Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CS vent

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • CS vent

    I just need to vent.

    My ex and I separated in 2009. He had a separation agreement drafted that specified that neither of us would pay support - we share custody 50/50.

    A few months later he asked for support. Since I am the higher income earner I started paying him. Neither of us had lawyers at the time so we based the amount on what we estimated we would both make in 2009. In 2010 we went to mediation and the mediator calculated a new amount for us based on what we thought we would make in 2010. Keep in mind no paperwork was provided at this time. My ex's wages fluctuate as he's in construction, I am salaried so my income is pretty much known.

    In 2011 my ex decides that I underpaid him for 2009 because we should have based the CS amount on our previous year's income. He wants this of course because in 2008 he barely worked so his income was super low. He, of course, ignores the guideline that states that you would actually have used the average of income from the previous 3 years. Not that it matters, because at this point, it's retroactive support.

    In 2011 he started demanding retroactive support. Even though he has been told repeatedly - even by his own lawyer - that retroactive support would be paid based on the actual income for that year, he refuses to accept it and wants it based on his 2008 income. He's tried to claim that I am guilty of blameworthy conduct because "I knew" that it was supposed to be based on his 2008 income which is ridiculous. He didn't even supply income tax returns until 2011 because he didn't do his taxes!

    My lawyer did the calculation based on actual income and I forwarded him the amount due. Which wasn't much. Which is why he's so pissed.

    At our case conference he finally agreed that the issue was done. NOW he's back at it. But this time he's saying that he'll accept the calculations for 2010 and 2011 but he wants the calculation for 2009 to be based on his 2008 income. Because apparently you get to pick and choose the calculation that works best for you in any given year *sigh*. His argument is that if we had had our case conference in 2009 the CS would have been based on his 2008 income. Which is completely wrong. Arrrrrgggghhhh!!

    I AM SO TIRED OF THIS STUPIDITY. And I'm tired of thinking about it. Tired of dealing with it. I have a new life, a new baby, and I just want to enjoy it. I can't wait for this to be over.

  • #2
    So sorry CSAngel.

    Its ridiculous how lengthy and convoluted this process is.

    Comment


    • #3
      You are right, he is wrong.

      The POINT of basing on the year before is because that is a known value (at the time), and the income at the time is not known. In the long run it all works out if you adjust yearly. You used a guess of 2009 income for 2009 CS, which turned out to be a better guess than using 2008 income.

      If you separated in 2009, and it is now 2012, and anyone wants to dispute retro CS, it should be based on the ACTUAL income from 2009 (obviously).

      CS is supposed to be based on ACTUAL income - a guess is reasonable when the actual income is not known.

      I wish you the best in getting this over with.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thank you. I wish there was some way to charge someone with harassment in a case like this. My ex has told so many lies. He harasses me constantly about money. Tells everyone I'm a dead beat and that I am hurting my children. Is so frustrating. It's so difficult to ignore. Hopefully it will get easier as time passes.

        Comment


        • #5
          CSAngel: you mention he harrasses you constantly about money. From your post, I gather you have a lawyer. Tell him to sent documents to your lawyer to deal with the issue. Since it's been dealt with in court, there isn't much your lawyer will do but IGNORE HIM. You have to do the same when it comes to calling you a deadbeat and so forth. You can't control his behaviour and what he says, and will drive you crazy if you continue to acknowledge his requests which are not valid. Don't spent your time and energy focusing on such issues, life is too short!

          Comment


          • #6
            I disagree with this solution, why have to pay for your lawyer to read his correspondence. As has been advised in other threads: communicate by e-mails only and ask for "subject" line. If the mail isn't about the kids, it goes straight into an "ignore" folder. But kept for future use (like harrasment). Then be "teflon-coated" and ignore anything he says that is not relevant to the kids. DO not respond to any other e-mails. It will pass when he sees you are not "playing" any more... (no reaction, no game).
            As for what he says to others: let it be - truth will come through eventually... you know what YOU do and your kids will figure it out.
            Last edited by torontonian; 04-12-2012, 01:01 PM. Reason: added last sentence

            Comment


            • #7
              Base it on the line 150 NOA and recalculate it each year. Ignore the rest of his bullshit. If he feels that strongly about it, advise him to take you to court.

              If/when he does, you show the historical/status quo method of payment and ask for costs given he's being unreasonable.

              Comment


              • #8
                NBDad: your right it is B.S and sometimes difficult to ignore when on a daily basis.

