Background: SA done in 2007 with the expectation of a typical "reside with mom, visit dad EOW" scenario. Gave her pretty much everything, including the kitchen sink (because I believed that what was good for her was good for the kids). Turns out that the kids never lived with her, but she tried to enforce the SA (CS & SS) anyway via FRO - which is what originally brought me to this forum.
Today: STILL trying to amend SA so that she can't do anything nasty again. Have been pissing around with lawyers, went broke, and now self-repping. Every proposal comes back with a tweak or two, as her lawyer attempts to wring every possible dime out of her. This is OK with me, as all it is now costing me is time. Their latest proposed tweak ties CS (she's supposed to be the payor) to SS (I'm the payor) such that she only has to pay CS for as long as I pay SS. Should I object, this would never fly. Pretty much immaterial, BUT...
The problem: I received an email today from her lawyer (ca-ching: another $40 from the ex's pocket (grin)) inquiring if I had had a chance to review their proposed tweak. I answered (email pasted below) factually and reasonably, but then allowed myself a little rant. Obviously, I should have waited a day (and had lots more coffee) before replying.
My question: What damage have I done, and how can I fix it? Those of you to whom I address this question know who you are
The dick-stepping occurs in the self-admitted ill-advised candidness
Thanks,
Cheers!
Gary
The emails:
From: [me]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 9:28:37 AM
Subject: Re: Agreement
Without Prejudice
Good morning [ex's lawyer], and thank you for your email.
I have indeed received and reviewed the proposed amendment.
Although largely acceptable, there are significant concerns with some items, such that I will have to seek legal opinion before deciding on how to proceed in this matter.
One example would be the clause that ties CS to SS and terminates entitlement to CS concurrent with the termination of SS. As you are aware, CS is a right of the children and is not something I can sign away, no matter how inclined I might be to do so. CS is payable until the child(ren) are no longer children as defined by the Guidelines; I would think that an acceptable clause would indicate that CS is payable in accordance with the amended Agreement until the termination of SS -at which time it shall revert to Guideline amounts/application based upon the age and status of the child(ren) and the payor's annual income.
I will be candid and advise you that I am not very inclined to continue with this course of amending the SA. I feel that I have been extremely generous in my attempts to settle this matter and become more discouraged that it is even possible to settle with every change and delay. With the passage of time and some recent case law, I am confident that the system would look most unfavourably upon a parent who has avoided supporting her children while continuing to attempt to extract money from the their only caretaker despite that she neither hosts nor visits the children, that she's sitting on a pile of money, that she's living in a house her parents bought, and that she's driving a car her parents bought, while the custodial and 100% residential parent scartches and scrapes just to pay the bills. I have been advised that I would likely be successful in a motion to find that there is no entitlement to SS at all. Although almost certainly ill-advised, I offer you that glimpse of my thought process not to be provocative or argumentive, but rather to give you a feeling for the "other side of the coin."
Thank you again for your correspondence. I will be in contact again as soon as I receive sufficient legal advice on the best way for me to proceed. In the meantime, I am certainly open to any comments and/or suggestions you may have. I am reasonable and my sole goal is to simply put all of this behind me and move ahead with raising the children such that they have the best possible chance of enjoying a successful life.
Yours,
Gary
----------------------------------------------
From: [her lawyer]
Cc: [the ex]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:21:58 AM
Subject: Agreement
Good Morning, Mr. Madore,
I am writing to inquire as to whether you have had an opportunity to review the draft Amendment to Separation Agreement that was forwarded to you. If you could please advise as to a time frame for a response it would be appreciated.
Today: STILL trying to amend SA so that she can't do anything nasty again. Have been pissing around with lawyers, went broke, and now self-repping. Every proposal comes back with a tweak or two, as her lawyer attempts to wring every possible dime out of her. This is OK with me, as all it is now costing me is time. Their latest proposed tweak ties CS (she's supposed to be the payor) to SS (I'm the payor) such that she only has to pay CS for as long as I pay SS. Should I object, this would never fly. Pretty much immaterial, BUT...
The problem: I received an email today from her lawyer (ca-ching: another $40 from the ex's pocket (grin)) inquiring if I had had a chance to review their proposed tweak. I answered (email pasted below) factually and reasonably, but then allowed myself a little rant. Obviously, I should have waited a day (and had lots more coffee) before replying.
My question: What damage have I done, and how can I fix it? Those of you to whom I address this question know who you are
The dick-stepping occurs in the self-admitted ill-advised candidness
Thanks,
Cheers!
Gary
The emails:
From: [me]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 9:28:37 AM
Subject: Re: Agreement
Without Prejudice
Good morning [ex's lawyer], and thank you for your email.
I have indeed received and reviewed the proposed amendment.
Although largely acceptable, there are significant concerns with some items, such that I will have to seek legal opinion before deciding on how to proceed in this matter.
One example would be the clause that ties CS to SS and terminates entitlement to CS concurrent with the termination of SS. As you are aware, CS is a right of the children and is not something I can sign away, no matter how inclined I might be to do so. CS is payable until the child(ren) are no longer children as defined by the Guidelines; I would think that an acceptable clause would indicate that CS is payable in accordance with the amended Agreement until the termination of SS -at which time it shall revert to Guideline amounts/application based upon the age and status of the child(ren) and the payor's annual income.
I will be candid and advise you that I am not very inclined to continue with this course of amending the SA. I feel that I have been extremely generous in my attempts to settle this matter and become more discouraged that it is even possible to settle with every change and delay. With the passage of time and some recent case law, I am confident that the system would look most unfavourably upon a parent who has avoided supporting her children while continuing to attempt to extract money from the their only caretaker despite that she neither hosts nor visits the children, that she's sitting on a pile of money, that she's living in a house her parents bought, and that she's driving a car her parents bought, while the custodial and 100% residential parent scartches and scrapes just to pay the bills. I have been advised that I would likely be successful in a motion to find that there is no entitlement to SS at all. Although almost certainly ill-advised, I offer you that glimpse of my thought process not to be provocative or argumentive, but rather to give you a feeling for the "other side of the coin."
Thank you again for your correspondence. I will be in contact again as soon as I receive sufficient legal advice on the best way for me to proceed. In the meantime, I am certainly open to any comments and/or suggestions you may have. I am reasonable and my sole goal is to simply put all of this behind me and move ahead with raising the children such that they have the best possible chance of enjoying a successful life.
Yours,
Gary
----------------------------------------------
From: [her lawyer]
Cc: [the ex]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 8:21:58 AM
Subject: Agreement
Good Morning, Mr. Madore,
I am writing to inquire as to whether you have had an opportunity to review the draft Amendment to Separation Agreement that was forwarded to you. If you could please advise as to a time frame for a response it would be appreciated.
Comment