Changing the Laws

[AtALoss]

Hi Everybody,

Many of you know that my spouse has a suit against the Crown for basically wrongfull enforcement of an expired order. We have also been speaking with the House of Commons and the various avenues to realise change.

I have asked this question before and well asking again. One of the things that we are fighting to have changed is the Enforcement Act. ( make it a fairer act that gives equal rights to both payor and recipients) We all know that it is biased.

I would like to hear from you here what you think needs to be changed. for example I dont feel it unreasonable that the child reports thier need of support. they would just have to send FRO thier transcripts tax info and beyond 18. Almost always it come down to an argument from the parents as to when the support should end and we all know where that ends.

So please if you have any concrete thoughts on how any of these acts should change please let me know here. HoC Needs our ideas too.

[AtALoss]

Thanks for the feed back I guess the majority would rather whine than do anything about it. Typical. Good luck to all. See ya.

[Epona]

"...for example I dont feel it unreasonable that the child reports thier need of support. they would just have to send FRO thier transcripts tax info and beyond 18. Almost always it come down to an argument from the parents as to when the support should end and we all know where that ends."
Many happily married parents do not financially support their offspring after 18. So why should all divorced parents who feel the same way be forced to go against their beliefs?
"So please if you have any concrete thoughts on how any of these acts should change please let me know here. HoC Needs our ideas too." You didn't mention which Acts, or the sections and subsections you'd like to see changed. It's difficult to suggest something concrete when responding to mist. And no, I'm not one of "the whiners"

[mizzliz90]

Hi At A Loss
I'm with you there.....I know exactly what your saying. What I have researched and read.....It's very double standard.....rather pathetic actually...Many people feel the same way. My story would make your hair curl lol

[WorkingDAD]

there is a quite research done in that area... Just dig it out and you will see what need to be done ....

Australia did it ...

[mizzliz90]

explain working dad?

[WorkingDAD]

explain working dad?

I am not sure what exactly to explain ... Lets not go deep. Lets start from
For the Sake of the Children report

This report was buried by Anne McClellan, every man's nightmare.

The Joint Committee's

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Basically nothing came of all this work. Anne McClellan, the AG, killed this report.

The Special Joint Committee on Child Custody and Access has sumarized its recommendations with references to the page in its report (found in brackets at the end of each recommendation) where each recommendation is discussed. We are reprinting the Summary below. Check out the Government's response to the committee's full report, For the Sake of the Children to access a fully hyperlinked Table of Contents and to read the discussion leading to each recommendation

[dinkyface]

How about this: If either party wants the order to be enforced by FRO, the court order must describe the CS terms using a specific defined format, which is based on the structure used by the federal child support guidelines. A freeform list of 'exceptional terms' could be added, but hopefully those would be minimized.

In addition, if a court order is updated to change the CS terms, the ENTIRE CS section of the court order must be restated i.e. to avoid confusion about whether new term 'X' is in addition to, or replaces, or modifies term 'Y'.

Not sure about how to deal with orders to pay off specific arrears amounts... that get's tricky, since the arrears amount may change if a month (or more) passes between defining the order and getting it sent to FRO.

Also not sure about S7 amounts - no idea how FRO can possibly deal with this unless there is a specific list of inclusions/exclusions, dollar limits per item, rules on when proof of agreement are required, and requirements to submit receipts. Just too many variations to describe clearly enough for FRO to know what to do with...

[SillyMe]

A real easy for me, (being tech savvy) would be better access to our accounts online. In this day and age, we should be able to login to our accounts. See all the records, transfers, etc. like we do our banks. Just think of how much savings in time for the front-line folks, payers’ and, collectors. Everybody seems to have better access to my account then me and it’s my money (or at least it was):/ How come I need to get a cold body on the phone to do those little things? All that savings in time/$$ could then be transferred to better serve those with complicated issues....even triggers like those described above can be easily achieved.

[mizzliz90]

S7 amounts? Well thats another story itself....I can never understand how a 22 yr old can even be under S7.....children under 8

[mizzliz90]

children under 18...yes....totally

[dinkyface]

Oh, and something else. I got served with a 'notice of arrears' from FRO 24h before a court date. I frantically contacted them, and they confirmed that there were actually no arrears owing, and that this was just 'their process' to send the notice whenever one parent requested it - or some bafflegab like that.

HUH???? There's a process needing to be changed! I agree with sillyme, just let each parent view the account transactions on line.

[mizzliz90]

so i find that when my husband support is sent through the 1st of every month....the mother is complaining she isn't getting it until 2 wks or more later....but she tries to blame the husband that he is late...when he isn't...of course we have all records showing that he is not late on anything!...FRO needs to speed up the process at their end!

[AtALoss]

It is the Federal Arrears and Enforcement Act that I would like to see changed. This one has the potential for the most damage. There are 6 points that we hope to challange in the Crown suit that are against all of our constitutional rights. But back to the act it is the power that they have over a support payor. Honestly I dont feel that they should have that power to destroy a persons life the way that they do. Fro acted on an expired order in my spouse case and didnt start the default hearing until over 2 yrs later and held this for a further total of 6 yrs. There are svereal places in the act that the Director can intervene but she choose to repeatedly does not Just feel there need to be some equality restored. So am hoping to hear what all here may have to say on the matter.

its late and apoligse for badd typing

[lilspinx]

Looks like pandora's box now. So your saying, provincial enforcement statute is unconstitutional? And, on what grounds?