Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Child Support - Children's Choice

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Child Support - Children's Choice

    Just wondering if anyone has gone through this issue and what the outcome was for you?

    Up until last summer I was in a shared custody/shared custodial custody arrangement with my ex. We have a separation agreement/court order going back a few years that stipulates what support amount is to be paid (in my case I pay because I am higher income) and how the children's living arrangements will be...live with each of us 50/50.

    A little over two years ago I convinced my new partner to join with me in raising my three children 50/50 with my ex. My partner sold a house on the other side of the City and I sold my house and we bought a new house in my children's school district and settled into what we though would be a 10 year plan. In the mean time my ex moved out of the children's school district.

    Relations with my ex have never been good and the main reason I think for that is I landed on my feet after the separation much better than my ex. Also our parenting style differs a lot where I am more about teaching my kids about the realities and consequences of life where my ex is more like a snow plow operator pushing everything out of the way in front of them. About 6 month ago my kids decided not having to learning any coping skills is the easiest route for them, so they decide they wanted to live with my ex full time. Heartbreaking, but what can you do when they are all teenagers who think they know what is best for them?

    Now my ex is taking me to court asking for more money (almost double) for child support for have the kids basically 2 weeks more a month! So basically all our financial and emotional investment my partner and I have made is basically for nothing and my ex can unilaterally decide that our separation agreement means nothing? One thing is for sure, if two years ago I knew my kids would bail on us because they like my ex's rules better, I certainly would not be living in a house now set up for raising three kids and all the money that has cost us!

    I'm fighting my ex's bid for getting more money on the grounds that my ex cannot demonstrate a "need" for more considering my ex has set up an entire life perfectly fine for years now under the child support that was being given. Also, I am the only one since day one who has been putting money away in the kids RESPs, to the tune of more per month than my support and my ex has done nothing in this regard.

    How do you think this will turn out in court?

  • #2
    Not well for you...

    You are new, basically you figure how much custody time your ex will have which I assume will be over 60% and pay her full child support, shut your mouth and move on.

    If you don't like it, you need to get the laws changed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Your ex has the kids, so you will have to pay table support.

      If you fight it in court, you will have to pay table support, and you will have to pay a costs award.

      In a divorce, teenagers are piles of money that can walk to the lousy parent. Being a good parent often literally doesn't pay.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Links17 View Post
        Not well for you...

        You are new, basically you figure how much custody time your ex will have which I assume will be over 60% and pay her full child support, shut your mouth and move on.

        If you don't like it, you need to get the laws changed.
        I prefer to hear from folks who have gone through the same thing. Your anger at the "system" is based on your experience, which may not be the same experience as mine.

        I actually have found the system to be very fair up to this point. I'm just wondering how far that fairness goes?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Janus View Post
          Your ex has the kids, so you will have to pay table support.

          If you fight it in court, you will have to pay table support, and you will have to pay a costs award.

          In a divorce, teenagers are piles of money that can walk to the lousy parent. Being a good parent often literally doesn't pay.
          BTW...it's s zero-sum game for me anyway. Every dollar more I have to give to my ex is one dollar less I put in the RESPs anyway. I will not be angry so much as I will be disappointed in the "system" for not sharing my views on the best interest of the children.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by WilsonWilsonWilson View Post
            BTW...it's s zero-sum game for me anyway. Every dollar more I have to give to my ex is one dollar less I put in the RESPs anyway.
            I am not sure how that matters. You will have to pay education costs whether you have contributed to an RESP or not.

            If you give more to the ex and put less in the RESP, you will have to pay more when university comes around.


            I will not be angry so much as I will be disappointed in the "system" for not sharing my views on the best interest of the children.
            For the record, I completely agree with your concept of fairness. However, your ex has custody, and according to family law, fair is that you pay her table support. There is no wiggle room. They don't care why your kids left. They don't care that your ex is a lousy parent. They don't care that you made plans or bought a house or changed your life.

