ethics of lawyers

[Victorviola]

My ex husband is trying to use the defence of laches to avoid spousal support, has anyone heard of this kind of defence in family law, we were married 10 years, separated in 2012, divorced in 2014, no spousal support paid since date of separation,

[Victorviola]

Update: my ex is having his income evaluated for the past 10 years, took 4 months for him to sign consent and pay initial retainer, he earns over $200k per year from the limited disclosure he's provided. Does the income evaluator take into consideration his expenses as he expenses everything, his taxes don't match income in his accounts, I started these proceedings in early 2018, since reviewing his disclosure I noticed over 400k transferred out of all his bank accounts through drafts and have no idea where the $$ went, now his lawyer is claiming financial stresses, what's the best way to collect the $$$ he owes for CS and SS without going through fro, I know he hid the funds and don't want to fight another 5 years to collect when this is settled. Any advice on orders to ask for to find the hidden funds?

[sahibjee]

first against the husband's lawyer, then against your own lawyer. hmmm

[AlexLitty]

Update: my ex is having his income evaluated for the past 10 years, took 4 months for him to sign consent and pay initial retainer, he earns over $200k per year from the limited disclosure he's provided. Does the income evaluator take into consideration his expenses as he expenses everything, his taxes don't match income in his accounts, I started these proceedings in early 2018, since reviewing his disclosure I noticed over 400k transferred out of all his bank accounts through drafts and have no idea where the $$ went, now his lawyer is claiming financial stresses, what's the best way to collect the $$$ he owes for CS and SS without going through fro, I know he hid the funds and don't want to fight another 5 years to collect when this is settled. Any advice on orders to ask for to find the hidden funds?

Your ex sponsored you to Canada and this is how you repay him to seize half of his assets ,without contributing one bit to his success . Entitlement ,ehh .
You can file a Mareva injunction to freeze his assets . If he is an IT individual ,he mus have an offshore company in Caymans,Bahamas , BVI or Bermudas. You can hire a private investigator for this and would cost about a 500k-1million . You will likely spend more than what you will get out of him .If I was in your exs shoes ,I would just transfer all the assets to Dubai ,where entitled ex wives get 0% of marital property and only support .

[Victorviola]

Update: After 16 months of waiting I finally received a draft income evaluation report for CS purposes, I mentioned major discrepancies with the draft report to the evaluator which they agreed with along with my lawyer, respondent immediately stated he is not paying or cooperating anymore with the evaluator even though it was ordered by the judge in late 2020. Respondent threatened my lawyer, evaluaotor and his ex counsel via email. No child support for the last 6 months, respondent fired his counsel also. Now respondent is self representing and threatening to bring motions which have no merit just to delay. Settlement conference schedule for end of march. So no final report after almost 2 years. And the circus continues.

[blinkandimgone]

Your ex sponsored you to Canada and this is how you repay him to seize half of his assets ,without contributing one bit to his success . Entitlement ,ehh .
You can file a Mareva injunction to freeze his assets . If he is an IT individual ,he mus have an offshore company in Caymans,Bahamas , BVI or Bermudas. You can hire a private investigator for this and would cost about a 500k-1million . You will likely spend more than what you will get out of him .If I was in your exs shoes ,I would just transfer all the assets to Dubai ,where entitled ex wives get 0% of marital property and only support .

This kind of thing is why there are laws and guidelines around divorce in Canada.

People exercising their legal rights to property and asset division, whether you agree with it or not, are doing absolutely nothing wrong.

This kind of garbage isn't going to be tolerated here. Consider yourself warned.

[Victorviola]

Update: ex was found in bad faith regarding motion , 26k awarded in costs against him, there is justice, it's sad its so hard to fight for it and attain it, a light at the end of the tunnel after 5 years in litigation, ex is not a happy camper right now,

[rockscan]

Did you get an enforcement option in the order? The ability to file it with an enforcement agency to garnish his wages?

[Victorviola]

No I didn't get an enforcement option, he has 30 days to pay.... I was more happy that the judge stated he was acting in bad faith for the past 2 years, my ex has some tough choices to make now, motion was relating to an evaluator report which as of now is still on hold, he is required to pay for the evaluation report, he threatened the evaluator so interesting times...

[Victorviola]

Been a while since I updated....my ex paid the cost award... is self repping now,, no idea where he lives as he is renting primary residence... 3 years and still no final evaluation report on his income,,, evaluator has major concerns regarding income deposits and what was declared as expenses to cra...

Some Yeats deposits are over 200k but he declares 40k as revenue for company and personal income of 10K. Major discrepancies.

he is not willing to provide more disclosure to evaluator or pay retainer again.

He didn't show up for trial assignment court..

No CS in 7 months. Fro garnished 7k from last year.

Served him with Request to admit, don't expect response.

My lawyer cant reach him via email as he cancelled his email and will not provide new one.

Need to send everything via courier to his rental property. He will not disclose where he lives.

My lawyer recommends motion for strike of pleadings and uncontested trial at this point...

The worst part is he is very well off and trying to cripple me financially with this case. Not giving up.

[newerwavers]

I'm not going to delve into the minutiae of your situation or what drives your ex, but from the sounds of it, he was never even in the running for something resembling a 50/50 custody arrangement. It’s like he was set up to fail from the get-go, now finding himself in a position where he hardly sees his kids at all. This whole mess you’re enduring really shines a light on how the court system’s failures aren't reserved for just one gender. It indiscriminately steamrolls anyone caught in its path—mothers and fathers alike. We spend so much time arguing about whether the court favors men or women that we miss the forest for the trees: the system is fundamentally apathetic. Its main focus appears to be sustaining itself, regardless of who gets hurt in the process.

The labyrinth you're navigating, with its financial hide-and-seek and judicial indifference, perfectly illustrates the court's impotence in enforcing its mandates. It’s a public secret in the family court circles that perjury, particularly regarding finances, goes largely unchecked. Contempt of court, whether through denied access or evading financial obligations, seems almost inconsequential. This lax enforcement emboldens individuals like your ex to flout the rules, fully aware of the negligible repercussions.

He's probably watching from afar, smugly satisfied with how the system's ineptitude plays into his hands, leaving you to shoulder the financial burden and emotional toll. It's a grim tableau of the reality many face when stepping into family court: a place where the rules are more akin to guidelines and the costs of participation—both in terms of money and spirit—are exorbitant, with justice often remaining elusive.

This sad state of affairs, where deceit and contempt are par for the course, exploited by those savvy or cynical enough to use them to their advantage, casts a long shadow over the notion of fair play and justice. It underscores a bitter truth: engaging with family court can feel like a quixotic quest, with the only assured winners being the legal system and its custodians, profiting from the ongoing conflict and confusion.

[Victorviola]

Newewavers- great response... what drives my ex is Greed and $$$$$, it's not about our child as he has not seen her in two years and gave me full custody without a fight, should speak volumes...

If i could turn back the clock i wouldnt have initiated these proceedings, my $$$ that went to lawyers would have been better spent on my kids, too far in too give up.

One day I hope someone can use my case to their benefit...when all is said and done

[newerwavers]

I dealt with a similar situation recently: a single mom, strapped for cash, against an absent dad with a trust fund and a penchant for hiring expensive lawyers to play hide-and-seek with his income—or lack thereof, considering he treats doing his taxes like he's allergic to them. It's like the system's tailor-made for these types, making it a cakewalk for them to stall proceedings and bleed the other party dry. It's been years and she hasn't collected a dime, all while her legal bills continue to stack up. And, just to add my own twist to the tale, I’m wrestling with outstanding FRO payments from my ex, which she seems to dodge with alarming ease. Chasing them down, even through Small Claims, turns into a herculean effort on my part. Through this ordeal, I’ve picked up on how easy many of these legal tasks are, which lawyers bill hundreds for per hour. I’ve since taken to fully representing myself.

Looking back, I'd tell her straight: don't bother. The whole venture's akin to throwing your money into a black hole. And here's a slice of truth you're unlikely to get from your garden-variety lawyer: wading into this battle is often an exercise in futility. It's essentially the old adage of never asking a barber if you need a haircut—there's always a vested interest.

The real issue (including on this forum): is this ongoing blame game between dads and moms. It's all just a smokescreen, diverting attention from the core problem. The real adversary isn't the fathers or the mothers; it's the system. Broken, morally bankrupt, and fueled by a relentless drive for cash and perverse incentives, it shows no genuine concern for what's fair or for the children caught in the crossfire. This system flourishes on conflict, raking in profits, while genuine issues are buried under a mountain of legal fees and endless, meaningless paperwork.

So, why are lawyers the gatekeepers of legal advice? Ever wonder why there's such a strict barrier against obtaining free legal counsel from anyone else? It's because the entire legal framework is needlessly complex, a self-perpetuating monopoly that transforms straightforward human conflicts into a drawn-out spectacle. What you're essentially paying for is overpriced copywriting, dressed up with unnecessary legal fanfare. It's a setup engineered to ensure you keep coming back, shelling out more, as they protect the convoluted citadel they've constructed. Justice has little to do with it; it's about fueling the machinery, all on your dime.

