Announcement

**standing on the sidelines** · 12-11-2012, 07:30 AM

wow. If anyone was entitled to SS I was thinking you had a chance. Not sure what you can do.

**Tayken** · 12-11-2012, 07:50 AM

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

without question this is not about entitlement when this is so clear, we are here today to determine an amount if there is any at this point, to give relief to one spouse given the need is so clear.

Yet, costs in the amount of $3000.00 were order against you. (See your quote below.)

I warned you that you have to demonstrate entitlement. The purpose of a motion is to hear oral arguments. The oral arguments may have started with that statement but, the purpose of oral arguments is to argue the matter. You may have "felt" your version of the truth on paper was absolute fact but, clearly the resulting order of costs demonstrates that it wasn't.

Entitlement in your situation in my opinion is not based on the fact that you had an accident at work, which was not the result of the other party's doing but, your employer. An argument can be made that the employer was responsible, you received a settlement and over the course of the relationship this settlement was spent.

Many have told you and provided advice that you can't get money back that was already spent.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

are there ever any real/reasonable recourse to the individual aside from ending the relationship? I admit I communicated only briefly before he left town for 10 days but my words were simply "I am REALLY UPSET, more than you can imagine."

Don't be surprised after sending that very highly conflicted and possible projection of blame at your counsel that they remove themselves from the file. It wasn't a good idea.

You can fire your lawyer at any time. But, do remember that the next lawyer you try to retain will ask why. They will review your case, what you say to them and the order for costs against you and a red flag may go up: "HIGH CONFLICT LITIGANT - APPROACH WITH CAUTION".

You didn't get what you want from a judge and you want to blame your counsel?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

So I realize that there is no sure thing, judges do what they think is best and given what they do, how hard it is to do it and to actually see that it is done can wear any person down and here it comes.....BUT!

No "BUT!" just reality of the situation... You can blame your lawyer all you want. If you want to destroy the relationship with the lawyer and project blame at the lawyer it isn't going to solve your problem.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

getting me dinged for $3K of costs by how she elected to solve SS

I can only assume that you had a costs award against you for $3000 on this statement and that you did not get SS.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

My issue really is in my lawyer not being prepared, not even having basic info that I tried so many times to drive home. My ex's disclosure is mostly lies, her expenses are 60% too high, her cash on marriage is even worse - My lawyer's answer was always I don't care what her numbers are; to him each issue all in time - I care about what you have today and that is both your incomes.

Your lawyer is absolutely correct. You dwell on the past too much often in my honest opinion. Your lawyer was doing the right thing and if you fire your lawyer for this it will be your loss in my honest opinion.

Others have discussed the relevance of the "budget" in the Form 13.1 and that it is rarely relied upon. Your line 150's is what matters in determining the number for SS. Your elaborate calculations of the past are irrelevant.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

I don't have time was his answer the night before when I told him a very bulleted list of things I thought he had to know. I was very specific to the SS related info, her very much out to lunch numbers, I have redone hers with good numbers utilizing all the statements and the like for the last year and longer to prove it; all this has to do with income and SS determination? No????

Because they are "your numbers". You can't prove them. Furthermore, line 150 is the numbers considered really. You were advised of this by members of this forum and even your lawyer.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

If her budget was not a FULL $2,000 over and I gave her an extra several hundred to work with; I would think differently, I really would.

It sounds like the gross incomes (line 150) were used to determine income. You may not have provided your full disclosure of payments, the judge can consider many factors like that you may not possibly pay any income taxes (or get significant credit) for your disability. This is all allowable.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

Now with my ex's divorcemate printouts, I have verified that it is true - the program has an issue that apparantly brings the CPP income into the calculation twice which really negatively impacts the range result and my lawyer made no effort to bring this up when the other lawyer produced their Divorcemate printout and the numbers were so different.....

