Anyone else feeling hopeless, financially?

[HammerDad]

You can disagree with me on this one if you would like. But, the guidelines are vetted by a large body of experts and if there was a systemic issue with them it would be addressed.

The guidelines are what we have, but I am not sure I would call them fair:

One father’s fight for gender-neutral justice | Full Comment | National Post

They are based off of faulty 80's logic that women were always worse off post divorce and that men were always better off financially. They aren't even used in Quebec, which uses a different and more fair system......I mean Quebec is more fair....of all places???

Most of the US and Australia and other countries are revising their child support and custody regimes to bring them up-to-date with modern realities.

Have I ever felt hopeless? When it came to the financial aspect no. There are times when I feel like I am being nickled and dimed and have issues relating to my parenting time. But money....not really....money comes, money goes....I'll never be rich, I just need to be content.

[Tayken]

The guidelines are what we have, but I am not sure I would call them fair:

One father’s fight for gender-neutral justice | Full Comment | National Post

They are based off of faulty 80's logic that women were always worse off post divorce and that men were always better off financially. They aren't even used in Quebec, which uses a different and more fair system......I mean Quebec is more fair....of all places???

Most of the US and Australia and other countries are revising their child support and custody regimes to bring them up-to-date with modern realities.

Have I ever felt hopeless? When it came to the financial aspect no. There are times when I feel like I am being nickled and dimed and have issues relating to my parenting time. But money....not really....money comes, money goes....I'll never be rich, I just need to be content.

Related decisions

Supreme Court of Canada - Applications for Leave

Lucien Roger Khodeir v. Nora Jane Premi, 2011 CanLII 14362 (SCC) - 2011-03-17

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 ONCA 721 (CanLII) - 2010-10-28
Superior Court of Justice
Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 CanLII 3109 (ON SC) - 2010-01-22
Premi v. Khodeir, 2009 CanLII 42307 (ON SC) - 2009-07-14

Legislation cited (available on CanLII)

Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp)
Family Law Rules, O Reg 114/99
Federal Child Support Guidelines, SOR/97-175

Quick search on the "champion" from the National Post article...

[HammerDad]

Related decisions

Supreme Court of Canada - Applications for Leave

Lucien Roger Khodeir v. Nora Jane Premi, 2011 CanLII 14362 (SCC) - 2011-03-17

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 ONCA 721 (CanLII) - 2010-10-28
Superior Court of Justice
Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 CanLII 3109 (ON SC) - 2010-01-22
Premi v. Khodeir, 2009 CanLII 42307 (ON SC) - 2009-07-14

Legislation cited (available on CanLII)

Divorce Act, RSC 1985, c 3 (2nd Supp)
Family Law Rules, O Reg 114/99
Federal Child Support Guidelines, SOR/97-175

Quick search on the "champion" from the National Post article...

Not saying the guy is a saint, but just saying he has delved into the numbers far more than most....

[Tayken]

Not saying the guy is a saint, but just saying he has delved into the numbers far more than most....

The interesting read to his theory and attempt is found here:

CanLII - 2009 CanLII 42307 (ON SC)

[HammerDad]

The interesting read to his theory and attempt is found here:

CanLII - 2009 CanLII 42307 (ON SC)

Read it. Interesting......the unconstitutional part was blah blah...I am more focused on the numbers.

And considering there was a study way back in like 1999 that found that the guidelines (I think it could've been in the for the sake of the children study) that found that the guidelines contained sums that could only be described as a limited spousal support payment, was worked into the equation.

And again, while I am not adverse to paying c/s, which I pay full amounts on time, I don't believe the formula used to determine c/s is entirely accurate. Especially when government reviews of the guidelines found that they are not fair/accurate to the payors (that is if one is willing to overlook all the other studies done them as being biased).

[sa_snoopin]

Tayken - I will answer. No criminal charges were laid because he didn't physcially hit me. He broke doors, mirrors, verbal abuse, harassment and stole my car from the garage - police called it matrimonial property.
He's at the matrimonial home because he claimed that he was supporting our 26 year old married son (no disabilities, son is working full time but in constant debt). He had harassed me so much (taken door knobs off, destroyed property, left nails at the wheels of my car, scratched my rental, etc... much more) that I didn't fight him on the big house.
Because of my income and the fact that I'm part owner of property, I don't qualify for legal aid. I have spoken to Duty councel several times and was told that I was doing everything right.
The judge made the order for him to stay away from me.

Is my understanding of the Family Law totally wrong? When two people divorce all assets and properties are divided in half no? So why do we have to fight for this when the law is in place already? Why is the law not implemented. You commit a crime and it's proven, you are punished.

I don't understand what I need to do to get a judge to make an order for the law to be implemented? How do I need to phrase it in a court document that I want what I'm entitled to by law?

No, I'm not using his infidelity as proof of anything. I know that much about this 'no fault' divorce.

