Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What would you do ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AlexLitty
    replied
    Originally posted by rockscan View Post
    But when the children have been living in a situation where the household income is over 500k then their needs are different than a household with 200k. I am sure your kids are used to being driven around in a mercedes and having nannies and going on vacations. It�s aimed at equalizing the households. Your anger is aimed at an ex who refuses to work and expects thousands monthly which will also include spousal which is needs based. Why should your kids have their lives have a drastic change because their parents split. You don�t get to control what the support is used on and if your ex is an asshole and wants to use it for vacation, you don�t get a say. Your fight is on spousal and entitlement to it.
    Dont disagree with you , then how is the system in the best interests of children when support meant for them is blown up elsewhere .

    Leave a comment:


  • rockscan
    replied
    Originally posted by AlexLitty View Post
    Child Support = Should be need based when income is above 150k as is said in original guidelines but often for high earners the mother uses it to hire nannies and vacation for world trips while using the money .

    But when the children have been living in a situation where the household income is over 500k then their needs are different than a household with 200k. I am sure your kids are used to being driven around in a mercedes and having nannies and going on vacations. Its aimed at equalizing the households. Your anger is aimed at an ex who refuses to work and expects thousands monthly which will also include spousal which is needs based. Why should your kids have their lives have a drastic change because their parents split. You dont get to control what the support is used on and if your ex is an asshole and wants to use it for vacation, you dont get a say. Your fight is on spousal and entitlement to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexLitty
    replied
    Originally posted by respondent View Post
    Unfortunately famous "In best interest of child" is nothing more than a beautiful slogan that is repeated without any attempt to understand the meaning. The true best interest of child is to know both parents equally (and the very best not to have parents divorced). However especially for high earners, children become tool for mother to milk dad. As a result, fathers are often excluded from children life for years - there is no way it is in best interest of a child. If support wasn't as significant, the number of cases when mother takes off with children would drop substantially.

    If court wants to ensure the father is fit - fine, but do it in one month, and don't drag the case for 3+ years - you very best intent harms children the most.

    It would also help if table amounts could only be spend on children - I understand it is virtually impossible to control, but when you paying 2-3k a month per child, yet she dresses them from second hand store, this makes you wonder why you have to pay this support at all.
    Child Support = Should be need based when income is above 150k as is said in original guidelines but often for high earners the mother uses it to hire nannies and vacation for world trips while using the money .

    Leave a comment:


  • respondent
    replied
    Originally posted by Brampton33 View Post
    It really is all about the money. Especially when your ex knows how to play the game. Stall and delay the court process while you pay Table CS. I figure my ex extracted an additional $20k in CS by stalling the court process and the prolonging the graduated schedule to reach 50/50.
    Unfortunately famous "In best interest of child" is nothing more than a beautiful slogan that is repeated without any attempt to understand the meaning. The true best interest of child is to know both parents equally (and the very best not to have parents divorced). However especially for high earners, children become tool for mother to milk dad. As a result, fathers are often excluded from children life for years - there is no way it is in best interest of a child. If support wasn't as significant, the number of cases when mother takes off with children would drop substantially.

    If court wants to ensure the father is fit - fine, but do it in one month, and don't drag the case for 3+ years - you very best intent harms children the most.

    It would also help if table amounts could only be spend on children - I understand it is virtually impossible to control, but when you paying 2-3k a month per child, yet she dresses them from second hand store, this makes you wonder why you have to pay this support at all.
    Last edited by respondent; 08-07-2022, 11:53 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kkc
    replied
    I have been 6/14 so over 40 percent by overnights but 38.4 percent by hours

    Luckily I had a judge state we are shared parenting 5050 ndi, so that settles a lot relative to ssag and range

    You would think getting that one extra night for a balanced 2-2-5 would happen

    Nope. I still have them every weekend…like what parent would never want weekends???