Just to warn you... Divorcemate is highly trusted by the courts and lawyers. The reason is that it goes through incredibly rigorous testing every day before the court. Highly doubtful that there is a software quality issue. Your situation is not unique and the system more than likely has been used numerous times for that calculation.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

My question today without all the details is really about what recourse does a client have when there is serious call to what their lawyer did or in my case did not do which at least in my motion for SS, by not bringing any of the pertinant anything to the judge's attention, the fact that he did not call anything to what is in my ex's really off financial disclosure, not by a little but by as much as 200% in some cases.

Look at that paragraph and read it. Read it again. You are looking to blame someone for your problem. You are blaming a software bug, the other lawyer, their affirmations to the truth... But, have you considered what mistakes you made in all this? Costs were ordered against you for $3000 in the matter. Really think long and hard as to why this happened. Costs are not just awarded for no reason.

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

I just know that I was further ahead not asking for help than what came out last week.

How do you "know" this? Honestly, think about what you just wrote. You want to blame your counsel for what happened. Your lawyer no doubt warned you that your argument was weak and you still instructed them possibly to go forward with it. The lawyer more than likely warned you that you could have costs awarded against you.

Numerous people on this board even warned you that you could have costs awarded against you. Then it happened.

It is difficult to provide you any constructive feedback on this without having some insight into what was actually ordered and trying to decipher it from your long paragraphs and emotional reasoning.

Good Luck!
Tayken

**FightingForFamily** · 12-11-2012, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

What I am wondering is what are the real solid options to a lawyer really dropping the ball, breaking 9 of my toes in the process and magically getting me dinged for $3K of costs by how she elected to solve SS, gave it to me then took it away in Costs - which would not bother me if I deserved it or I was wrong in bringing up the motion in the first place.

Can you clarify this?

You ex made you an offer for SS and you pursued it in court instead of settling? This could be the clear cause of the costs order against you.

**janice020204** · 12-11-2012, 11:29 AM

This is so depressing.

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 05:57 PM

lots of info and I don't know how to break out a post like Tayken has done here but to the most of what was put here and from not only my lawyer but here it will only be what was from my lawyer and some which I left out....
ENTITLEMENT
1.> Several times along the way I stopped and asked this question, "Given my circumstance do I qualify for SS?
Answer - yes! Answer months later, again, Without a doubt - I Qualified with, if it not - tell me now.... Answer is YES!! I can only add that it was also pointed out to me that although again a unique situation, I was actually the best stay at home Dad I could be for 8 years which allowed my wife to work during that time even though I always did look at things as do what you need to raise your family.

I asked for the last time just before he put the papers in for the motion and his answer was, geeze you are nervous! So you know the rules, you read them so my very last words from my lawyer was indeed that there were many reasons that bring entitlement and you actually do fit into most of them, stayed home the 8 years, he then pointed out the need part which he did point out that that in its ownright can be considered enough but you meet the older needs and means test, your years married at 24 along with that age 65 rule. It was never a question of entitlement. This is why the other side has upped their offer. It is sad that you went from sole or major breadwinner for your family to where you are today.

The judge's comment out of the gate was quite obvious to me, in that right off the bat, the judge said she was not going to hear arguements otherwise so I am not sure where the rush to non entitlement came in ( I did put a shorter version of this point at the start of the post).

The issue of Costs: I believe you are assuming to much in the area of entitlement, more specific follows but right off I was informed by my lawyer that for even an increase in her ss order by $1 would have meant no costs to me and my lawyer did say, and she knew it - this was the first time he used the word incomprehencible in his assessment.

I admit I was stunned and I realize my lawyer was stunned but I do see that all the critical issues that can be used to determine a fair amount was not tabled by my lawyer, maybe he assumed things were too obvious too, I admit I have not asked him this. My lawyer said think about appeal at the court house, to which I remembered all said here - no point, cost and what benefit now, it will cost money that could just as easily go towards just getting this thing over with. (not sure but that does not scream high conflicted to me) My lawyer said right off the bat that the numbers for support were there and the judge made a, I believe he called it a very creative order, made just under the amount and to make up the difference she ordered my Ex to cash in her RRSP's for the $15,000 - This sole purpose was to aviod my ex from having to pay costs. He had never seen or heard of a support order structured in the way that judge just made thus causing costs to be issued. This was a move of costs assignment.

