300 overpaid in child support from 2005, but the Ex owes me child support since 2009 AND will have money that does not belong to her. WTF!

    What a system!

  • #2
    I don't understand. How can they refute a court order? That is messed up. I am sorry another dad is hit below the belt

    Comment


    • #3
      The unfortunate part about FROs methods is they are very adamant that they will not do ANYTHING with out an order. granted sometimes that rigidity may be needed but..... they have a hard time acknowledging when they do make a mistake.

      Comment


      • #4
        Try contacting your local M.P.P. as FRO falls under a Provincial Ministry.

        Comment


        • #5
          Additional point. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am 99% sure this was just an administrative error as the FRO probably sees 80, 90 or more percent of orders where the man pays, therefore, in haste, it was assumed I was the payer.

          Besides the obvious gender bias that caused this problem, my main issue is that they were quick to judge, but not quick (or willing at all) to change their system without me getting the proof.

          Furthermore, the deeper issue is the FRO culture that allowed this to happen. Even more disturbing, I stand with many whom have this issue; it is not isolated!

          Comment


          • #6
            Family Responsibility Office Ontario Telehone Directory - Client and Legal Services | Phone numbers and address

            try going to the source, this web page list most of their contact info.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hi Kenny
              Statistically speaking you me and 27,500 other Ontarians we are standing up for

              Comment


              • #8
                For the past 8 years we have been trying to talk to ALL levels of Govt and there is little they will do to assist against FRO... I do have a few that are sympathetic and would be happy to route you to them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Kenny View Post
                  If I didn't have bad luck, I would have no luck at all!


                  The Family Responsibility Office (FRO) garnished the wrong person! I just can't believe it.

                  There was no child support order in effect of any type. I have had sole custody of the kids since summer 2009 (Winter 2005 for one). Ex has refused to pay child support in any amount or even send a birthday card with $5 in it for the kids.

                  The court granted a Temporary Child Support Order until the trial in November 2011 where "The Respondent, Rita ***** will pay the Applicant child support in the amount of ..... (and so on)"

                  I opened up the FRO mail the other day, apparently now, I am the payer! I am in the Canadian Forces, therefore the garnishment is easy. It will be effective on my end month April pay. WOW.

                  I am sure this can be addressed. I have an original order to the contrary. The point is, FRO refuses to change the payment order or even investigate the mistake. I have to do all the leg work. In the meantime, my Ex is about to receive $1,800 that she is not entitled to, and will likely refuse to pay back.

                  I am not only (court recognized) as $5,300 overpaid in child support from 2005, but the Ex owes me child support since 2009 AND will have money that does not belong to her. WTF!

                  What a system!
                  They did a story or three not that long ago about the horrors of dealing with them...you need to call Ctv or some other news station...this needs to be out to the public..not swept under the carpet...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kenny View Post
                    Additional point. I am not a conspiracy theorist. I am 99% sure this was just an administrative error as the FRO probably sees 80, 90 or more percent of orders where the man pays, therefore, in haste, it was assumed I was the payer.

                    Besides the obvious gender bias that caused this problem, my main issue is that they were quick to judge, but not quick (or willing at all) to change their system without me getting the proof.

                    Furthermore, the deeper issue is the FRO culture that allowed this to happen. Even more disturbing, I stand with many whom have this issue; it is not isolated!
                    oh..I have no doubt this is gender related and was a factor and these situation are beyond theories anymore.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I dont know so much if it is gender bias, as that the majority are male payors. Females exist as payors and there are recipients that are getting screwed by them too. The problem with their deadbeat theory is that you can be as little as a dollar behind and you are grouped together. So problem one. There attitude towards you no matter what side of the fence it truely their biggest. We have talked with FRO and many caught in the middle to get resolution. We here from the majority that are indeed payors with issues but we here from recipients with issues as well. For example one recipient was owed 72,000 and fro would not release to her. Their reason the paperwork they had from the court and both lawyers did not have the oficial court stamp so FRO made her wait 6 month until the judge reissued his order. Another recipient a male was owed 59,000 that FRO never collected in 12 years but in fact had him as the payor. But FRO could tell the Min of Just in BC he was lying. Others get garnisheed that are not even recipients or payors. I cant explain that one other than he had the same name as the actual, but meanwhile everything he had got frozen/garnisheed. Half the time the problem is FRO having no right but they do anyway and you have to fight them tooth and nail to properly do thier job. If they would then I dont think any of us would be talking about it.

                      BTW... those interviews you mentioned, the 59G above and my spouse were those people. They originally aired on Global Toronto July 09. Un fortunately global does not archive them for long. Least I was given a copy just wish I could post it some how... ah well.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by AtALoss View Post
                        I dont know so much if it is gender bias, as that the majority are male payors. Females exist as payors and there are recipients that are getting screwed by them too. The problem with their deadbeat theory is that you can be as little as a dollar behind and you are grouped together. So problem one. There attitude towards you no matter what side of the fence it truely their biggest. We have talked with FRO and many caught in the middle to get resolution. We here from the majority that are indeed payors with issues but we here from recipients with issues as well. For example one recipient was owed 72,000 and fro would not release to her. Their reason the paperwork they had from the court and both lawyers did not have the oficial court stamp so FRO made her wait 6 month until the judge reissued his order. Another recipient a male was owed 59,000 that FRO never collected in 12 years but in fact had him as the payor. But FRO could tell the Min of Just in BC he was lying. Others get garnisheed that are not even recipients or payors. I cant explain that one other than he had the same name as the actual, but meanwhile everything he had got frozen/garnisheed. Half the time the problem is FRO having no right but they do anyway and you have to fight them tooth and nail to properly do thier job. If they would then I dont think any of us would be talking about it.

