No announcement yet.

Bankruptcy discharge hearing after cost order...

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bankruptcy discharge hearing after cost order...

    Hello All

    So here we go. Day X came. We had discharge hearing today in bankruptcy court (for those who forgot ex filled for bankruptcy to wipe out cost order to be able to comeback to family court).

    So bankrupt presented her case why she should be given absolute discharge which basically come down to poor me I did not mean to go to court and I did it just to bring stability to child's life (how cynical is that?) and it's OCL fault that he gave her such report (which turn out to be not good because she lied .) But no she did not lie to him he just did bad job and did not go deep (sound familiar?)

    Then I have opportunity to cross-examine her (yea it;s like I did not had it enough). So basically Bankrupt admitted on the record among whole bunch of another interesting distortions:

    1. Justice Pazaratz just got confused and got all it wrong and everything what he wrote in his endorsement for the trial and cost order has nothing to do with reality - nice isn't it ? It also her bad English and again the fact that Pazaratz said there is no issue with English is his opinion and has nothing to do with reality.

    2. Not only Pazaratz but another judge later did not get it right too.

    3. Whole bunch of I do not know and I do not remember you confused me with dates.

    Basically it came to the point that she applied for bankruptcy just to have fresh start (and yes I definitely brought to the court attention that bankruptcy filled on Feb 3 and another motion brought for feb 10 - so much for fresh start isn't it?) and she can not pay anything because she is on Ontario Works have just ~570 a month live with her brother and pay him $400 rent (isn't it anybody dream to have such nice helpful brother?), she has brain tummor and applied for disability and bla bla bla.

    Interestingly enough when I asked how much child support you pay since kido with me full time she said nothing because there is no court order for her to pay CS (who knew that you actually required to have an order to support your kid - I did not know that and foolishly paid voluntarily).

    I basically said at the end that it my hope that this court will send loud and clear message to this Bankrupt and all others who will come after her with the same issue that bankruptcy court is not going to allow that.

    Judgement reserved (what I think is kind of good sign that Judge will do right thing or at least take close look on whole picture and how we get there - but of course you never know how it will turnout). (so I am on verdict watch like with Jodi Areas) - may take couple of month.

    I will update this thread when I will have decision on Bankruptcy. Hopefully my ordeal will help someone with same issue in future.

    As for me if anyone missing me and wondering where I disappear (I don't really believe there is anyone). I am still looking for job and keep adding pounds

    Kido is great - happy, healthy and stubborn (that all what matters).
    JK on horizon

  • #2
    good job WD. I just hope that they see thru her like everyone else has.


    • #3

      Great to get an update from you. We do miss you, you are an inspiration to a lot of people and your name comes up often on the forums and even in conversations in real life with my friends and family.

      I'm sorry to hear you are no longer employed

      Sounds like you did a great job (as always) in bankruptcy court and I hope the judgement reflects "reality". Keep giving Max lots of hugs, they do grow up so fast!


      • #4
        Here is an interesting article when "Judgement is reserved.":

        Delay in Reasons for Judgement: Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

        Delay in Reasons for Judgment: Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

        The 2011 version of the Code of Civil Procedure requires this, at §485:
        "A judgment on the merits must be rendered within six months after the case is taken under advisement...

        "Where the judge seized of a case or matter fails to render a judgment within the time limit prescribed by the first paragraph, the chief justice or judge may, on his own initiative or on a motion by one of the parties, remove the case or matter from the judge and order that it be assigned to another judge."
        Basically, my interpretation of the significance is that:

        When a judge takes a case under advisement, a controversial matter - a live dispute between real people - remains undecided and in a no-man's land.
        Considering that most bankruptcy court hearings are 5-10 minutes and ordered on site... It is quite interesting that the justice reserved judgement to no doubt review your materials contesting the release from the debt incurred due to a finding of bad faith by another justice.

        As it is common knowledge that:

        Bankruptcy is a legal process carried out through a trustee in bankruptcy designed to relieve honest but unfortunate debtors of their debt burden.
        Basic Concepts - Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada

        How do you as the bankrupt, address this very simple principal when the debt you incurred that you "lied" and that is how you incurred the debt?

        For example:

        Originally posted by Justice Pazaratz para. 7
        In my judgment I concluded the Respondent father had exemplary parenting skills; the Applicant unilaterally terminated a viable co-parenting arrangement when the child was 9 months old; she lied at the motions stage to marginalize the Respondent and create a self-serving status quo; she misled the OCL investigator (who in turn did a superficial investigation which simply rubber stamped the status quo); she engaged in alienating behaviours to shut the Respondent out of the child’s life; she demonstrated questionable decision making in vitally important areas such as the child’s health and education; and she clearly demonstrated that she was unprepared to promote meaningful and beneficial contact between father and son.

        Originally posted by Justice Pazaratz para. 18
        In my judgment I set out in detail that at every stage I concluded the Respondent acted reasonably – both as a parent and as a self-represented litigant (Rule 24(4)). In contrast, the Applicant behaved unreasonably in making and promoting false allegations; misleading the OCL investigator; failing to make concessions which not only should have been obvious but also in the best interests of the child (such as accepting the social worker’s recommendation to implement overnight visits); and in stubbornly advancing implausible and poorly thought out allegations and themes.
        Ultimately the justice hearing the matter is burdened with this problem in the decision that will eventually result:

        Originally posted by Justice Pazaratz para. 68
        In any event, the practical result of a set-off at this time would be that Ontario Works – i.e., the taxpayer – would end up paying the costs award on behalf of the Applicant. This added set of “wings”, shielding the Applicant from personal accountability, would effectively negate the intended salutary effect of a costs order. Even the Respondent acknowledged that the Applicant should be required to pay costs from her own pocket. Otherwise, it won’t modify her behaviour.
        To paraphrase:

        In any event, the justice presiding over the bankruptcy trial has to balance the impact not only to the creditor (WorkingDad) but, the overall taxpayer who is having to foot the bill for the the bankrupt's conduct, lies, etc... If the justice absolves the bankrupt in this matter it will ultimately be you (WorkingDad) who would end up paying costs again. Almost a doubling down on you. The justice presiding over this matter has to insure that in the order that an added set of "wings" are not given to the bankrupt as it would "would effectively negate the intended salutary effect of a costs order". Not only this costs order but, all costs orders for which people bring from Family Law into bankruptcy court.