    Luckily I have one cost award ordered, another one soon bc she is dragging feet. Maybe I’ll buy my schedule.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexLitty
    replied
    Originally posted by Kkc View Post
    if she is fully certified abroad all she has to do I believe is write her canadian exams
    depending on the country, she may actually have to repeat residency here

    I would suggest going onto the College of Physicians website and figure it out from there

    if she was a family doctor, the CFPC (collge of family docs)
    if it was a specialist, Royal College of Physicians of Canada

    What I did for nursing was learn the license processs inside and out and when I can demonstrate that I know far more than she does it helps
    Thank You I did look up , there is a pathway known as practice based assessment or MLPIMG .Takes about 2 years . There is refusal to challenge the exams or apply for the pathway citing childrens needs for past 7 years ,lol with daycare and a nanny present .

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexLitty
    replied
    Originally posted by Brampton33 View Post
    Agreed. During my unnecessarily elongated court case (as my ex dragged feet on inevitable outcome), my ex cried that it was OK for kids to sleep at my place 5/14, but 6/14 was blasphemy. Luckily I had a judge that was in-tune with what my ex was all about....extracting as much money from me for as long as possible.

    Now that I am at 50/50 with kids, my ex is all too happy to pawn them off onto me as she cannot manage her hectic life. And of course, I am happy to have even more time with kids . What is frustrating, as you may have read in my posts, is that my ex does not hold up any financial responsibility when it comes to things such as shoes, snowsuits, coats, school expenditures (field trips, lunches) etc. I just account for everything, keep receipts, and will use the info if ever needed.
    I will tell you my story .
    My Ex kicked me out of the house and changed locks without a court order for exclusive possession .Subsequently within a month ,where I was staying in a one bedroom condo,she asks for me to either take kids 50/50 or give em to her 100% . She took both the cars ,one for her pleasure driving and one for driving kids . I stood up ,gambled in the stock markets with 100k loan from my TFSA and in 2 yrs I am now networth 5mill . Lo behold and now they come asking for 2.5million . Lol ,the same ex who filed court affidavits alleging abuse etc etc suddenly sends messages asking if we can reconcile/patch up after a year .Its not the kids , it is the $$$$ so once the patch up is done ,they claim more $$ with a new seperation date .They tried to change speeration date thrice saying they were still talking and not seperated .No thank you . This is legally sanctioned loot compounded by gender biased judges

    Leave a comment:


  • respondent
    replied
    Originally posted by StillPaying View Post
    Your lack of knowledge is as obvious as your lack of care for children. You should research child support before making absurb comments.

    1. You believe step dad should be paying your responsibility.
    2. Saying you don't need a lot of money to raise kids shows you've never raised kids - apart from eow.
    3. It doesn't sound like you understand what "offset" is.

    .. It sure sounds ALL about you.
    it is very common to have your ex giving you a child for 38, even 39%, but not giving you child for 40% claiming you are bad parent, not ready or whatever. I see as only possible reasoning is higher CS, and not the child interests. It took me very long time to cross 40%, and as soon as I did suddenly my ex didn't mind me having kids for over 50%, as long as it is less than 60%, and from friends who went through this before they had very similar stories about crossing 40%. Yet our expenses at 39% are about the same as at 40 or 50%.

    Leave a comment:


  • StillPaying
    replied
    Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
    I would love to have someone explain how its for the best interests of a child (and not the mother) for :

    1) the lower single income earner (father) pays full offset to the higher dual income (mother + new hubby) because he's either stuck at EOW or at 38% due to a graduated schedule (me)

    2) both parents have exactly the same $$ requirements for the kids .. i.e. toys cloths, diapers, 2nd bedroom, etc (which let's be honest .. if you're a good parent on a budget .. you very quickly realize that you don't need a lot to $$ to raise a child well).

    3) Judge puts in an "offset" exception clause ... eliminating offset CS back to the father when 50/50 kicks in.

    .. sure, it's ALL about the kids.
    Your lack of knowledge is as obvious as your lack of care for children. You should research child support before making absurb comments.

