What would you do ?

[Connery]

What would you do? We sold our home for 875,000. Stbx wants to keep the proceeds of home sale, around 740,000, this is after payment of realtor fees, line of credit and property tax payments and legal fees.

I would then keep my omers pension, evaluated at 500,000 back in 2012 and i would pay no spousal support, which could be $2200 a month.(less after I retire)

I am 60 and want to retire due to health issues. Stbx wife never really worked for 27 years of the marriage and receives disability support for anxiety.

I was looking forward to receiving half of the proceeds from the home sale, ($370,000) but then I would give her half my pension and pay spousal support.

So my options are:
(1) accept her offer as is and get it over with
(2) receive $370,000 now , give her half my pension and pay spousal support

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

[Tayken]

What would you do? We sold our home for 875,000. Stbx wants to keep the proceeds of home sale, around 740,000, this is after payment of realtor fees, line of credit and property tax payments and legal fees.

I would then keep my omers pension, evaluated at 500,000 back in 2012 and i would pay no spousal support, which could be $2200 a month.(less after I retire)

I am 60 and want to retire due to health issues. Stbx wife never really worked for 27 years of the marriage and receives disability support for anxiety.

I was looking forward to receiving half of the proceeds from the home sale, ($370,000) but then I would give her half my pension and pay spousal support.

So my options are:
(1) accept her offer as is and get it over with
(2) receive $370,000 now , give her half my pension and pay spousal support

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

Do a spreadsheet. I suspect that it will come out that getting 370,000 now won't even come close to the long-term benefit of your pension and not paying SS.

If you are 60 now and live to 85 you will have paid 2200 a month until you were 85 its 600,000 in loss. Double the 370,000 and I doubt you could double the 370,000 if you invested it. You are on a public forum asking basic math questions.

Talk to an accountant they will show you pennies from the pounds.

Don't be penny wise and pound foolish.

[DHTO]

I am an accountant and can let you know without a doubt that option 1 is 100% better for you.

If you took the $370,000 and invested it in preferred stocks (at your age I wouldn't suggest anything more risky than that), you would likely get somewhere around 5% return, or $18,500 per year.

Alternative 2 costs you $2,200 per month + half your pension? It's a no-brainer. Keep your pension and no spousal.

The only time I would suggest #2 is if you thought you were in serious health problems and could die within a short timeframe.

[Connery]

Thank you for your comments. Much appreciated.

[velas]

Also, once this is all done you will have forever cut ties with her. No transferring money every month, no having to go to court to reduce the amount if you retire, or have her come back for more.
Just make sure your agreement is iron clad as possible and that you both have competent legal representation.

[AlexLitty]

Option #1 comes with risk!!!!

You can sign a legally binding document for lump sum payment which future spouse or child support fees waived .....

Ex can come back after you after a few years asking for money (including spousal support) pleading some Sob Story that she didn't understand the contract and undue hardship.

This exact same thing recently happened to a colleague of mine, judge sided with the ex-wife IGNORING the previous contract .. (there were NO kids involved).

This also happened with Canadas infamous "worst deadbeat dad" .. Hans Mills (look it up).

Mr Mills said: 'Donna got the million dollar lakefront mansion and full custody of the children with child support, but no spousal support, in exchange for the house.

'Everyone at the time agreed that my spousal support obligation had been met fully.'

The feud grew for several years until a new trial was scheduled for autumn 2011 after Mr Mills had reportedly tried to take his ex-wife to court three times.

She decided to use it as an opportunity to ask a court to grant her spousal support. This was granted before the trial when, in June 2011, a judge issued a temporary order for the payments.

He also awarded her retrospective payments and court costs.

I would have done the same thing if I was in Hans Mills shoes . Maybe I am in a still better position than him ,as I have PR status in Canada and can go back to my home country and I have been moving assets there . Any unfair Canadian Court order would have to run through the court system in my home country to see if they are in conformity with laws there. I know of a friend where he essentially told a court judge in a video trial during COVID19 ,that he would wipe his ass with their written court order and challenged him to enforce the order in Morocco. You should have seen the judges face .ROFL

[rockscan]

I would have done the same thing if I was in Hans Mills shoes . Maybe I am in a still better position than him ,as I have PR status in Canada and can go back to my home country and I have been moving assets there . Any unfair Canadian Court order would have to run through the court system in my home country to see if they are in conformity with laws there. I know of a friend where he essentially told a court judge in a video trial during COVID19 ,that he would wipe his ass with their written court order and challenged him to enforce the order in Morocco. You should have seen the judges face .ROFL

All of this will get you in trouble. You should not be hiding assets or thinking you can leave and not worry. More and more countries have extradition treaties with Canada and you will be jailed for violating a court order.

