He is not responding to affidavidt

[ringettteplayer]

Hi my stbx was served a little over 30 days ago. We have had 3 adjournments and his lawyer said I must be questioned by her first before her client( my stbx) will respond to my affidavidt. Whaaat does that mean?? I have asked for spousal child support and sole custody.
Thank you.,

[ringettteplayer]

We do but we don't have to attend, just our lawyers and his lawyer has adjourned it 3xs already?! I don't understand why!?

[hadenough]

Yeah, the "questioning" thing is strange. Tell your lawyer you want to proceed and if the other party is non-responsive as you say then a decision should be made in his absence. Sounds like a run-around to me. Your lawyer needs to toughen up, and proceed - seek an interim order of some kind. You are in a holding pattern due to lawyer-games by the sounds of it. Remember: your lawyer works for YOU.

[OrleansLawyer]

We have had 3 adjournments and his lawyer said I must be questioned by her first before her client( my stbx) will respond to my affidavidt.

What they are requesting is an examination; they will ask you questions which you will respond to under oath. This is not terribly common in family law, due to the high costs involved (everyone paying their lawyers, plus facilities, recording, order transcript, etc) and people often prefer to obtain the information in other ways.

What has your lawyer said about you being questioned? Is the questioning required for the motion to proceed?

[ringettteplayer]

Good morning everyone!
The questioning came from his lawyer in a letter to my lawyer, I served him my affidavidt and my lawyer requested financials etc., along with his affidavidt, his lawyers response was with regards to spousal she says I'm not being candid in my affidavidt, as I didn't mention my new relationship. Therefore she feels the need to question me then he (stbx) will reply with an affidavidt.
So if she doesn't question me and he doesn't do an affidavidt does that mean anything?

[limer]

This may help depending upon where your case is at, it's covered under rule 20; Questioning a witness and disclosure
QUESTIONING OR DISCLOSURE — PRECONDITIONS
<!-- TRANSIT - HYPERLINK --><!-- .tribunaux judiciaires (Loi sur les) - Règl. de l'Ont. 114/99. -->(8) A party who wants to question a person or obtain information by affidavit or by another method may do so only if the party,
(a) has served and filed any answer, financial statement or net family property statement that these rules require; and
(b) promises in writing not to serve or file any further material for the next step in the case, except in reply to the answers or information obtained. O. Reg. 114/99, r. 20 (8).

[DowntroddenDad]

Something smells fishy.

Your new relationship should not be material in any financial disclosure, spousal support or custody decision, unless he is claiming undue hardship (and you are living with the new beau) or the new beau is somehow a danger to your children.

Your ex may not understand that, but your ex's lawyer would.

I would not trust that the new relationship is the real reason. Sounds like a fishing expedition to me, and the new relationship is an excuse.

[ringettteplayer]

He left us. He moved across the country. He shacked up with a new woman, he doesn't want to pay spousal. He made over a hundred thousand last year, I made $10 000 as I was a stay at home mom for 12 years, until just recently,
Undue hardship really I will be sick if he does that

[DowntroddenDad]

I understand your frustration and your emotion. Don't let it come out in court. It won't help your case. Stick to the facts.

The fact that he is with someone new and that you are now in a new relationship should have nothing to do with the custody or support discussions.

[ringettteplayer]

If he doesn't reply back with an affidavidt what does that mean? That he agrees with what was said?

[DowntroddenDad]

If he doesn't reply back with an affidavidt what does that mean? That he agrees with what was said?

If he has asked that you be questioned, that means he disagrees with something you said, and wants the chance to prove it.

[ringettteplayer]

Yes he is questioning my relationship and my partners income. I volunteered my new partners T4 to prove that we are not high earners, not even close to what he made. I have not heard a response or a peep
From his lawyer since they have 15 more days to respond.

[DowntroddenDad]

Are you living with your partner? Is it common law yet?

Your partner's income should be no concern. I would not have shared a T4. What purpose would it serve?

[ringettteplayer]

Yes I am living here until c/s starts getting paid. I have been here since oct'12.
The purpose I suppose is b/c we wanted to prove that we are not well off like he implied. I threw him a bone. No big deal., he is trying to get out of spousal and god only knows what else, he took a lower paying job this year cutting $70thousand off his income. He lives with his woman should I fight fire with fire? Or.....

[DowntroddenDad]

Strictly speaking the courts don't care about any income except yours and your ex spouses, unless one of you is applying for undue hardship, and you have to have very low income to qualify for that.

The SS and CS are based on your income and your spouses income. If you moved in with a millionaire they might try and impute income based on lifestyle but other than that you should be good. I'm not sure that providing a T4 from your partner can do them any good.

You can try and prove he deliberately took a lower paying job. But you would need a lawyer for that, it would be tricky to prove.