                Originally posted by CSAngel View Post
                I wish there was some way to charge someone with harassment in a case like this. My ex has told so many lies. He harasses me constantly about money. Tells everyone I'm a dead beat and that I am hurting my children. Is so frustrating. It's so difficult to ignore.
                Torontonian: asking to have emails sent to her lawyer is sometimes the only way to stop these irrelevant endless emails as it's one thing to send emails to the ex but to lawyer is different. They don't, knowing there is not case as it was dealt in Court with no change in circumstances.
                It's clear from her post she is having difficulty ignoring them and is frustrated.

                Comment


                • #9
                  TLCRN and torontonian are right. (I agree with torontonian about saving money with no lawyer - send him a letter that all correspondence regarding money/support must be done over mail/email - and stick to it!!!!! You can do it...if he starts talking to you about it, tell him to send you an email and walk away.)

                  Please don't give him the control. It took me 2-3 yrs to figure it out. I was tired of being in anguish. And I said to myself (and anyone that would listen), SHE DOESN'T DESERVE MY PRECIOUS TIME! Every time I wouldn't play, I would feel better and better. I mean it's been 11 years and I'm still getting crazy requests!

                  Remember what you wrong previously. It seems no matter how much you went along, he would give you grief. So stop trying to please him in hopes that he will leave you alone. HE has THE problem. Only HE can make himself happy and no matter what you do, he will be the same.

                  Focus on all the great things in your life...because that is ALL that matters.

                  D

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Why are you paying CS at all when you both have 50/50 Shared custody?

                    Originally posted by NBDad View Post
                    Base it on the line 150 NOA and recalculate it each year. Ignore the rest of his bullshit. If he feels that strongly about it, advise him to take you to court.
                    I know it's easier said than done, but this is right. Ignore his BS.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by court View Post
                      Why are you paying CS at all when you both have 50/50 Shared custody?.
                      Because even in 50-50 you still pay child support based on the off set method.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by billm View Post
                        You are right, he is wrong.

                        The POINT of basing on the year before is because that is a known value (at the time), and the income at the time is not known. In the long run it all works out if you adjust yearly. You used a guess of 2009 income for 2009 CS, which turned out to be a better guess than using 2008 income.

                        If you separated in 2009, and it is now 2012, and anyone wants to dispute retro CS, it should be based on the ACTUAL income from 2009 (obviously).

                        CS is supposed to be based on ACTUAL income - a guess is reasonable when the actual income is not known.

                        I wish you the best in getting this over with.
                        Right on the money. For retroactive payments you use the "ACTUAL" reported incomes from the NOAs and not the previous year's income. I recently watched a judge have to tell a solicitor this one in court.

                        Child Support is for children and on a 50-50 offset BOTH parents are expected to support their children. You can't get a job then try to double down on the previous year income differences after a huge change in circumstance. Just not how the system works.

                        PS: Costs were awarded to the parent who was over paying and against the parent who was trying to pull this stunt.

                        Good Luck!
                        Tayken

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Berner_Faith View Post
                          Because even in 50-50 you still pay child support based on the off set method.
                          Bingo. Even if you are recieving child support it is less what your required support payment would be.

                          Full table Parent A (higher income earner)
                          Full table Parent B (lower income)

                          Parent A CS Payment - Parent B CS Payment = Parent A CS Payment.

                          ie.

                          500 - 200 = 300

                          Parent A pays Parent B $300 on an "offset" method.

                          Good Luck!
                          Tayken

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                            Right on the money. For retroactive payments you use the "ACTUAL" reported incomes from the NOAs and not the previous year's income. I recently watched a judge have to tell a solicitor this one in court.

                            Child Support is for children and on a 50-50 offset BOTH parents are expected to support their children. You can't get a job then try to double down on the previous year income differences after a huge change in circumstance. Just not how the system works.

                            PS: Costs were awarded to the parent who was over paying and against the parent who was trying to pull this stunt.

                            Good Luck!
                            Tayken
                            Lawyers - making money fighting about things that should be obvious, especially to 'experts'.

                            Case in point -

                            My ex and I separated in September years ago at which time she got a full time job, and was previously a stay at home mom.

                            Now many years later her lawyer is saying (among other illogical things) that I underpaid CS the first partial year because she only made 16K in that first year of separation, but I paid offset CS based on her income of 48K (extrapolated starting from our separation date). Her lawyers is using 16K as the basis for CS income that year of separation.

                            She got half of my income from December to September through equalization. Then CS support started based on her income at that time (48k/year), not based on her income of $0 while we were together (obviously!!).

                            Silly lawyers.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              In my case my ex's lawyer told him how it works. As has my lawyer and the judge, but he insists on arguing it *sigh*

                              Comment

                              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.
                              Working...
                              X