My Lawyer at this point
I did see him for a few minutes at the end of the next day) He did say he did not have time now to speak (I knew he had his plane to catch, I was there to see his law clerk) He did start to talk and I stopped him, he had to leave, he was late as it was but his words, "You can listen while I think aloud, is that ok

?? So with a smile back and said if he thought aloud.... but as long as you are aware that D is really upset over this. (and who would not be?)

At his office he started his thinking with he has never seen such an imprehensible order out of any judge for any reason and I gave lots of thought last night to many reasons. I really believe if there is ever been a reason to appeal, recognizing your financial position, I am going to continue thinking about this and we will speak next week. My answer was that I do not mind the wait, but rregardless the costs will be the barrier to reason and this is just a temp order, not a final one. (Again I do not look at this as high conflict thinking either)

The next thing I should point out that I did spend time reading during the week but never really found information I found useful so I very much pointed toward some really hard words as incompentency - and should this be determined when we do talk, I was, still am very interested in what are my options to resolution that normally or might be tabled should this be the case..... and I do know there was much in the way that I would think should have been obvious, or am I wrong here?

Specific to My Lawyer's time with the judge, he should have at least spoke to the poor disclosure and the very strong possibility, based on the fact that I do have a couple of years worth of all the bills, that her expenses were less than admirable. Even the time it has taken me to get to where I could get proper documents to my EX's lawyer, down to the wire - I admit I did first by going 40 hours straight, slept for 10 hours and spent the last 24 to finsh - I had 1000's of pages with all the bank statements and he had mixed the folders in his office so three sets to look and get to the one last most upto date file. I do think that this should have been done, it covered his basic what if when it came to determining the most important issue of the day; Does my ex have the funds, the capacity to pay support at all. This was discussed before the motion too.

I listened to what the judge said, every word, during the motion. But here I will only point out that the judge said how she came to her decision and her reasoning included the simple fact that my ex's expenses wiped out her entire salary - this was the only info she had to go by and she did take a 90 minute in her chambers before coming out with her ruling what her mindset was I can't speak to - just her need to rely on poor or incomplete information to make a difficut decision. She admitted that she was unable to find any case law, not even remotely - she was on her own to give her decision.

This has gone a long response so I will just make a small note to what I do understand where many either have not all the pieces which is ok, even the really hard negative ones too as it clearly identified what will need to be addressed when the time comes - but I also realize how easy it is to make assumptions, who is expected to remember every detail anoth forum member has? But I continue to at least answer to:

the funds - excluded funds and the like
Here again there is an assumption "it is all gone" so... just that it is not - my pain and suffering damages went right into a seperate savings and then into my RRSP as fast as the government would allow - so I am lucky that account remains untouched - and it to in effect remained seperate as an excluded damages benefit in my RRSP. I also have a good idea how having only a half portion of the age 65 CPP retirment pension will do - and I needed to save for this and I was. Was because these are the missing funds, it took a long time to put what happened in our joint account considering there was no less than 30 different accounts she was flowing money through our account and then back and forth.... I am happy to have excellent help from our Bank Managers, even the online banking manager - I had my last meeting just this Saturday and with the question marks I had - each transaction is now going to be pulled and hopefully will end the last uncertainties. This by far has been the most difficult thing I have had to do both mentally and pysically.
I wish I had done a few things different, who wouldn't looking back but to put numbers to things, I am attempting to retrieve the funds set aside in its specific account and it in reality is only a small portion of what came in by the way of damages in the area of 10% of the total and the funds that did sit in the accounts did meet all the conditions as set out in the various acts. This money set aside, which included my Inheritance, not alot but it was put in my retirement savings which for me is a way of remembering my mom - these are the funds to which I make my claim. It does not make me high conflict but assumptions can sure makes one feel that way.