            You have the kids less than 40% of the time. By law, you are considered to directly spend a grand total of zero dollars on them. Therefore, you must pay table child support, plus proportional special expenses, because you don't contribute at all in any other way.

            Your ex doesn't have to show need. She can stand up in court and say that she fully intends to spend the child support on sex toys for her and her boyfriend, and she will still get table support. Child support is explicitly for the custodial parent to spend as she sees fit.

            If you bring this to court, you will get wrecked. Don't confuse justice with fairness.

            Comment


            • #7
              Have you talked to a lawyer? Im wondering if this might be a contempt issue with respect to the order for 50/50.

              She is obligated to encourage the relationship and perhaps if you can prove that there is no reason for the kids to not live with you it might be a defense.

              She has a right to request full support if they are with her more than 60% however she should still be encouraging the relationship.

              Talk to a lawyer about it and how you can encourage the kids to keep the living situation the way it is. Obviously they are teens and want more freedom so perhaps you will need to be a bit more flexible.

              Dont approach this as a money issue. Or a "i spent all this money and now you are screwing me" situation. What is best for the kids? Does having exposure to both parents create an ideal environment? Are they emotionally mature enough to make this decision? Thats how you need to view it. A judge will listen to them but they will also consider other factors. If it is a case of them not having rules at moms house a judge will see through it. There have been cases where the father has been abusive or attempted to alienate the kids in which case the judge has decided in favour of status quo or full custody. Look on canlii for relevant cases and also speak with a lawyer.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Janus View Post
                I am not sure how that matters. You will have to pay education costs whether you have contributed to an RESP or not.

                If you give more to the ex and put less in the RESP, you will have to pay more when university comes around.


                For the record, I completely agree with your concept of fairness. However, your ex has custody, and according to family law, fair is that you pay her table support. There is no wiggle room. They don't care why your kids left. They don't care that your ex is a lousy parent. They don't care that you made plans or bought a house or changed your life.

                You have the kids less than 40% of the time. By law, you are considered to directly spend a grand total of zero dollars on them. Therefore, you must pay table child support, plus proportional special expenses, because you don't contribute at all in any other way.

                Your ex doesn't have to show need. She can stand up in court and say that she fully intends to spend the child support on sex toys for her and her boyfriend, and she will still get table support. Child support is explicitly for the custodial parent to spend as she sees fit.

                If you bring this to court, you will get wrecked. Don't confuse justice with fairness.
                Thanks Janus for your input and I really appreciate you taking the time to read my post. However, I do not agree with you on a lot of what you have said. Reading from the "playbook" I can do myself and can find all this in 2 minutes searching on the internet. I have read more than enough court cases on-line now to know that the "Guidelines" for child support are just that...guidelines. They are a starting point to argue for or against. Parental behaviour plays a big part of it. I know from personal experience with an old neighbour of mine and his situation, but I'm not going into it here.

                I looking for someone who has been in the exact situation as me and what happened to them.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                  Have you talked to a lawyer? Im wondering if this might be a contempt issue with respect to the order for 50/50.

                  She is obligated to encourage the relationship and perhaps if you can prove that there is no reason for the kids to not live with you it might be a defense.

                  She has a right to request full support if they are with her more than 60% however she should still be encouraging the relationship.

                  Talk to a lawyer about it and how you can encourage the kids to keep the living situation the way it is. Obviously they are teens and want more freedom so perhaps you will need to be a bit more flexible.

                  Dont approach this as a money issue. Or a "i spent all this money and now you are screwing me" situation. What is best for the kids? Does having exposure to both parents create an ideal environment? Are they emotionally mature enough to make this decision? Thats how you need to view it. A judge will listen to them but they will also consider other factors. If it is a case of them not having rules at moms house a judge will see through it. There have been cases where the father has been abusive or attempted to alienate the kids in which case the judge has decided in favour of status quo or full custody. Look on canlii for relevant cases and also speak with a lawyer.
                  Thank you for your input. Thankfully I also know already a lot about what you are saying and about "parental alienation" and I've been putting a good case together in this regard. I have 9 reference letters from friends and family about what has been going on and I have also read "Divorce Poison" by a well read child psychologist.

