Very frustrating - Where is the justice

[berniez]

Sorry need to vent and looking for comments:
House sold 1 month ago - only debt from Form 13 cleared off was a mortgage - still another 40K to go. Because I have a pension and lost the case of "splitting it" with her I HAD TO equalize on a cash basis on the remaining house funds. So I walked away from a house with 0 cash - in addition to being broke the day she left the house! Now she gets about 160K left from the house, another 2 incomes from the new boy friend in addition to HALF my wages for CS, SS. So for the past month she is on a spending frenzy - just like when we were married!

I am still waiting for the remaining funds to be disbursed under the Form 13 and paying interest on money which should have already been paid off, ie VISA account, personal line of credit, etc. This is @#$@#. Nobody seems to care, including the Canadian FLA/Court system who knew that I was left broke, now having to loose half my salary with no house to own anymore. She defrauded my family, lost my house and now the rest of my money against a pension plan which I will not see for about the next 15 years.

Now I understand why there is such tight security at these court houses. Who on earth had the authority to put into legislation the amounts for CS SS? These people should be held accountable and liable for the rest of us trying to get our lives back on track. For those of us who have been robbed by our x-spouses and sit back laughing at our unjust laws.

Sorry got off topic. All I want is my remaining 40K payed back out but I fear that X has already spent it!! Now what?? My lawyer is not responding to my emails but as of today I have forced/made an appointment to deal with this for next week.

BTW why am I supposed to pay SS to someone who is already enjoying a double income from a new partner? Who wrote these laws?

[staysingle]

Write to your MP and MPP. If given the chance get out and protest locally! Family court is sheer madness and it will continue to fleece Canadians until enough people push back and scream "enough of this bullshit". In the mean time STAY SINGLE

[raven70]

Table amounts -SS

I often wondered about the table amounts, especially SS. My supports
were reduced because of access costs but the table amounts were going
be exactly 60% of my net income form SS and CS for one child. I
researched it on Ont Appeal Court and sat in courtrooms to see that this
happens all the time. I don't understand how the SS guideline could be
so high myself. Raven

[ddol1]

Ok I admit this is a vent from someone (me) who is just plain tired to the bone. This is not to offend anyone here or anyone who has thier legit beefs on what I have been told is not always a fair system. First thing tomorrow I will be at it doing the best I can to get a fair shake and hopefully my kids will be able to only worry about working hard so that someday they too will be living their dream. I will persevere this dark period called seperation and my life will be better some day. I am not sure if it is safe to do this (or even if this is the right thread) but it is almost Friday and it has been a REALLY hard week, month, year and the first official lets get this divorce done already document is going to get filed...... as my stbx has well not put any energy into squat unless it was in attempt to try and force me into pre-bankruptcy and to make me look bad in the eyes of our children.

POints to stbx 1 - points to me 10. (I give her credit for 1 now because I always find my stbx's next step 5 or 10 days down the road only due to the fact that stbx prefers to operate behind my back with only one set of "goals". I, in my opinion, and the bank and the utilities and...... we have stopped my stbx's moves each time so far. We all know that the kids deserve to be left out of mom and dad's marital breakup but it was my stbx who went out of the way to tell them on Tuesday that I had to have my name removed from the utilities. That's ok with me.

Stbx's Strategy last month was to grab and hide all the cash as I looked at utility bills that were solely in my name, although a couple were actually joint in responsability - Past due, these Utility bills needed to get paid. The utilities are now in my stbx's name only so now when the bills do not get paid it is not my credit rating getting tanked, I do not control the ability to get these bills paid each month and now my three innocent kids will now look at the right person when the electricity gets turned off. The utilities and the rest are all paid and up to date now.

This week it was to figure out how to extend overdraft on an joint account, left open to accept any last direct deposits, the very same account that I sat down at the bank and after doing the 20 questions game was 100% assured that indeed an overdraft was not possible....... last night, i opened my online banking to discover overdrafts on the account that she set up the day before! Aahhh! Ok the bank corrected all and I owe nothing.

I admit my stbx now is the breadearner of the family, has been for many years. Each of those very long, long years I have been unable to work, sadly I had no choice but to go onto disability - I am an honourable individual who each step of the way has done things above board - the stbx the other way. Today the bank employees have seen the truth - I now have more respect there than ever - my stbx, I really don't care anymore, I used to not that long ago but not anymore but still it doesn't look good. How many more banks are there in our small city?

Although for a long time there was silience, now on a regular basis, loudly I may add my stbx proclaims that yes those numbers in those SS tables are too much, my stbx will tell the judge so. My stbx would rather quit a good paying job with good benefits and loose everything if it means I go down too. My stbx's idea of SS after 25 years of marriage is $200 a month - I can go live under a bridge somewhere. I understand Those Guidelines will have us closer to the middle. We are not rich for sure and it sure won't be any easier financially after but when the court assigns (ok I do have to hope a few of those eggs will hatch - I have no choice) but in the end, the guidelines say my stbx should have to give what a 1/3 - maybe 40% in SS my stbx won't be so bad off. Afterall, it was ok when I worked 60 and 70 hour weeks so my stbx could stay home with the kids. The pretty nice house in the pretty nice nieghbourhood that we own today didn't come from the lottery even though yesterday I heard her say that she couldn't wait to see me ordered out of Her house........... Tomorrow I start again - I can only do my best every day.

[inseperationhell]

Question: How did your situation happen re the pension and losing on the splitting of the pension - having to pay equalization in cash which resulted in you having $0?

Reason why I am asking is that I have a pension which will come under equalization. My ex has stated that he wants the house and all assets and will not touch the pension - a fair trade. BUT, that would leave him flush with assets and cash and me with $0 and a pension that I cannot access for 20+ years. My lawyer has assured me that he cannot force me into this - that the pension will get split (and the value locked in for both of us) and then the rest of the assets are on the table for equalization.

[ddol1]

I may have an answer after I spoke to my stbx's pension people. Divorce is a negotiation but if nothing else it also atempts to divide the assets between the spouses equally. I was told that the splitting of a pension is a "right" and I suppose this would go both ways - You would not be wise to give up all your todays assets for as you say a future income stream 20 years down the road unless there was a huge advantage for your doing so. If you can't agree I was left with the strong impression that the cash value of all your assets now and in the future would be split equally in an as equitable fashion as possible. You should be contacting your pension directly to get the issue first hand from your pension - they do this every day. I believe your lawyer is right.

[pokeman]

a wise man told me there is no justice in family law

from what I can see spousal support got into the system so 'Ken' who is the CEO of a big corporation cant leave 'Barbie' his long time devoted wife pennyless while he runs off with his secretary, the idea being Barbie gets some coin to get her life back together ... makes sense

BUT in the real world its just as likely 'Barbie' decides to get wood elsewhere like maybe GI Joe, really no difference than what Ken did above EXCEPT Ken still pays ...

i used Ken,Barbie - feel free to reverse the roles if it makes anyone feel better , its unlikely here in calgary Ken would get much from Barbie if she
was CEO

The new Canada should do a crash course in every high school across the country how life works here - give some real hard examples of how it affects people , lot better than having your life ruined with debt and homelessness later in life while the lawyers run down the street with cash flying out of their brief cases ...


till then STAY SINGLE as I am as i dont got much stuff left

[berniez]

Question: How did your situation happen re the pension and losing on the splitting of the pension - having to pay equalization in cash which resulted in you having $0?

Reason why I am asking is that I have a pension which will come under equalization. My ex has stated that he wants the house and all assets and will not touch the pension - a fair trade. BUT, that would leave him flush with assets and cash and me with $0 and a pension that I cannot access for 20+ years. My lawyer has assured me that he cannot force me into this - that the pension will get split (and the value locked in for both of us) and then the rest of the assets are on the table for equalization.

I just went through this in court - your lawyer is incorrect/wrong. Your pension MUST be valued by an actuarial service. They will assign a dollar amount to the value of that pension, either a pension partially paid out, being drawn from, whatever. Lets say for argument sake the pension is valued at 400K. You as the OWNER of that pension MUST equalize this FIRST against your home value - Lets just keep the other items off the table so to speak like material goods, etc.

If you both own a house worth 400K and you own a pension worth 400K your net equalization is simple - you keep the pension and walk from the house. You must by law equalize everything to a cash basis. I just lost this argument in court. I lost my house but kept my pension - completely against my choice but our stupid laws forced it on me. However there is a slim chance your STBX could accept half your pension which then changes the picture. But it is their choice only. Most will run with the cashed out value,

In my case #@$% spouse racked up 300K of debt (over 4 years) and hid this from me. It was also my fault for not auditing the finances but as I tell my story to others it is amazing how many others DO NOT check their finances but trust spouse to look after things. So after selling our house, subtracting the debt, she walks with just over 100K while I am forced to equalize on several hundred - no cash for me, no house, just part of a pension and now paying out with no chance of recovery to re-buy a house! Canadian justice could not care less.

Again who is to be held accountable for implementing these stupid Canadian Divorce laws? I want to see these morons stand up and let them now explain their calculations and actions. BTW STBX was not held accountable for any of her "intentional debt loading" spending habits. She is so lucky to be living in Canada enjoying our stupid unjust Canadian laws. She should be in prison for fraud charges.

[ddol1]

equalization is simple - you keep the pension and walk from the house. You must by law equalize everything to a cash basis. I just lost this argument in court. I lost my house but kept my pension - completely against my choice but our stupid laws forced it on me. However there is a slim chance your STBX could accept half your pension which then changes the picture. But it is their choice only. Most will run with the cashed out value,

I just spoke with my stbx's pension people again to clarify a few things and it aligns with what you are saying here. I initially figured that her government pension is pretty good and although really small (3.9 years accumilation) that would get me $96 a month for my half at 65. She spoke of valuations but they do not do this. She also told me since I am younger than her my $96 will drop accordingly.

This is my snag - according to the current pension laws the pension although split is still very much tied to my stbx. If she chooses to work until she is 80 then I will not be able to collect untill the stbx begins collecting her portion of her pension. I understood that if she passes on before retirement there will only be a death benefit - not a monthly pension for the non contributing spouse. (It is like they want us to have clean breaks where possible and here they go and rejoin you at the hip with your stbx. She then said the law is in the final stages to rectify this but alas too late for us.)

To your experience, it was your pension - who was mandated to get the valuation, is the owner of the pension forced to get this valuation done and then pay for the valuation too, which I was told can reach$600-$800? I have come across some CANLII cases where the judge was not pleased with the lack of proper valuation(s). It may seem like the implication is both sides need to get thier own valuation done although i would figure the process would be impartial. Again the pension rep thought that complexity makes it costlier but even for a small pension cost can be $400 (a minimum charge).

Can you explain the circumstance of your being "forced" to not negotiate an agreement with your stbx? Was it due to the fact that you were at a stalemate and the judge decided it was time to "impute" a settlement on you both?

[inseperationhell]

Ok, I have just done alot of research on the net and can not find anything that states that I must equalize the value of my pension against the matrimonial home first. I am not so sure that my lawyer has steered me wrong in this. There are issues highlighted with the equalization of some pension plans however, no all plans. Every pension plan has rules and I suspect it depends on the pension that you are in.

I have a federal public service pension plan. There are regulations written in the plan for what happens to the pension on divorce. He would get half of the actuarial value (with tax adjustments) transferred into a locked-in RRSP. No "if and when" clauses, no uncertainty. My pension value drops then I spend the next 20 years accumulating my pension with no ties to my ex.

I can not find anywhere that it is his right to refuse this split and make me equalize against the matrimonial home.