COSTS: EX was ordered by Court to pay 18g in Costs, if he does not, then what?

[caranna]

It was all so unnecessary - Trial, Costs, all of it. That's what you get when you must deal with high-conflict, never say die people. The sad part is that the ex will never comprehend that he created the current situation by being completely unreasonable. We all would have been far better off without all the bullshit.

Hadenough, if there's any justice, it's coming your way and it's long overdue. Yes it is deplorable that high-conflict people never really seem to get it, but it's their life and they will have to deal with the consequences some day. Continue to be strong and look out for yourself.

[wretchedotis]

Had 3 day Trial last April. Decision released over 5 months later!! (Sept/11). In Jan/2012: My EX was ordered to pay 18g in costs. In the Final Costs Order, it states he has 6 months to pay it. If (or should I say "when") he fails to - am I responsible or on the hook for the costs? My lawyer knows I don't have any/much money. Still, I rec'd a bill in the above amt. Strangely enough, after a lot of confusion an the run-around: after 6+ months, FRO still doesn't have the "final stamped order." FRO has nothing. Courts said "call your lawyer" - Lawyer said "gee I'm surprised Courts didn't send order to FRO (back in Sept). Same lawyer told me (oct/nov/dec) that we had to wait for "final order on costs." That: is not true/correct. Last month was the "I'm surprised the courts didn't ... as above"

No idea what is going on. I'm starting to think my lawyer is waiting to see whether EX pays him or not: and if he doesn't, I'm strung out/hung out to dry all these months - will likely out o sheer desperation sell my house - no idea where I'll go. 2 emails later (to lawyer) and a VM left for his assistant and guess what? No reply. Unless I've just become totally paranoid, I'm thinking this "hold up" is very deliberate and gerting the order to FRO is a tactic to ensure that I have to cave in and sell, so that lawyer will get his "costs" one way or the other.

Even FRO (I've spoken to them a few times) says it's very strange that a decision made in Sept/2011 is not with them. Min of A.G says when you are rep'd in Court and go to Trial, the party who the final order was in favour of: it's that party's counsel that takes care of seeing the Final Order is sent to FRO. I really have no clue as to what is going on. Will I be forced to pay, if ex doesn't? (Order for Costs states he has until June/2012.

I really don't know. So take what I say with a grain of salt.

But you owe it to your lawyer, and your ex owes you the bill you incurred from your lawyer.

So. Who will default first?

That's hard to say.

[hadenough]

Caught a typo of mine above ^. It should read "not" successful at Trial. Just an update: the motion was approved/signed by the Judge. The costs will be sent to FRO for enforcement as an incident of C.S. The Final Order will be amended by the Court.

The Judge noted that the OP had not responded to the motion and had not made any attempt to address the costs, despite being given several months to pay the amount. Based on those factors, the amendment was approved. I am not sure if ex will be expected to pay the full amount within 'x' amount of days, or if he will be permitted to make monthly instalments (?).

It was all so unnecessary - Trial, Costs, all of it. That's what you get when you must deal with high-conflict, never say die people. The sad part is that the ex will never comprehend that he created the current situation by being completely unreasonable. We all would have been far better off without all the bullshit.

[hadenough]

PS Rioe; The lawyer (for ex) is the *same* lawyer he's had for the past couple of years. This lawyer went to Trial w/him re: our Family Court Matter and they were ot successful at trial. This lawyer is well aware of the entire situation. I don't doubt that HE is being paid. I'm sure that's all he cares about. I'm 100% certain

[hadenough]

Rioe: a response to this affront has already been drafted (part of it, by me) - CS of course is the entitlement of the Child as you also pointed out. If it were any other lawyer I might agree (w/feeling some sympathy re: having morons for clients) but I've seen this jack ass in action and he has no shame at all. He is a total disaster. I would go un/self-rep'd any day before I had a freak of a lawyer like this one.

It is crystal clear to ALL that the ex does not honour anything. It is addressed in the Judge's decision and the amt of his arrears and this unpaid costs order testify to his character.

[Rioe]

Maybe there's some way you can communicate to this other lawyer that your ex is not one to honour his financial obligations. Scare the lawyer into thinking that he's not going to have his bill paid!

How about replying to the letter with something to the effect that it is through your ex's own actions that he was ordered to pay the court costs, and that the money he is expending in continuing to fight this would be better served actually paying them. It is not your responsibility, nor in the best interests of the child (sneak that in there!), to assist him in further evading his obligations.

Naturally, you agree that no one wants him to lose his driver's licence, therefore it behooves him to address his arrears instead of further increasing his own legal expenses by hiring a lawyer to send letters such as this one.

Additionally, the CS amount is set by table, and it would not be fair to the child nor respectful to the judge who ordered it to adjust it now.

I kind of feel sorry for lawyers who are hired by people like your ex. Most probably feel like idiot jerks being instructed to write letters like these.

[hadenough]

Here's a good one: ex has continued to ignore the Costs order. His dream team calibre lawyer has written a letter to mine, stating that I should agree to lowering ("adjusting") the CS amt to "make room for" ex's legal fees to be paid through FRO. There definitely needs to be some ADJUSTING to MAKE ROOM FOR something, but it's not legal fees.