Not to mention what you are doing to your kids. What a terrible approach.

[AlexLitty]

All of this will get you in trouble. You should not be hiding assets or thinking you can leave and not worry. More and more countries have extradition treaties with Canada and you will be jailed for violating a court order.

Not to mention what you are doing to your kids. What a terrible approach.

Rockscan
1) I have declared all assets,both foreign and Canadian . The issue is whether Canadian courts have the jurisdiction or powers to enforce the verdict on a foreign asset. Secondly ,can they enforce a verdict of Canadian family law on a foreign national ?
2) Just look at the number on Non Hague signatory countries . You could simply buy a Dominican passport for 100k and Dominica does not extradite their citizens period with or without a extradition treaty PERIOD.
3) Kids have foreign passports/dual nationality . I can as well move to my home country and obtain a court order seeking 100% custody as the sole earning/ providing parent with visitation rights to ex .Unfortunately no canadian court will agree to that order ,so why would you expect a foreign court to agree to a canadian court order . So ,if the canadian courts are stacked up and unfair to men here , then why would you accede to the laws here . Simply packup and leave to a friendly jurisdiction . This is exactly the reason ,not a lot of men choose to marry ,women misusing the law to seek support .I can point out the example of California where NBA players are routinely told to flush their condoms down ,so that their partners dont get pregnant to seek support or look at how Boris Becker was screwed for support in British courts .
Its the family law which is responsible for this mess and needs to be updated to reflect the fact that women are capable of earning more than men in todays world . Look on this forum , the number of men paying support vs the women . You will have your answer as to who is reponsible for the mess or the tragedy that befell his children ,its not Hans Mills .

[rockscan]

Blah blah blah—> horrible person.

I dont like the laws here so I will go somewhere else to get what I want. Wah wah wah big baby.

Meanwhile your kids are left to deal with you being a spoiled brat who doesn’t want to take responsibility. Good news kids!

How about you man up and remember you married this person, you chose to have kids with them, you chose to build a life with them and when it didn’t work, you actually accept that this is how things go and don’t complain about how unfair life is.

This forum is NOT a healthy barometer of Canadian family law. There are plenty of men out there who have gained shared or full custody and manage themselves quite well. Unfortunately the men that do come here are predominantly unhappy with not getting what they want and choose to bitch about how unfair things are. Look up WorkingDad. He had an actual shit show of a case and he was successful while also being honest, up front AND took responsibility. There are a lot of men here who took responsibility and dealt with their shit like adults.

But hey, go book your flight to la la land where you think you will get a better go.

[AlexLitty]

Blah blah blah�> horrible person.

I dont like the laws here so I will go somewhere else to get what I want. Wah wah wah big baby.

Meanwhile your kids are left to deal with you being a spoiled brat who doesn�t want to take responsibility. Good news kids!

How about you man up and remember you married this person, you chose to have kids with them, you chose to build a life with them and when it didn�t work, you actually accept that this is how things go and don�t complain about how unfair life is.

This forum is NOT a healthy barometer of Canadian family law. There are plenty of men out there who have gained shared or full custody and manage themselves quite well. Unfortunately the men that do come here are predominantly unhappy with not getting what they want and choose to bitch about how unfair things are. Look up WorkingDad. He had an actual shit show of a case and he was successful while also being honest, up front AND took responsibility. There are a lot of men here who took responsibility and dealt with their shit like adults.

But hey, go book your flight to la la land where you think you will get a better go.

What about an ex who comes to Canadian Courts to get what she wants . It is fair right .

How about an ex who is using the system to stay at home to obtain lifelong support after property division .Child support is used to support her own lifestyle/vacations and kids look like urchins when they come to you . Lets run statistics/data to see how many men get paid spousal support when they have kids vs women who get support . Have you read the table amounts for child support .It is frozen at approx 150k/year , why are payors routinely ordered to pay above this if income is more than 150k/yr ,to support your exs vacations to mexico i guess when they dont have kids with them .

Did you read the message , I am seeking 100% custody . Most dads will happily pay a nanny/live in caregiver 4k a month to take 100% custody ,than pay 11k monthly to an entitled ex for a lifetime who lives off support .