[Tayken]

Read it. Interesting......the unconstitutional part was blah blah...I am more focused on the numbers.

It was an interesting approach to get jurisprudence put in place. I do have to give the person credit on the attempt. It was well structured enough that the Attorney General of Ontario had to get involved in the matter...

And considering there was a study way back in like 1999 that found that the guidelines (I think it could've been in the for the sake of the children study) that found that the guidelines contained sums that could only be described as a limited spousal support payment, was worked into the equation.

I haven't gotten to these paragraphs yet in the case law... Could you post them up? (the paragraph numbers) Especially the ones you found interesting?

And again, while I am not adverse to paying c/s, which I pay full amounts on time, I don't believe the formula used to determine c/s is entirely accurate. Especially when government reviews of the guidelines found that they are not fair/accurate to the payors (that is if one is willing to overlook all the other studies done them as being biased).

Economic factors change on such a rapid pace that being "accurate" in a formula such as this would take significant effort to maintain. If it is off by hundreds of dollars then, it needs to be fixed but, there is a threshold where the return on investment isn't worth it.

I am trying to deduce where the journalist got the billions in errors numbers from as a result of the CS formulas. They are just such absurdly large numbers that it is hard to accept even prima face.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[FightingForFamily]

I snorted when Tayken said the guidelines don't leave people destitute.

Sorry but I don't believe earning $61k per year and being told to live on $1400 is a good system when non-working partner has $2800/month coming in, tax free, sans employment.

What, is my son supposed to sleep on the floor in the single bedroom I can afford to rent until he is 18 years old? How is that reasonable? Why would he even want to come over and visit?

I make an above average salary and I am destitute. What if I only made $50k? or $40k? I'd have like $900/month to live on and support my child when he is with me.

[Janus]

There is lots... Search "forensic accountant" and you will find it all. Also, if you search this very forum you will find jurisprudence to this fact.

Another good search is for "undue hardship" and "child support" on CanLII.

I trust that you are an able bodied person, are able to use a search engines on the internet as you are able to post to this forum.

CanLII

Whenever people make wild claims, you always demand that they produce case law evidence to back up their statements.

You have made a pretty wild claim here: that an opinion from a financial advisor (very distinct from a forensic accountant) can be used to reduce child support. I asked for a single case where this was true. You instead made snarky reply about finding my own case law.

You made the wild claim Tayken, the onus is on you to provide the case law to back it up.

[HammerDad]

I'll see if I can find the articles later.

But even in Canada, not every province follows the same model. Quebec follows a different model, one that more closely resembles the route many US states and Australia are turning to.

In many States, c/s is tied to both parents incomes and the amount of parenting time had by the non-custodial parent. One would think that is a more fair regime. Although it does have it draw backs as the recipient may find it beneficial to under employ themselves to receive more c/s as employment income is taxed, and c/s is not....

But anyway...I don't think this system is entirely fair. It doesn't take into consideration current realities and was based off of faulty logic to begin with (that the woman is always or substantially more likely to be better off financially and that the man was always better off financially post divorce, when the reality is both genders get the short end of the stick).

[Janus]

Related decisions

Supreme Court of Canada - Applications for Leave

Lucien Roger Khodeir v. Nora Jane Premi, 2011 CanLII 14362 (SCC) - 2011-03-17

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 ONCA 721 (CanLII) - 2010-10-28
Superior Court of Justice
Premi v. Khodeir, 2010 CanLII 3109 (ON SC) - 2010-01-22
Premi v. Khodeir, 2009 CanLII 42307 (ON SC) - 2009-07-14

The above cases found that the child support tables were constitutional, not that they were fair.

Also, CS was not reduced in the above case... as usual it was found that there was no undue hardship.

[Tayken]

Tayken - I will answer. No criminal charges were laid because he didn't physcially hit me. He broke doors, mirrors, verbal abuse, harassment and stole my car from the garage - police called it matrimonial property.

Criminal Code of Canada:

1. Destruction of property is a criminal offence.
2. Theft of a vehicle is a criminal offence.
3. Psychological abuse is a criminal offence.

Furthermore, to point #1 and #2 evidence to the fact of what you are claiming is quite easy to present to "peace officers" and for a charge to be laid and for the Crown to proceed.

He's at the matrimonial home because he claimed that he was supporting our 26 year old married son (no disabilities, son is working full time but in constant debt).

Has an order been made for exclusive possession based on the "fact" you cite here?

He had harassed me so much (taken door knobs off, destroyed property, left nails at the wheels of my car, scratched my rental, etc... much more) that I didn't fight him on the big house.

Again, simply install survalence cameras or park your car in an area that has them. Furthermore, the destruction of property is a criminal offence.

Because of my income and the fact that I'm part owner of property, I don't qualify for legal aid. I have spoken to Duty councel several times and was told that I was doing everything right.