    1. You believe step dad should be paying your responsibility.
    2. Saying you don't need a lot of money to raise kids shows you've never raised kids - apart from eow.
    3. It doesn't sound like you understand what "offset" is.

    .. It sure sounds ALL about you.

    Leave a comment:


  • rockscan
    replied
    Originally posted by Bogdan View Post
    Love the hypocrisy.

    My understanding is that this poster (Islandmom) got custody of the kids, got extremely high CS (and SS) -- essentially winning the lottery, never having to work again .. but is shaming a father for asking if he could get the same, and is generally still complaining about her situation and playing the victim.

    Sadly, Family Court will continue to me a mess a long a people keep believing that one parent is better / more entitled / does more sacrifices than the other .

    They are equal.

    In her case he husband doesnt want them 50/50 and he was abusive so check your facts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kkc
    replied
    if she is fully certified abroad all she has to do I believe is write her canadian exams
    depending on the country, she may actually have to repeat residency here

    I would suggest going onto the College of Physicians website and figure it out from there

    if she was a family doctor, the CFPC (collge of family docs)
    if it was a specialist, Royal College of Physicians of Canada

    What I did for nursing was learn the license processs inside and out and when I can demonstrate that I know far more than she does it helps


    Originally posted by AlexLitty View Post
    Ex quit her job midway in marriage(she had a job in Dubai) and refused to be gainfully employed inspite of all opportuntities and staying 1 year away from kids to attend a coaching camp paid by me . I was never okay with it . My lawyers have pushed to get icome imputed to her as a trainee doc for 2 yrs and after that full income of a family doc.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexLitty
    replied
    Originally posted by StillPaying View Post
    You keep making stuff up - not sure why.
    They've been separated for 2 years and ex has been "lazy", not completing her license for 5 years. There's no what-ifs or maybes. He was ok with it until he found out the ss consequences. And either ex owns shares/stocks/etc which would continue to add in value or she doesn't and it's DOS.
    Ex quit her job midway in marriage(she had a job in Dubai) and refused to be gainfully employed inspite of all opportuntities and staying 1 year away from kids to attend a coaching camp paid by me . I was never okay with it . My lawyers have pushed to get icome imputed to her as a trainee doc for 2 yrs and after that full income of a family doc.

    Leave a comment:


  • StillPaying
    replied
    Originally posted by respondent View Post
    If his wife didn't quit her job when she started the divorce, ...
    You keep making stuff up - not sure why.
    They've been separated for 2 years and ex has been "lazy", not completing her license for 5 years. There's no what-ifs or maybes. He was ok with it until he found out the ss consequences. And either ex owns shares/stocks/etc which would continue to add in value or she doesn't and it's DOS.

    Leave a comment:


  • respondent
    replied
    Originally posted by rockscan View Post
    Who will probably take your money too.

    If you aren�t an asshole most kids do see their parents back and forth. If you don�t want your kids to hate you, take a different path than the one you keep spouting about.

    You�re not a victim. Get over yourself.
    If his wife didn't quit her job when she started the divorce, she'd be the one paying SS, as she had higher qualification than him and capable of earning more than him, so to extent he is a victim. Another aspect many don't realize is S7 - when your ex claims to be unemployed, you paying 90% of that hockey, braces, etc. etc. There is no cap for S7, and judges have very little sympathy when your net income less than S7 + CS - on the line 150 you look like a high earner.

    Leave a comment:


  • rockscan
    replied
    Originally posted by AlexLitty View Post
    Rockscan,you are correct ,its my fault to have trusted her too much and not asked for a pre nuptial . I own up to my faults and lessons learnt ,which wont be repeated when I marry my girlfriend .

    Who will probably take your money too.

    If you arent an asshole most kids do see their parents back and forth. If you dont want your kids to hate you, take a different path than the one you keep spouting about.

    Youre not a victim. Get over yourself.

    Leave a 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