                  I have read dozens of court case like you suggest, but just can't seem to find a situation like mine, although I'm sure there are plenty out there. But I also know that a court matter only gets reported on when it becomes an actual court case and if the just/legal way to proceed is very cut and dry, it ain't going to make it into a court room before someone gets the message.

                  I'm just looking for someone that has been in my situation and how did it turn out?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    You may not find someone with a similar situation. Most people here have been fighting for access.

                    I suggested a lawyer because youll need one for the support order argument. You have an order for 50/50. She will have to explain why it has changed and why she is not enforcing the shared custody. Get yourself some legal advice.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by WilsonWilsonWilson View Post
                      Thanks Janus for your input and I really appreciate you taking the time to read my post. However, I do not agree with you on a lot of what you have said. Reading from the "playbook" I can do myself and can find all this in 2 minutes searching on the internet. I have read more than enough court cases on-line now to know that the "Guidelines" for child support are just that...guidelines. They are a starting point to argue for or against. Parental behaviour plays a big part of it. I know from personal experience with an old neighbour of mine and his situation, but I'm not going into it here.
                      I looking for someone who has been in the exact situation as me and what happened to them.
                      Janus is a senior member and is rather knowledgeable when it comes to cs calculations and custody. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find others as familiar in the forum these days. You most certainly won’t find anyone in your exact situation – we and our situations are all unique.

                      Guidelines under $150/annum are not negotiable unless on consent. Your new household, for whatever reason, agreed to grant custody to the other parent household, and in essence your ex is now the CP. Status quo and all that – longer than six months as well, from what you’ve posted. You will be ordered to pay table cs. That “playbook” is the one the judges will work with.

                      The ship has sailed on parental alienation – you are dealing with teenagers. If you’d like to enjoy any sort of a relationship with them, I suggest you focus on each of them and speak to them as the adults they soon will be --work on Saturday or Sunday brunches, stay in touch with them via their extracurricular, text, facebook = practice a once weekly regular event where you spend time with them.

                      At the end of the day, table cs is payable to the parent who has the child more than 60% of the time [with an income of $150,000 or less] - and that is fair.

                      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                      You may not find someone with a similar situation. Most people here have been fighting for access.
                      What an interesting evaluation - I've found most posters lately fighting for/over money=custody. And encouraged to do so by other posters, both from parents and non-parents. Very money driven. In fact, this OP's initial post isn't concerned about missing quality time with the kids, is it?
                      Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I haven't been in your position but I know people who have. In their case, the position of the court was that child support is for the maintenance of the child and follows the child. It is not a reward to a parent for sticking to an agreement. So if the child is living full time with one parent, and this situation has been in place for a long time (4-6 months) and shows no signs of changing, the parent who has the child receives full CS.

                        The counter-argument is that both parties signed an agreement for 50/50 and one party is not following it, therefore that party should not benefit financially from breaking the agreement. In my friends' case, this was found to be a weaker argument than the one above (that CS goes with the child).

                        In your position, since your ex is already taking you to court, I would start paying full CS before you incur legal fees on top of the table CS you will almost certainly be required to pay. The house you bought, the RESPs, the claims of parental alienation, etc are all irrelevant.

                        It's a crappy situation to be sure. The kids for good reasons or bad have decided to live with Mom, and Mom is enabling. This is not good behavior on Mom's part, but going to court over CS will accomplish nothing.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I have no personal experience whatsoever with child support/custody.