I have learned much here, more by reading what I can (another issue of mine) and finding the various case laws that apply was an eye-opener. But what I have learned and passed onto my lawyer makes my efforts worthwhile. There are actually others with similar issues and it was hard for me to believe the issues which I find myself facing - and who decides these issues in the end often find that they are too facing the difficulty of finding and making the rulings they too are doing so for th every first time. It is not common or ususal to face these issues but at least there are case laws that do show the way at least - it is a start as I think it.

**Tayken** · 12-11-2012, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

ENTITLEMENT

1.> Several times ... did look at things as do what you need to raise your family.

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

I asked ... It was never a question of entitlement. This is why the other side has upped their offer. It is sad that you went from sole or major breadwinner for your family to where you are today.

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

The judge's comment out of the gate was quite obvious to me, in that right off the bat, the judge said she was not going to hear arguments otherwise so I am not sure where the rush to non entitlement came in ( I did put a shorter version of this point at the start of the post).

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

The issue of Costs: I believe you are assuming to much in the area of entitlement, ... incomprehensible in his assessment.

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

I admit I was stunned and I realize my lawyer was stunned but I do see that all the critical issues that can be used to determine a fair amount was not tabled by ... pay costs. He had never seen or heard of a support order structured in the way that judge just made thus causing costs to be issued. This was a move of costs assignment.

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

My Lawyer at this point
I did see him for a few minutes at the end of the next day) He did say he did not have time now to speak (I knew he had his plane to catch, I was there to see his law clerk) ... was that I do not mind the wait, but rregardless the costs will be the barrier to reason and this is just a temp order, not a final one. (Again I do not look at this as high conflict thinking either)

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

I listened to what the judge said, every word, during the motion. But here I will only point out that the judge said how she came to her decision and her reasoning included the simple fact that my ex's expenses wiped out her entire salary - this was the only info she had to go by and she did take a 90 minute in her chambers before coming out with her ruling what her mindset was I can't speak to - just her need to rely on poor or incomplete information to make a difficult decision. She admitted that she was unable to find any case law, not even remotely - she was on her own to give her decision.

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 06:24 PM

From Tayken's post

Because they are "your numbers". You can't prove them. Furthermore, line 150 is the numbers considered really. You were advised of this by members of this forum and even your lawyer.

I rrealize they are her numbers, can I prove the numbers I do have - you are darn sure I can. I have all the documentation, copies anyway - I did not take her originals, but the numbers like $60 for a new cell phone I left totally alone as it truely is hers after we seperated but from her rrsp's, pensions, I have all of it so I take offense at your assumption that another can never understand or do their spouse's reasonable numbers after being together for so long living as a couple. And yes, some of the truth I did find was a shocker but the paper doesn't lie (statements and the like) - it is was it is......

No "BUT!" just reality of the situation... You can blame your lawyer all you want. If you want to destroy the relationship with the lawyer and project blame at the lawyer it isn't going to solve your problem.

Sorry this is me - I almost figured how to grab seperate qotes:
So again between these two statements you have caught yourself assuming once again! I re read my post and it was clear in that what would be recourse should the things or similar isssues that a lawyer is found to have really not done a fully adequate job representing a client - and that right here I qualified that I do not want any of which you are assuming, but it is ok to understand perhaps what another (hopefully not one of the people who go through lawyers like candy but a perfectly normal spouse that wants one lawyer and wants this to be over no different than most here).
Quote:
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>Originally Posted by ddol1
getting me dinged for $3K of costs by how she elected to solve SS

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I can only assume that you had a costs award against you for $3000 on this statement and that you did not get SS.

Again it was probably deleted to shorten the post - I DID get interim Spousal Support ordered starting from I believe the first of December,2012. Perhaps better said in my last post but the Judge's order if for 1 dollar more instead of telling my ex to cash in 15K of her RRSP's today is "from my lawyer - the reason I got costs assigned".

