Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FRO & Child Support Adjustments

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

  • FRO & Child Support Adjustments

    Could someone please clarify...

    Can the child support payor unilaterally change the child support amount with FRO by providing them with a copy of the court order (indicating how CS is calculated) and their Income Tax Return (indicating their total income)?

    Or do they have to have a new court support order each year?

    The problem is that the child support recipient refuses to sign anything indicating a decrease in child support, even though the payor has had a decrease in income.

    Yet when the matter goes to court, the judge does not take into account the decrease in income in the previous 12 months because the "current" salary is higher than the previous year's income, and bases child support on the higher amount instead. (If you ask me, this is COMPLETELY wrong. How does this " provide the fairest determination of actual income and determine an amount that is fair and reasonable in light of any pattern of income, fluctuation in income, or receipt of a non-recurring amount during those years" - as it is written word-for-word in the Child Support Guidelines?!)

    So, is it possible to provide FRO with the Court Order and Notice of Assessment and ask them to make the necessary adjustments?

  • #2
    FRO cannot alter anything without an updated court order.

    To make a CS adjustment legal, the parties have to sign a Motion to Change with Consent (if they agree to the change).

    I would think that if your CS is adjusted annually, that the loss of income in 2009, should reflect in the 2010 CS payments....

    That being said, it the CS receipient didn't agree to the lower amount, (especially if she knew that the payor was currently making more money), she would just refuse, you'd end up in court, and the Judge would most likely rule based on the CS payors current income, and not what the Income Tax Return reflects.

    The Judge has the discretion to choose between the CRA income or the income indicated on the most current paystub!

    Most people get 2-3% raise year over year.
    One would think that unless there was a substantial increase or decrease in income, that the payor and receipient would only change the court order every few years. But some people are unreasonable and want to squeeze every penny!

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by representingself View Post
      I would think that if your CS is adjusted annually, that the loss of income in 2009, should reflect in the 2010 CS payments....

      That being said, it the CS receipient didn't agree to the lower amount, (especially if she knew that the payor was currently making more money), she would just refuse, you'd end up in court, and the Judge would most likely rule based on the CS payors current income, and not what the Income Tax Return reflects.

      The Judge has the discretion to choose between the CRA income or the income indicated on the most current paystub!
      And THAT is exactly why we are in this predicament!

      My husband worked in financial services. With the October 2008 market crash, he lost his job. Since then, he's bounced from job to job, trying to make ends meet. In between jobs, he would be unemployed and actively searching. I'd say that in the past 12 months, he has worked a 6-8 months "full-time." This is not due to choice, but rather to the state of the economy.

      So why should his decreased income during this 1 volatile year NOT be taken into account when determining child support? If the child's mother and him were living together, it WOULD be taken into account when determining their budget or whether they can afford certain luxaries. So why is it different when they do not reside together and he pays child support?

      It's sickening.

      Comment


      • #4
        Unfortunately it sounds like you and his ex are going to be doing this dance for years to come...

        Clearly she is being selfish and unreasonable, and the 'system' is backing her up all the way.

        Sure, you can try and get a Judge to side with you, but at what cost?

        Even if you represent yourselves every time, you are constantly losing money, taking time off work to research and prepare your case, and attending all of the ridiculous court appearances.... where you sit in a crowded waiting room for 6 hours to be seen infront of a Judge for 10 minutes, (if you're lucky).

        Now matter what angle you look at it, or what approach you take, 'she' will be ahead of the game, just because she has the child.

        It is also unfortunate that 'she' has so much time on her hands, because if she had a life of her own, maybe she wouldn't be so ready to drag you into court every 6 months...

        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