This stunning Lawyer then goes on to remind us that if his client loses his license, there will be no resources with which he can pay CS etc. Very amusing as it begs several questions wrt how he himself would survive. Fancy cars and a new house to pay for, just as a starting point. It is lawyers like this one that really do taint the entire legal profession. I would never want someone like this representing me..

And I'd really like to know why it's perfectly okay for him (these types) to bullshit, left right and centre. There were several outright LIES contained in this recent correspondence. We have been through court. Evidence was heard and decisions were made/ordered based on that evidence! Again, I find myself angered that ex (and lawyer) simply lie their faces off, and then once again it is up to me to provide the proof, that they are in fact completely full of shit. Now that I'm a few years "in" on this 'tour of duty' - I don't get as upset as I once did. Some of it is rather amusing, knowing what I know now.

I can totally see that ex's lawyer does not care at all how he himself looks/sounds, nor his client. He will say whatever/whenever and as long as ex is paying him, everything is fine and dandy. In exchange, the ex gets to feel all warm and fuzzy (temporarily) that his big bad lawyer is deflecting and doing the old 'smoke and mirrors' routine. Absolutely pathetic.

[hadenough]

Update: the 14B motion has been served and filed to have the Judge's cost order amended to be enforced by the FRO. I do not know the outcome yet, but it is expected to go through. If this move was/is an effective means of seeing that costs are paid (and not simply ignored) then hopefully it can help others.

[hadenough]

I totally agree. He should have caught this oversight long ago. I think he's 'old schoool' and assumed it was an incidental automatically attached to the CS Order. Apparently, back in the 'day' it was, but not anymore. The order needs to be specifically worded.

Yes, I am acutely aware that ultimately, he may pursue me for the Costs that my ex owes to him.

[WorkingDAD]

He initially referenced Rule 25 (or 29?? IDK) which has to do w/error or mistake. He said it (the 'enforcement' of costs) should have been included/enforced in the Final Order and it wasn't. So now, as time ticks away (costs were due a few months ago) - he is filing 14B - not sure if he's referencing the error thingy (I think it's Rule 25, but I might be mixed up). The order states that "ex" pay the costs to ME, within "6 months" from date of order, and then I was to pay my lawyer. Yeah, like THAT was ever going to happen (that he'd pay what he was ordered to).

Should this 'over the counter' motion be successful, I will ask him for a copy of the materials submitted and share them w/you. I did not meet w/him personally on this, nor did I have to sign anything so I learned of this through a phone conversation. Stay tuned.

Well he probably want to put wording that cost incurred for obtaining support than it can be endorsed by FRO. good thing he is not going after you for Cost and trying to fix his own mistake (yes as a lawyer he should know that wording and be on top of thing before order even issued)

RULE 25 ORDERS
and particularly

CHANGING ORDER — FRAUD, MISTAKE, LACK OF NOTICE

(19) The court may, on motion, change an order that,
(a) was obtained by fraud;
(b) contains a mistake;
(c) needs to be changed to deal with a matter that was before the court but that it did not decide;
(d) was made without notice; or
(e) was made with notice, if an affected party was not present when the order was made because the notice was inadequate or the party was unable, for a reason satisfactory to the court, to be present. O. Reg. 151/08, s. 6.

[hadenough]

He initially referenced Rule 25 (or 29?? IDK) which has to do w/error or mistake. He said it (the 'enforcement' of costs) should have been included/enforced in the Final Order and it wasn't. So now, as time ticks away (costs were due a few months ago) - he is filing 14B - not sure if he's referencing the error thingy (I think it's Rule 25, but I might be mixed up). The order states that "ex" pay the costs to ME, within "6 months" from date of order, and then I was to pay my lawyer. Yeah, like THAT was ever going to happen (that he'd pay what he was ordered to).

Should this 'over the counter' motion be successful, I will ask him for a copy of the materials submitted and share them w/you. I did not meet w/him personally on this, nor did I have to sign anything so I learned of this through a phone conversation. Stay tuned.

[WorkingDAD]

Lawyer is filing a 14B motion to get costs enforced by FRO. He's doing it over the counter and I am awaiting his call/email to advise if this motion was successful, re: Costs (owed to Lawyer).

14B (Procedural, uncomplicated or unopposed matters) to get costs (owed to Lawyer) enforced by FRO. ?

That interesting... I would like to see his materials

[hadenough]

Lawyer is filing a 14B motion to get costs enforced by FRO. He's doing it over the counter and I am awaiting his call/email to advise if this motion was successful, re: Costs (owed to Lawyer).

[WorkingDAD]

Thanks workingdad. I was told there won't be a support deduction order b/c ex is self employed. I don't know if that info is correct or not. I've been misled many times now by persons who were in a position to know better and advise accordingly.

That sound weird. If there is order which stated that CS $$$ and SS $$$ than I do not see any reason why Support Deduction Order has to do anything with self-employed. All that being done at Trial when your ex income was imputed...

[hadenough]

Thanks workingdad. I was told there won't be a support deduction order b/c ex is self employed. I don't know if that info is correct or not. I've been misled many times now by persons who were in a position to know better and advise accordingly.