**Tayken** · 12-11-2012, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by ddol1 View Post

Again it was probably deleted to shorten the post - I DID get interim Spousal Support ordered starting from I believe the first of December,2012. Perhaps better said in my last post but the Judge's order if for 1 dollar more instead of telling my ex to cash in 15K of her RRSP's today is "from my lawyer - the reason I got costs assigned".

Why are you not sure when the SS starts to be paid? Didn't you get a copy of the endorsement from your lawyer?

Ok, so you got SS, so why are you lamenting? You demonstrated entitlement and got an award for temporary SS.

Also, I am not sure a court could order someone to cash out their RRSP for any amount of money to pay SS. They can order a transfer to equalize RRSP but, that is done tax free in accordance with the law. The tax burden of a RRSP cash-out would have to be born by the person who the RRSP is in the name of. So it really isn't 15,000 that they get... It is generally around 30%-50% of that depending on their gross income for the year.

Family Court couldn't order the CRA to absolve the person of cashing their RRSP of the tax burden. It is not within their jurisdiction. Do you see why the judge wouldn't do this and ordered COSTS against you?

Also, costs were ordered against you because a reasonable offer was made and the same order was made. You argued and went to motion to have the court order someone to withdraw additional funds from their RRSP to pay SS. Surely your lawyer told you that it was not going to fly.

Also, put everything from this matter behind you. Stop revisiting what you "should have done". The anxious state it will create in you compounded by your disability and other issues will only make matters worse for you not better.

Be happy you established entitlement and got an award for SS.

You could have walked away with the settlement, no motion, no emotional stress and no costs award against you.

Honestly, the other party seems reasonable in the matter even making a reasonable offer, that was accepted by a Superior Court Justice, had it ordered in accordance with the offer and then the judge had to order costs because you were unreasonable and didn't accept the offer.

Good Luck!
Tayken

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 07:54 PM

Your lawyer is absolutely correct. You dwell on the past too much often in my honest opinion. Your lawyer was doing the right thing and if you fire your lawyer for this it will be your loss in my honest opinion.

Others have discussed the relevance of the "budget" in the Form 13.1 and that it is rarely relied upon. Your line 150's is what matters in determining the number for SS. Your elaborate calculations of the past are irrelevant.

Sorry this is my third but it deserved its own response - it is the best piece of info that I WAS LOOKING FOR HERE! Why? For the simple reason that what I believe and what is "normal" can be two different things - heck what seems logical may just not be the case. Perhaps this is what the lawyer was getting at with his opinion of the judge's order. But I shall put this to you right here and now - asking for information, even the bad stuff is what I need to do ( I do return the favour to another when I am able - to my limited understanding at least - I am not in the business) Gathering information to cover what I thought to be valid points and getting information on both sides makes me in a better position to have that good conversation with who still is my lawyer. Shoot I tell him at least every couple of weeks that if he couldn't drag me through this - nobody in this town could. This is not blind faith and I also realize that he encourages me to make my own decisions as it needs to be me. His job is to offer his expertize and hopefully his very best ability every day, and nobody is perfect - the best thing that ever happened to us was our "small talking loud and honest with each other" went miles for both of us.

Divorcemate - you bet, and I realize these people are there to do it right but there are faults in every program. I could not say anything about Divorcemate even though I was contacted and given very specific information from a person who worked with this program every day - but I gave it to my lawyer for him to be aware of the possability . But that is not anything, it is a person on the internet. So I for the first time got really alarmed when I held onto two seperate Divorcemate printouts with identical data aside from where or how the disability benefit shows up and the drastic change in the numbers as a result. It gives me great concern that it needs to be verified.

I hate to see the whole world accept what a computer program tells them at face value - as they say nothing has come close to the complexity of the organ in our heads to reason. Computers and their program are only as accurate as the person doing the millions of code lines and from a programer - what unexpected results can do when a program is updated to fix another issue.... it is a never ending battle. Perhaps overboard for this forum but what I have learned from various programers in the manufacturing sector at least, are the acknowlegement that they will never fix all the glitches - never. A new program is always around the corner to start the process all over again.....

Today I face two identical data inputs, almost identical printouts with for the sake of waht we had asked for which was the min table amount, that the low range table SS number changed from $648 to $905 - I hope that if you were to see what I have in my hands you would begin to question what you are holding and two, that you would not just shrug your shoulders and give it a blind eye.

I have to ask this question of you Tayken if you do not mind:
Should you be shown a divorcemate printout that says $600 SS and your current offer of $550 I hope you would take this and run to the bank!

But what if you are down or short $1,000 a month, your lawyer shows you a printout that says $1200 from his divorcemate calculation - that $550 does not look as fair as it did previously and it makes sense to proceed. You might have to say yes, given that you also hold nearly every document you need to keep your house going, and no I did not, but all these charges are recorded in the main bank account to verify income versus expenses claims as we always used the one joint account.

So you find yourself at your motion, totally overwhelmed but that is ok, my job is to breathe and the Lawyer's job is to do his thing. So you see your lawyer going to the other lawyer's table to discuss this very issue - which th enew reality is I said yes to our offer for what I am down every month and suddly the information that you have based your decision as to what is fair suddenly changes from $1200, or better our actual offer was less than divorcemate's lowest suggested number in the low range at $1,000 and here comes the big change (too late as we are sitting there - costs are at stake!!) but the Divorcemate number has now changed drastically from the $1,200 to the printout now is at $648 (first time I saw this was right there and it was only after the judge ruled.

What do you think the result would be from a Judges standpoint that she has this $600 document and an offer that is pretty darn near to Divorcemate, what was offered which was back down to $400 (they had offered $550 which was still less than half of the lowest table amount the day before) --- Would you be upset at least a little to find out that what got you there and what greatly influenced the judge were two different Divorcemate printouts.

I do not blame the judge for using everything that was put before her - I think she did a good job in that regard. BUt it was too late from the get go..... not when the the Divorcemate printouts that they all value so much, to me I saw the divorcemate numbers drop like a rock for no apparant reason but it is too late - we are already there....costs are coming! So now the judge takes this new lower print at face value, my lawyer had what he brought that morning (much higher results which made it worthy of going before the judge) But she has this lower valued printout and she knows her offer was $400, So the judge orders the $400, not $401 which either way was far off the divorcemate suggested tables and she does this for the reasons already noted.

Would you not find this switch disturbing? Would you take your own "blame" as you put it for not recieving any notice to any of these changes and as you put it for a judge who then relies on the buget numbers, something my ex's lawyer alone spoke to, even though ass you just said "my lawyer was right to ignore her numbers, they are I believe you mentioned not "normally used". But both my lawyer, and myself, have long know nothing about this file is normal - and I did not ask for any of it!!!

If you have made it here - I am on overload and messages are coming in faster than I can think/type!! But I will get to each one, I just need some time thanks

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 07:57 PM

sorry I should put this in a seperate post - from the end of my last one...

If you have made it here - I am on overload and messages are coming in faster than I can think/type!! But I will get to each one, I just need some time thanks - please I do thank each one for their inputs.... they are helping me to understand all the sides - not just mine...

**arabian** · 12-11-2012, 08:07 PM

Interim Order for Spousal Support? This would mean that you have been awarded money temporarily with judgment being reserved for the final order?

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 09:48 PM

So, were you awarded Spousal Support in the resulting order from the motion?

Still confused if you were awarded spousal support and if you met the entitlement threshold.

Do you see the challenge your lawyer may be having with your communications?

Yes I did, I admit which may be a mistake but I chose to leave this aspect out - I really did not want the fact that I did get a support order or even how much as I believed this would amount to mudding up the waters to what my real intent was.

My intent was and still is to learn what are real world solutions.... not the adversarial ones that I am trying hard to get out of!! Going to the law board is not an answer, firing someone for one bad day is not an answer given a set of circumstances that for one reason or another a lawyer did not make that important judgement call, to read the Judge (this can't be relied on ever as the Judge is a person not a machine) applies to the lawyers too!! or finally in my case the chance that a series of many smaller judgement calls were all "not not what the judge was looking for":
(this I will clarify as 20 small calls a lawyer must make on the fly sometimes in the day, some will be right, others not so but where I was trying to get at is when a lawyer who is paid good money for their best every time, comes to the situation where he read the situation wrong in each of those twenty times and all in the 30 minutes during one single motion)

So if I hopefully set this up well, you face the day when the lawyer you have put all your trust in does make a long string of misjudgements that without a doubt made a significant impact in the process. That process being to ensure that judge has every one of your important view points in which to at least look at when making that all important ruling for thier client. I realize taht every decision I make is mine to live with - it is always my decision that I will live off.

So here it is in one sentence: Given a lawyer's client was for the sake of this post, very much wronged, and wronged, if for no other reason than that professional really making a ton of judgement calls wrong - plain and simple wrong, and that assessment only comes from the words offered by the Judge in the wording of the order. My question is what are some real life options for both the lawyer and the client (who really does not want another lawyer)?

Obvious answers would be nothing, discuss it but otherwise tough, continue on; you will take the $3K hit in cost alone, maybe at is appropriate to split the costs, maybe the lawyer feels that going for the appeal is the right thing to do and he will correct this, at least try to, and the lawyer makes the decision to not charge the client for this part (the SS appeal only - and I do not know anything about an appeal for a small issue as interim support.

I only know what makes sense right here - do not risk even more of what $$$ remains, appeals are very expensive, very difficult to be hear and usually unsuccessful unless the judge made a serious breach of the law? (not sure if the words I used are the right ones) But I was not after the take him to court and sue for.... that is the high conflict person who will destroy to meet objectives. I am not acting as a high conflict anything - I am however very much a spouse who has come out of a very bad period to learn all this not from my spouse but from the professionals I am getting to help and all the things that I was told, reassured as to all was ok, everything is status quo everything..... was a lie - and that is now my past, my job to move forward from here on out .

This may be off topic --- I also remember your words one day that states "trust your lawyer" - this I have done to a very large degree - If I can't keep up or process the information right now, and the choice needs to come right now - I have looked at him with a tear in my eye, as he made the decision for me. I shall admit this is so much like my life and the responsability my ex had, while my spouse and I were really a good match and she had twenty years of us, ok me, voicing my strong opinions (I at least recognize that I used to be in tune to the markets and the local noise in the smaller local penny stocks companies as I had the opportunity to shake many a person's hand that was in the business and with the insight of some owners of very big stock profolio investment firms gave me a solid understanding in the money aspect and I did pass on much of this to my ex. But you need to really apply your energy to the world economics every day if you want to make solid investments - and when it is time, to get out.... AND NOBODY IS PERFECT!!

This was a long way of making the point that a person can't just flip 180 degrees in the investment world overnight, not even I would consider that risk!! The whole issue of trust is a long time earn but that makes the breaking of that trust after decades is all that much more devistating to the other partner - business, marriage or otherwise.

**ddol1** · 12-11-2012, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by arabian View Post

Interim Order for Spousal Support? This would mean that you have been awarded money temporarily with judgment being reserved for the final order?

Easy one! The order was just that, a nominal amount that in fact was lower than it should have been..... my post is more about the other part and that is the judge not having the full picture, being put in the position to make the decision with what was put in front of her. And the costs issue which is out, How the judge chose to structure the order in a fashion that to the $1 the issue of costs flip to me as the result.

My lawyer's assessment: And that dollar, the judge structured her order to force my ex to sell her RRSP's for 15 K as an advance equalization payment "obviously coming my way" was the judge's words. To increase her SS Order to $401 would have meant costs would have NOT come to me.

Edit: and the divorcemate printout using our numbers came up as $1,200, and even the ex's version adding some $6,500 on top of my disability produced a low number of $650......

We still need to settle, I think the judges do not want this in their courts, they are incouraging facing this head on and negotiate it away. