Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ex's job loss and daycare

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

  • Ex's job loss and daycare

    Hello
    My ex just informed me that he lost his job. I have primary custody of our son and have enrolled him in daycare. Our court order is barely 2 months old and I have just up for FRO. I have not received any payments from FRO. I am likely going to be approved for subsidy for daycare do that is not an issue, however ex is claiming that he should not have to now pay any spousal support and will try to modify to pay less child support. He made 85k I made under 20k. He says he will go after me for spousal support too, since I make something and he makes nothing. Also he says that now that he has time till he finds another job he should watch our son while I work. I said no way, and he has accused me of parental aluenation even though I have not with held any visitation time with our son from him. This is his 7th job loss in a decade and after a very painful and frightening situation our son is just getting stabilized and settling in with a new routine. Plus ex should be looking for a new job and he's half an hour away. Right now court order is he gets every other weekend. Do I have to pull our son out of dc? Any thoughts?

  • #2
    He is fully capable of working and should be imputed a wage comparable to the average wage in his industry. "Impute" means he is assumed to be making that much for calculations of child support (and spousal if you are receiving that.)

    In an intact family, you don't stop feeding your kids just because you lost your job. You look for a new job and go into debt if you have to.

    He is resposible for paying according to your last court order unless/until a new order is in place. He has a snowballs chance in hell of getting you to pay spousal support.

    Comment


    • #3
      It looks like you are out of the house now, and have moved? Maintain the status quo, move forward on your daycare subsidy. If your order has been filed with FRO, he can't stop it without a new order.

      Let him continue to postulate, and don't fret. Any decent lawyer (or you, self-rep) will impute him an income unless he's also had a major stroke in addition to losing his job, and can't work for physical reasons.

      And umm. yeah, what Mess said - he won't be receiving spousal support.. Too funny!

      This must be stressful for you, but just move forward, settle your son and household, obtain the subsidy and keep going.
      Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Yes, I moved out, the issues were just too extreme and not worth it, a lot of psychological abuse that is still affecting my son and I. Even today he came to pick up our son and I could see him from upstairs taking pictures outside of my mothers house, property and cars, for whatever crazy reason. He kept the house, the furniture, appliances, rrsp's, etc. I settled for a very paltry sum of spousal, only for one year. Even his lawyer said that if a judge looked at it he would double my offer and for much longer. Subsidy is available for when parents need to find a job as well as for when they're working or going to school, so he cannot suddenly be an 'available parent'. Hostile one maybe though.

        Comment


        • #5
          Hey Slug:
          oh no the magical abuse card raises its head. its one thing to say it but can you PROVE it......

          Yes I can, which is why he settled out of court the day of trial. Doctors records, witnessess, etc.

          also if you did get such a good deal he is probably only blowing steam

          He got the good *financial* deal, not me, I got primary custody.

          but again only one side of the story

          i would wonder why you would settle on less then what you were entittled too?

          Because some things are not worth it and its not all about entitlement

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Mess View Post
            He is fully capable of working and should be imputed a wage comparable to the average wage in his industry. "Impute" means he is assumed to be making that much for calculations of child support (and spousal if you are receiving that.)

            In an intact family, you don't stop feeding your kids just because you lost your job. You look for a new job and go into debt if you have to.

            He is resposible for paying according to your last court order unless/until a new order is in place. He has a snowballs chance in hell of getting you to pay spousal support.
            Mess, he is not "fully capable"...

            Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
            ...This is his 7th job loss in a decade...
            His actual income should be used for support calculations, not some dreamed up amount that some imaginary person could make.

            CS should simply be based on a person's income, adjusted yearly. Unless they are being supported by other means such as a new spouse or parent.

            As for her paying SS, it seems that they made a deal for SS of only one year, which to me says that there was little financial obligations between the two, which he agreed to, so he should not expect SS because his circumstances (which it seems could be reasonably expected) have changed.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Mess View Post
              In an intact family, you don't stop feeding your kids just because you lost your job. You look for a new job and go into debt if you have to.
              In an intact family, you spend less, you don't go into debt to maintain the same standard of living.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                My ex just informed me that he lost his job.
                That is unfortunate to hear. This represents, if a truthful statement by the other parent, a material change in circumstance and the child support would have to be adjusted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the unemployment.

                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                I have primary custody of our son and have enrolled him in daycare. Our court order is barely 2 months old and I have just up for FRO. I have not received any payments from FRO. I am likely going to be approved for subsidy for daycare do that is not an issue, however ex is claiming that he should not have to now pay any spousal support and will try to modify to pay less child support.
                There has to be a "material change in circumstance" and that would have to be reflected and requested at the time his income changes. More than likely the other parent got some sort of severance package which would be considered part of their income. Until such time the actual income increases or decreases from what was ordered against the table amounts it isn't "material" that the other parent lost their job. The "material" part in the change in circumstance is the change in income.

                So, if the other parent got a 1-2 year severance package that pays the same wage, benefits, etc... due to downsizing and there is no change to the other parents income... Being laid off isn't a "material change in circumstance". The other parent has an obligation to pay according to the Guide Line tables.

                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                He made 85k I made under 20k. He says he will go after me for spousal support too, since I make something and he makes nothing. Also he says that now that he has time till he finds another job he should watch our son while I work.
                Request financial disclosure regarding his severance package, duration of severance, etc... Request full and frank financial disclosure in accordance with Rule 13 of the Family Law Rules.

                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                I said no way, and he has accused me of parental aluenation even though I have not with held any visitation time with our son from him.
                What is your objection to the child spending time with the other parent? It could reduce family expenses etc. in this time of need. Is there past abuse/harm/maltreatment/neglect of the child in question by the other parent?

                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                This is his 7th job loss in a decade and after a very painful and frightening situation our son is just getting stabilized and settling in with a new routine.
                The past decade has not been the best. Lots of people have had to do this and many families have had to adjust to the current economic conditions.

                How is the other parent losing their job a "very painful and frightening situation"? This is something that happens all the time for intact and separated families.

                Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                Plus ex should be looking for a new job and he's half an hour away. Right now court order is he gets every other weekend. Do I have to pull our son out of dc? Any thoughts?
                Yes, the other parent should be seeking employment and that is the expectation the court will hold. Do you have any evidence that the other parent is explicitly not looking for new employment at this time? Or are you just worried that the other parent won't. The other parent has had 7 jobs in the past decade and demonstrated that they are employable.

                Until such time that the other parent files a "material change in circumstance" due to a *change in income* I wouldn't stress too much about it. The financial obligations are set forth in the court order. The other parent can simply provide you with the full and frank financial disclosure of their settlement package and matters can be resolved.

                Change is inevitable and there is no guarantee that either you nor the other parent will have constant and continuous employment. The best way for anyone in our society to protect their financial future for themselves and their children is to invest in their career and insure their own financial security. Children depend on both parents for their well being.

                Good Luck!
                Tayken

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by billm View Post
                  Mess, he is not "fully capable"....
                  He has job skills and experience that enable him to find employment earning 85k, he is capable. He is stating that he will seek spousal support from an ex who is earning 20k. This is absurd. He is capable of finding a job and dealing with his obligations.

                  If he has legitimate reasons for periodic work loss, like layoffs in the industry then he should seek to have support calculated on a three year average.

                  If he got a bonus for one month, would you agree that the recipient instantly gets support raised? If he has circumstances that justify having support immediately lowered, like the plant went out of business and there is no possibility of comparable work in the area, then he can make that argument, sure. That is an unforseen material change. But what is described is that he loses jobs 7 times in 10 years; he obviously also gets new jobs 7 times in 10 years. He is capable of finding work.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Mess View Post
                    He has job skills and experience that enable him to find employment earning 85k, he is capable. He is stating that he will seek spousal support from an ex who is earning 20k. This is absurd. He is capable of finding a job and dealing with his obligations.
                    Agreed, as well the other parent has had 7 jobs in the past 10 years. Assuming that there was no period of unemployment between those jobs. Sounds like that pattern of a consultant when looking at the income level.

                    Originally posted by Mess View Post
                    If he has legitimate reasons for periodic work loss, like layoffs in the industry then he should seek to have support calculated on a three year average.
                    Not sure if I agree yet... "What" and "how" the other parent makes an income comes into question now. Contractor, I agree as they should be planning for 'downtime'.

                    Originally posted by Mess View Post
                    That is an unforseen material change. But what is described is that he loses jobs 7 times in 10 years; he obviously also gets new jobs 7 times in 10 years. He is capable of finding work.
                    It sounds more like a contractor in my opinion. 85K in income, lots of jobs... It may just be that the other parent is between contracts? Would require confirmation from the OP.

                    You don't job hop between 85k full time positions. The income level stated is too high and generally HR departments would see the pattern of changes in full time employment and rarely consider someone like this. It sounds like a contractor in a specialized field... (OP can you confirm?)

                    Good Luck!
                    Tayken

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mess View Post
                      ...
                      If he got a bonus for one month, would you agree that the recipient instantly gets support raised? If he has circumstances that justify having support immediately lowered, like the plant went out of business and there is no possibility of comparable work in the area, then he can make that argument, sure. That is an unforseen material change. But what is described is that he loses jobs 7 times in 10 years; he obviously also gets new jobs 7 times in 10 years. He is capable of finding work.
                      I think one should pay according to their income, and that should adjusted automatically every year.

                      This removes ALL arguments such as the ones above.

                      It really confuses me how people state they want their support lowered based on change of circumstance, when a change in income is a common occurrence that can be easily dealt with by simply automatically adjusting every year.

                      Even my ex has issues with this simple concept. Last year I had a bad year and actually made less than her. I went into debt to maintain my CS/SS payments to her. We just adjusted our CS based on last years tax return, as we have done every year. Now show owes me $40/month in CS, which drives her crazy because I am now so busy with work. It drives me crazy that she can't get the simple concept of yearly adjusting CS handles all of these issues. (Not to mention that I have paid her over 100K in support over 5 years, and she is beside herself that she has to pay me $480 in CS this year (while I still pay her more than that in SS as our SS agreement is not dependent on current incomes)).

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Just a bit more information,
                        he's not a consultant, he's a director in the advertising/marketing field and his income was 85k when he was dismissed. He was at this job for 7 months and his previous position for over a year, other positions for several years within the same company. All in all I believe 5 different companies, in 7 different areas.
                        When I referred to frightening situation, I was not referring to job losses, I was referring to things he had done in the past that were disturbing, such as recording us 24/7, turning off our heat deliberately at the power source and leaving for ten days, things of that nature, that occurred while we were still living under the same roof. Then finally just changing the locks out of the house before I had the opportunity to move all of my belongings. Tip of the iceberg, and believe me, some situations are not worth it.

                        Basically with subsidy that I just recieved this week, I had to show my court order to show that I have primary custody Monday to Friday and my tax summary form. I made 7,500$ in 2011 and his taxes reflected 73,000. He has been very vocal about my earning more money-yet he refuses to pay for child care that would give me the opportunity to work more, and belittling all my efforts. So I am in school, attempting to work full time, have care of the child and he's refusing to pay for daycare even while he was employed 2 hours away from his son. Now that he's not not employed and does not even have to pay for daycare because its subsidized due to my income, he is wanting to take care of our son. He should be looking for work to meet his obligations because I am busting my butt trying to be independent from him. If our son is taken out of daycare, I will lose subsidy, what happens if he finds work in a few weeks or a month? Typically his job is in large cities over an hour away from where he lives, which is even further than us. He is not saving me expenses, to date, I have not recieved a dime from FRO because our order is barely two months old. I have paid for daycare, rent, food, clothes, activities, etc etc, all out of my pocket with no child support. My sons daycare is across the street from my job and our house, we have a good system and routine. I could also lose my daycare spot, it is difficult to obtain daycare in the first place, and then get subsidy to pay for it again. He is not in school full time yet, so why why would I risk not having a provider in September on his days off? When the father can and needs to go to work again, he will simply expect me and my family to deal with the situation in a way that is free for him.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by billm View Post
                          I think one should pay according to their income, and that should adjusted automatically every year.

                          This removes ALL arguments such as the ones above.
                          Actually it doesn't, and goes to the heart of why I disagreed with your earlier thoughts.

                          He's been able to get new jobs regularly over the last 7 years. There is nothing to indicate he will unemployed for the next year or longer. There is no reason to lower support now if he is going to get another job in a few weeks.

                          Adjusting the support amount every year is written into legislation (for CS) and there is nothing wrong with that. Adjust the amount now, because he just lost his job, disregards the reality that he has to find new work. How many times have we read on this board threats of a payor to quit work so they don't have to pay support? I don't agree that the system should be built to enable such a thing, and right now it isn't.

                          If the payor has reason to think he won't be able to get a new job right away, or that he won't be able to earn as much, and can show facts to back it up then he should make that argument to the courts - or to his ex so they can come to an agreement. There is nothing here to suggest this is his situation or that he can support an argument like that.

                          To mama_pumpkin, your child should certainly stay with the daycare. The father is either declaring that he is not going to get another job, which the courts would not support, or he is not going to be able to provide child care reliable for the long term.

                          It's not possible to jump in and out of daycares, there are waiting lists for professional, licensed daycare, and even casual babysitters are not reliable. There are additional waiting lists for subsidy. You cannot be expected to just pull the child in and out willy nilly.

                          Your ex is trying to argue full role reversal. You have been working little and caring for the child and he has been paying support; now he wants to reverse the situation and have you work and pay him support to stay home with the child. He is dreaming, a court would require him to work to his potential or he should be imputed a wage.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                            Just a bit more information,
                            he's not a consultant, he's a director in the advertising/marketing field and his income was 85k when he was dismissed.
                            Based on the pattern and employment track record... The other parent may have a difficult time finding new employment in the field unless the other parent consistently works at "startup" companies taking a gamble on salary vs. options. Many people in the marketing world do this.

                            Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                            When I referred to frightening situation, I was not referring to job losses, I was referring to things he had done in the past that were disturbing, such as recording us 24/7, turning off our heat deliberately at the power source and leaving for ten days, things of that nature, that occurred while we were still living under the same roof.
                            It appears that you are alleging that the other parent was "gaslighting" you.

                            Gaslighting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                            Please don't take offence but, I find these allegations quite difficult to believe at times.

                            1. When he was "controlling" the heat why didn't you turn it back up? Why would he turn the heat off in a home for which he was residing in? Wouldn't he too have to deal with the cold temperatures?

                            2. Why didn't you record him 24/7 as well? What difference does it make if you and his conduct was being recorded? What "fears" did you have about being recorded. If nothing happens the recordings are useless and prove nothing. You have every right to record him back and it is often recommended by members of this forum and perfectly legal. Sure, you may not have liked being recorded but, were you afraid he was going to record bad conduct by you. Abusers generally do not like recordings and having people record them and claim "privacy" to insure they can maintain their power and control and not get caught.

                            3. He was living in the house without power too? What does "at the power source" mean? Did he just turn it off at the breaker? Why not just turn it back on? Or did the power company turn off the power? Did you call to have power restored to the house?

                            Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                            Then finally just changing the locks out of the house before I had the opportunity to move all of my belongings. Tip of the iceberg, and believe me, some situations are not worth it.
                            Happens all the time and should be raised to the judge as this is your residence too (if married).

                            Originally posted by mama_pumpkin View Post
                            When the father can and needs to go to work again, he will simply expect me and my family to deal with the situation in a way that is free for him.
                            Is there a particular reason for EOW? He is a parent, he should be responsible for the child equally unless there is a specific reason and finding by CAS or the courts that restricts his access to the child. Don't let him escape his responsibility to equally care for, support, raise and love the child.

                            Many parents think that it would all be just better if they had full custody and EOW with the other parent. In fact, joint custody and equal access was put in place by feminists (yes feminists!) as parents were abandoning their responsibilities and walking away.

                            Good Luck!
                            Tayken

                            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