                        BTW... those interviews you mentioned, the 59G above and my spouse were those people. They originally aired on Global Toronto July 09. Un fortunately global does not archive them for long. Least I was given a copy just wish I could post it some how... ah well.
                        Yeah not too sure when...the ones I was thinking of were more recent and was a cbc interview....I thought anyway...sorry to hear you're going though so much trouble...I know that some woman are the payor these days...but they're few and far between..maybe though that these issues are affecting women in that role maybe it might get more attention...I know it shouldn't matter...but life tells us different in my opinion.

                        I really think that the whole cs system should be torn apart and revamped along with fro...they have too much power...and little recourse but a lengthy and potentially costly battle for their screw ups...not going to happen...but one can always have hope lol.

                        Too bad...there was a poster in here a while back that claimed he workerd for fro...he stood on is pedestal boasting how great fro is and if I remember right they made very little errors as you can imagine that person didn't get a great welcoming ...that if there were problems it was the payors fault....needless to say it wasn't long before he was inodated with members that had other experiences with fro that were not so pleasant to put it mildly.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by LostFather View Post
                          ...that if there were problems it was the payors fault....

                          Worried about this.
                          My fiancee's ex took him to FRO because a couple of days late in DayCare.
                          He has always paid full table amount early or on time (1273)
                          He struggles to get daycare to her every week on the monday so sometimes was late But he always paid! She should be a collection agency because the hounding and threats would start 8am 1 day late.

                          She has failed to provide us or them with receipts for Daycare EVER. It is an under the table sitter job. because of this FRO won't collect anything for Daycare.

                          Separation agreement a piece of garbage. Only amount on it anywhere is 1,000 (under the table amount). No court order, not notarized, just a bad couple of pages he signed under a state of duress. We are going to court - eventually. Fro won't take anything other than the 1,000 as it is the only dollar amount listed anywhere.

                          Therefore, he will be under paying. He is not a dead beat and would pay but can't. He is now not allowed to pay the right amount. He can not pay her direct nor can he pay the sitter direct without penalty.

                          This may seem like a small victory but I am concerned it will come back to bite us on the ass.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Hi Karmaseeker
                            So nothing has been to court yet and the 12XX is the tabled amount. So continue as best you can on that score and seems you are managing that. As for the day care try and keep up.Could you not get recipts directly from the provider? bypass the ex. If that is impossible then I think it would be best that you always pay by some means that you make your own record. Banks archive your transactions for a long time. You have a bit of time that you can go to your branch and get them to print out the records for little to no cost. What ever the brach time limit is but they can go back several years but at a cost per page. My point in all that is keep meticulous records of anything you give her and if it is official reciepts from the bank all the better. Would you also have in writing from FRO that they will not take the payment as it is not for a licenced daycare? maybe try to get something direct from FRO. You do have a right to full disclosure. Stand your ground with them and trough the freedom if information act they have to supply you with a certian level of info.That request usually starts at $5 per request.

                            If she pushes the point to court you will be prepared with your papers to show her behaviour. It is her choice that she went with private and I am not arguing the bennifits but if she wants to be so demanding that it be covered under FRO then she should have choosen a lic daycare. cant really fault FRO on that one. also depending on her income she maybe able to get subsidies and tax breaks. Too bad she is not utilizing the perks. Sounds though that she is just using that as a tool to piss you off.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              No, we can't pay table amount because FRO won't let us. It isn't written anywhere so they can only go with what number is written on the seperation agreement. So they are refusing to take the money and refusing to giver her any more than 1,000 because that is the only actual number written in the agreement (under something that says if his income drops he has to pay 1,000 regardless).

                              It is the worlds worst separation agreement.

                              Further because she has not provided anyone with receipts for daycare (and technically can't - as the woman doesn't give them) FRO can't take more money. our lawyer has been asking for proof of expense for 4 months and us for over a year. It isn't an issue of private it is an issue of now documenting evidence to the cost involved. Not even a letter of cost from the daycare provider. I imagine the daycare provider is scared that if she gives that then the government will be after her for running a business under the table. ??? Maybe?

                              We continued paying right up until she went to FRO and FRO said DO NOT PAY HER DIRECT, DO NOT PAY DC PROVIDER.

                              She has screwed her self by going to FRO because she is now less a lot of money per month. WE have RECORDS of all monies paid to her.

                              1st from the bank. but then she closed bank account with out warning.
                              then we sent e-transfers.

                              It is all just a power move. We only just got her financials and it looks to me like she is claiming daycare so I am even more confused. Plus she gets full benefits and tax breaks for the kids. Plus she earns a heafty wage. I am totally confused by the money side of things. It doesn't add up.

                              Now she is taking US to court because she refused to negotiate, refused mediation, refused arbitration, refused parenting classes, refusing children counselling. She wants sole custody and money for private ski lessons and ski equipment that was given to them for x mas gifts from her parents.

                              Everything is about money and power. But she went to FRO and now FRO saying nope- no documentation - no money.

                              We would pay.

                              Our Lawyer is looking into it as we don't want to be perceived by the court as withholding monies that should go to the "kids / cough *trip to bahamas* cough* flying lessons* cough" .

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X