        Hopefully new jurisprudence ("case law") will evolve from this matter again and protect tax payers from this kind of improper use of our courts, Legal Aid Ontario funds, court time (and costs) and most importantly the impact it has on the child and the other parent.

        Good Luck!


        • #5
          Further to my opinions:

          I think the responsibility lies with Legal Aid Ontario for having provided public funds to the bankrupt (Application in the family law proceedings). This whole matter cries out for legislative review by the Ontario Government on the governance of funds provided to Legal Aid Ontario "clients" who are given "wings" to conduct this kind of litigation.

          The government would be wise to implement a governance structure on the conduct of Legal Aid Ontario clients and their panel lawyers whom are in reciept of the certificate. As well, I would add to that review process the duty counsel as well.

          I rely upon the following observations made and related case law from these threads in support of my opinions (concerns):

          In addition, I would include the Office of The Children's Lawyer as a responsible government agency that should be held accountable to the conduct and costs that may result from a "superficial" investigation which resulted in a "defective" report. I would add to that custody and access evaluators operating under Section 30 of the CLRA. More clear governance over these "professionals" needs to be put in place by their respective colleges and any organizational affiliations they have.

          OCL "investigators" and section 30 custody and access evaluators should not be "mediators" but truly clinical investigators with a forensics background in psychology and proper training in that area.

          For example these quotes:

          Originally posted by Justice Pazaratz
          the OCL investigator (who in turn did a superficial investigation which simply rubber stamped the status quo)
          Originally posted by Justice Pazaratz
          Sadly, the social worker didn’t show enough initiative to catch her in her lies. As a result, the s.112 report was defective – and the Applicant knew it.
          his devastatingly effective cross-examination of both the Applicant and the OCL social worker reflected significant organization and planning.
          The OCL and any "professional" ("expert") ordered under the FLR, FLA or CLRA to conduct an investigation should not represent themselves to anyone as a "mediator". Their responsibility should be clearly stated to investigate all allegations made and to base their **recommendations** on the basic principals of "evidence based medicine" (primarily) and to be supported (where possible) by "case law".

          It is time the Government of Ontario woke up and realized this. The reality that they face is that when reviewing case law in the public posted system it can easily be assumed that for ever 1 posted decision there are possibly thousands (or 10s of thousands) of cases that are not represented in the public reporting system. Add to that the number of matters that may have settled on a "defective" report or "superficial" investigation.

          The children of Ontario diverse better than this from our system of Family Law and from the people who represent themselves as "clinical professionals" through the OCL and under Section 30 of the CLRA.

          Good Luck!


          • #6
            Best of Luck WD and thanks for the update. I am of the opinion that the B-courts are far too lenient and in most matters, not nearly enough is ordered/done. An individual can remain in bankruptcy (undischarged) indefinitely, and many do.

            I sincerely hope your matter will be dealt with fairly and swiftly.


            • #7
              Another little win for the people who has to deal with crazy...

              Hello All

              I finally got my decision from bankruptcy discharge hearing (see above for details). It just two pages so I will just attach it here and let you to come to your own conclusion. I guess Taken will give some thoughts as always

              see attached pdf (please change .zip to .pdf after download and open in reader)

              Attached Files


              • #8
                My friend is in a situation with an ex who has claimed bankruptcy and hidden assets. How will your ex pay you money if they are bankrupt. My friend's husband still belongs to his golf club etc. but couldn't pay child support.


                • #9
                  WorkingDad - more justice for you !

                  A good ruling which will send message for all who try to evade family court cost Order: don't even think about it.

                  Congratulations - well done!


                  • #10
                    Wow. I bet you never expected to become an expert in family law and insolvency all thanks to one very troubled woman.

                    I hope someday you will be able to find rest and new hobbies. Meanwhile, you can feel proud that you are setting strong precedents to guide the future of family law and bankruptcy to prevent abuses such as your ex perpetrates on these systems.


                    • #11
                      Hello everyone,
                      WD- I was unable to view the decision but I'm anxious to see it. Would you kindly email it in pdf to my personal email address? Thanks. If you no longer have it (but I'm sure you do) just PM me. Thanks


                      • #12
                        Great job WorkingDad.

                        You should write the Bar exam


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rioe View Post
                          Wow. I bet you never expected to become an expert in family law and insolvency all thanks to one very troubled woman.

                          I hope someday you will be able to find rest and new hobbies. Meanwhile, you can feel proud that you are setting strong precedents to guide the future of family law and bankruptcy to prevent abuses such as your ex perpetrates on these systems.
                          At no time I consider my self an expert in any of thouse. I don't think I even first year law school student. Most of the time I really do not know what is proper way of doing things and just go on pure instinct.



                          • #14
                            WD you should be careful about your child, when you push people into corners they might do reckless things. Congratulations.


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Links17 View Post
                              WD you should be careful about your child, when you push people into corners they might do reckless things. Congratulations.
                              It definitely sound like threat to me... Storm, ConfusedMommy ... relative may be ?

                              Just as note I did not push people into conner - I Respondent if you are not aware...



                              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.