I can't buy the excuse on Legal Aid because you own a home. They place leans on the house and are the only organization I know that is allowed to do this without the consent of the other owner.

The judge made the order for him to stay away from me.

Was it a restraining order under the Family Law Rules or a non-harassment clause in an endorsement?\

Is my understanding of the Family Law totally wrong?

Possibly, this is why you should retain legal counsel to assist you. I would recommend you re-file your application for a Legal Aid Ontario certificate and provide the title to the home and request that they place a lean and for the proceeds be used to pay the lean on equalization.

When two people divorce all assets and properties are divided in half no?

When two people separate the marital assets should be equally divided (equalized). To get an order for divorce both parties will have to provide evidence that there are no outstanding issues regarding equalization.

So why do we have to fight for this when the law is in place already? Why is the law not implemented. You commit a crime and it's proven, you are punished.

The law is there to assist you in settlement. Should you not be able to settle or one (or both parties) are being unreasonable then you can bring forward an Application to the public court system and request that a judge apply the Law as set forth in the FLR, FLA, Divorce Act, CLRA, etc...

I don't understand what I need to do to get a judge to make an order for the law to be implemented? How do I need to phrase it in a court document that I want what I'm entitled to by law?

You don't "get a judge to make an order". That is the first potential flaw in your thinking. You make an Application to court for equalization and provide the cogent and relevant evidence in support of your argument and the law.

Then a judge reviews the evidence on the "balance of probabilities" and issues an order.

No, I'm not using his infidelity as proof of anything. I know that much about this 'no fault' divorce.

Then, you need to get it out of your head as it will only cloud the factual evidence you need to present to complete equalization and demonstrate entitlement (if entitled as determined by a judge on the evaluation of evidence on the balance of probabilities) to SS.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[Tayken]

The above cases found that the child support tables were constitutional, not that they were fair.

Also, CS was not reduced in the above case... as usual it was found that there was no undue hardship.

Please see posting for which you may have missed which is in this thread:

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...tml#post116608

[Tayken]

What I don't understand (for Tayken and others) is how to reduce it if it is your ex causing the conflict. Yes, I agree, conflict = costs.

You don't. Child support is THE RIGHT OF THE CHILD receiving the support. It doesn't equate the stupidity of parents. That is why you can't agree away NOT paying CHILD SUPPORT.

[Pursuinghappiness]

I had to borrow/rent), he emptied the bank account and it's been a year and no resolve.

Is my understanding of the Family Law totally wrong? When two people divorce all assets and properties are divided in half no? So why do we have to fight for this when the law is in place already? Why is the law not implemented. You commit a crime and it's proven, you are punished.

I don't understand what I need to do to get a judge to make an order for the law to be implemented? How do I need to phrase it in a court document that I want what I'm entitled to by law?

Sa:

Your understanding of the family law rule for equalization isn't wrong....however I think your understanding of how long the process takes is.

If you're only a year into the court process....and you're having a high-conflict divorce...equalization may take some time yet. Personally speaking, I'm 3 years in and am still working through the process of getting my ex to disclose.

I think divorcing spouses have an obligation to provide for themselves...divorce means change. My biggest pet peeve is the people on here who sit around not working expecting an ex-husband or ex-wife to provide them a lifestyle that they were accustomed to in marriage. And I'm not accusing you of any such thing...I'm just speaking in generalities.

There's a number of people on this forum that sit around whining here about being broke and don't work. It kinda drives me nuts. Reality check: Divorce doesn't work like that. You have an obligation to take care of yourself and not leech off an ex.

For all the people on this thread who are complaining about ex's that have gotten away with not working by pretending to be sick...or saying that they can't find work...you have my deepest sympathies. I think its a pile of crap that judges don't throw the book at lazy leeches like that. There is zero excuse not to be able to provide for yourself in some way unless you're in a coma.

My ex has a bigger house..more lavish lifestyle than I do...I honestly couldn't care less. It generally true that one spouse will have more money..its not a big deal. Eventually, I will be successful in the court process and I will have my half of the assets we acquired during marriage...until that time, I work hard and take care of my own financial responsibilities.

Its normal for the process to take time..its complicated to separate a long list of assets acquired during a lengthy marriage. Financial disclosure is a long process...so is the splitting of all the assets. I'm not sure what the multitude of lawyers you had worked on...but if they didn't even manage to help you make an arrangement on the matrimonial home...it sounds like you got ripped off. That's generally one of the more straightforward parts of asset disposal.

My advice...try to reduce the conflict and concentrate on what's important...it helps with your legal bills. Hang in there....get a job...perhaps arrange some bridge financing to help out. My ex's bills are probably more than double what mine are because I instructed my lawyer from the beginning to ignore anything that's irrelevant and he spends all his time worrying about my personal life. I'm wondering how you ended up with legal representation that didn't seem to accomplish any goals.

Anyway, best wishes and hang in there. This process is just very slow-moving. I too, wish it was faster.