Good luck, but be ready to consider if it's time to cut your losses.

[rockscan]

I dealt with a similar situation recently: a single mom, strapped for cash, against an absent dad with a trust fund and a penchant for hiring expensive lawyers to play hide-and-seek with his income—or lack thereof, considering he treats doing his taxes like he's allergic to them. It's like the system's tailor-made for these types, making it a cakewalk for them to stall proceedings and bleed the other party dry. It's been years and she hasn't collected a dime, all while her legal bills continue to stack up. And, just to add my own twist to the tale, I’m wrestling with outstanding FRO payments from my ex, which she seems to dodge with alarming ease. Chasing them down, even through Small Claims, turns into a herculean effort on my part. Through this ordeal, I’ve picked up on how easy many of these legal tasks are, which lawyers bill hundreds for per hour. I’ve since taken to fully representing myself.

Looking back, I'd tell her straight: don't bother. The whole venture's akin to throwing your money into a black hole. And here's a slice of truth you're unlikely to get from your garden-variety lawyer: wading into this battle is often an exercise in futility. It's essentially the old adage of never asking a barber if you need a haircut—there's always a vested interest.

The real issue (including on this forum): is this ongoing blame game between dads and moms. It's all just a smokescreen, diverting attention from the core problem. The real adversary isn't the fathers or the mothers; it's the system. Broken, morally bankrupt, and fueled by a relentless drive for cash and perverse incentives, it shows no genuine concern for what's fair or for the children caught in the crossfire. This system flourishes on conflict, raking in profits, while genuine issues are buried under a mountain of legal fees and endless, meaningless paperwork.

So, why are lawyers the gatekeepers of legal advice? Ever wonder why there's such a strict barrier against obtaining free legal counsel from anyone else? It's because the entire legal framework is needlessly complex, a self-perpetuating monopoly that transforms straightforward human conflicts into a drawn-out spectacle. What you're essentially paying for is overpriced copywriting, dressed up with unnecessary legal fanfare. It's a setup engineered to ensure you keep coming back, shelling out more, as they protect the convoluted citadel they've constructed. Justice has little to do with it; it's about fueling the machinery, all on your dime.

Good luck, but be ready to consider if it's time to cut your losses.

Not so much anymore. There is plenty of advice on the internet through sites like government and legal assistance sites. So much more is shared on legal blogs and forums like this one. The problem is emotion gets in the way of logic and a lot of people aren't strong enough to self rep as a result. My husband could never self rep and his lawyer had little to do. The ex was the one causing all the problems and we sat back waiting for the hearing dates and providing information. If she had been reasonable, we never would have gone to court.

The system has some blame but unreasonable parties have a lot more to do with it. A judge and lawyers can only do so much when a party comes along wasting time. That includes parties who don't want to provide info or comply with orders and those intent on fighting. And the court is hesitant to put ramifications in place if it would impact rights or access to justice. Which is what has gotten it to this point.

[newerwavers]

Not so much anymore.

Regarding what, exactly? If we're talking about the ease of accessing quality legal advice or the ability to self-represent effectively, I have to push back, especially based on what I'm currently seeing in the GTA. The delays and wait times for public court access, particularly post-Covid, have ballooned massively. The landscape has shifted, and not for the better.

Having no salaried job (i.e., no T4) while being able to afford high-quality legal representation has always been a significant advantage for stalling proceedings and sidestepping financial responsibilities. The Family Responsibility Office (FRO) is a perfect example of a system struggling to keep up, and Small Claims Court can take years to resolve even the simplest disputes. By all accounts, things have deteriorated from their pre-Covid state across the board.

Moreover, my other post from today touches on the noticeable decline in high-quality information available online for those looking to self-represent. This forum included. The digital landscape, once rich with resources and open dialogue for self-repping, seems to have thinned, leaving would-be self-representatives at a disadvantage.

From my experience, self-representing is far easier than most people are led to believe, emotional components included. The real challenge lies in discovering that for oneself amidst a dearth of reliable information. It's almost as if there's a concerted effort to obscure the viability of self-representation, maintaining the status quo of dependency on legal professionals. This trend, I'd argue, isn't incidental but rather a reflection of a system designed to perpetuate its complexity and necessity—intentionally so.