If given a choice between dealing with a unfair court verdict ,most men as in Hans Mills case,any sensible man would do what he did .

The culprit is not Hans Mills but the system which screwed him . They made him homeless ,to support a ex who blew away her family property .

[respondent]

his ex can work, but chooses not to, but before the divorce she was making 150K, and being a MD she can earn more than him. She chooses however not to work and not to support her children, and I clearly see why - she gets from him 7K a months CS tax free, lives in matrimonial home rent free, and has children only 50% of the time. I would understand if his ex was someone without education not wanting making 15 an hour while her ex multi millionaire (not an excuse, but I could understand it), but she can easily be in top 1% earners in Canada, just she chooses not to.

I thin we should support the OP - he is the one who was feeding those kids and his ex for the last few years, not his ex who took a free ride on a system.

[rockscan]

I do so love the high earning male posters who come here blathering about how the system is unfair. Especially when they were complacent in their ex staying home and now have an issue. You know why you don’t see women here complaining? Because their ex’s took off without a care, refuse to cooperate and/or the women just suck it up and deal with it. There are PLENTY of female posters on here who have come asking questions on what to do and how the system protects their male ex’s. Should we group them into your statement? Or were their ex’s smart to desert their kids?

I’m also curious if your sample size for “unfair” is just this forum and a few other friends because the system is unfair across the gender divide. This forum is not an adequate example of the balance of the system. Feel free to read canlii cases too. Or talk to a few lawyers. Better yet, look at the welfare and social assistance roles of single moms who have to utilize every subsidy possible to support their kids alone.

I have to laugh though at your big talk on disappearing and telling the judge to get bent but you admit that you allowed your ex to make the decision to stay home earning her “support for life”. So you are a pushover? She forced you to give in? Made the decision for you?

Before you get all out of sorts about your case and start planning your great escape you should really think about this—your ex is not entitled to lifetime support if she is capable of working. I believe you said she is a family doctor? Guess what, that job is VERY in demand and a judge won’t agree to her sitting on her ass. More than likely she will be imputed an income of a full time GP. You will get 50/50 because many men before you fought to make it the rule. Hell there are a few amazing men on this forum who did it themselves!! Go send them a thanks!

As for the rest…well, your ex did stay home and raise the kids and care for your home. You were ok with that. You probably would have been ok with that if you weren’t splitting but because you will have to equalize what you built together it’s not fair. She is also your children’s mother so what sort of example are you setting or impression you are leaving with your kids? This is very much the I love my kids but hate my ex more scenario. And before you throw stones, my husband stayed home, raised his kids, helped his ex build her career and got nothing but flack from his kids because she told them the system was unfair because she was a woman and earned more.

You will get shared custody if you fight for it. Your ex will know you are a flight risk and dual passports or not, Canada is their habitual residence which means taking them is kidnapping.

I feel bad for your kids. To have someone willing to do this for a parent is sad.

[rockscan]

his ex can work, but chooses not to, but before the divorce she was making 150K, and being a MD she can earn more than him. She chooses however not to work and not to support her children, and I clearly see why - she gets from him 7K a months CS tax free, lives in matrimonial home rent free, and has children only 50% of the time. I would understand if his ex was someone without education not wanting making 15 an hour while her ex multi millionaire (not an excuse, but I could understand it), but she can easily be in top 1% earners in Canada, just she chooses not to.

I thin we should support the OP - he is the one who was feeding those kids and his ex for the last few years, not his ex who took a free ride on a system.

Then he should be fighting to have an income imputed to her. If she is a family doctor a judge will not sit by and accept her not working especially in the environment Canada is in.

[respondent]

There are PLENTY of female posters on here who have come asking questions on what to do and how the system protects their male ex�s. Should we group them into your statement? Or were their ex�s smart to desert their kids?

Not his story. His wife stopped working when she filed for divorce - she was making good 6 digits prior, and they didn't have small kids - they are 7 and 10 now, so were about 5 and 8 when it started - this is the school age, and I doubt before/after school care was a concern for them - they both making 6 digits. I am looking at this as she chosen not to support kids, not him. Tbh I am surprised, as her education is well beyond high school diploma.

[respondent]

Then he should be fighting to have an income imputed to her. If she is a family doctor a judge will not sit by and accept her not working especially in the environment Canada is in.

that's what he does. And with a good lawyer from what I am reading. But years of fight definitely wear people out.