                          With that said, I have read many cases on child alienation (as you undoubtedly have as well). Notable items which stand out to me include: a) cost of proving alienation exceeds $50k because you have to get independent psychological assessment by an expert in the field; b) children have to pretty much hate the parent and refuse to have anything whatsoever to do with the parent; and c) process is lengthy and usually includes a period of time of reunification. I don't think your situation is anywhere near this.

                          Spoiled, indulged children generally gravitate to parent with lax rules IMO. I would therefore agree with Janus's post.

                          Perhaps it is time to downsize and get a nice condo with a den with convertible sleeping arrangements and plan some nice vacations with your current family?

                          "I am more about teaching my kids about the realities and consequences of life"

                          You made a decision, with your current spouse, to sell your respective homes and "upgrade" to a more expensive home. Now you unfortunately have to deal with the 'reality and consequence' of your decision.

                          Hope you live in Toronto and can get a good dollar for your home.
                          Last edited by arabian; 01-13-2016, 09:03 PM. Reason: Include quote from poster

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by WilsonWilsonWilson View Post
                            I have read more than enough court cases on-line now to know that the "Guidelines" for child support are just that...guidelines.
                            If one parent has full custody (defined as >60% of the time) then child support is not a guideline, it is a table. You run your finger down the column until it gets to your income, and then see how much you have to pay.

                            If there is a shared custody situation, then it is a guideline, and one that is improperly understood by judges IMHO.

                            Child support can also be altered in cases of high access costs, high income (>150k) or undue hardship.

                            You do not have shared custody, and it is almost impossible to claim undue hardship, ergo they are not guidelines. I recognize your personal situation, and how this is a financial disaster, and I feel bad for you.

                            Now, that said, since you have read court cases online, can you provide a link to a case where the non-custodial parent did not have to pay guideline? I like to save interesting cases, and one like that would certainly be interesting.


                            They are a starting point to argue for or against. Parental behaviour plays a big part of it. I know from personal experience with an old neighbour of mine and his situation, but I'm not going into it here.
                            Parental behavior plays almost no role whatsoever in child support calculations. Child support makes the life of the custodial parent better, but it is technically for the child, so bad parental behavior will not result in the child getting "punished" by a lower child support award.

                            I looking for someone who has been in the exact situation as me and what happened to them.
                            CanLII - 2014 ONSC 268 (CanLII)

                            [12] Similarly, there is no doubt that Keith has made his own decision. Ms. Clark does not suggest that there is any alienation or any behaviour of that sort by Mr. Leska. Rather, at best, Keith has a close connection with his father. At worst, he is enamoured of the living conditions and his independence at his father’s house. In any event, given his age and the length of time that these circumstances have continued, his wishes should be given considerable weight.
                            [15] Mr. Leska’s plan has been in place for almost a year. Forcing this young man to live where he apparently does not wish to, as requested by Ms. Clark, is a plan that is more likely to cause harm than leaving the present circumstances in place.
                            [16] Accordingly, I grant Mr. Leska’s motion to vary the order of June 22, 2010, such that the parties shall continue to have joint custody (decision-making) with respect to both children; however, Keith shall reside primarily with the Mr. Leska and Clara shall continue to divide a residence between the homes of both parties. This variation shall be effective February 1, 2013.
                            Teenagers get to live wherever they want, regardless of any agreement you may have had.

                            If you want a case that is even worse for you:

                            CanLII - 2010 ONSC 5342 (CanLII)

                            221. The Applicant argued that the Respondent engaged in parental alienation to manipulate Nicklaus into living with him on a full-time basis between April 2007 and November 2009. She argued it would be unfair to require her to pay support to the Respondent for Nicklaus during that period, because the Respondent shouldn’t be rewarded for enticing the youth away from her.

                            222. I see no merit in this position. Child support is to be determined on the basis of where the child is actually living, and where expenses are actually being incurred. The need for financial contribution is not diminished by the child’s rationale for preferring a particular custodial placement.
                            That said, it is your dime. Sally forth and fight brave warrior!

                            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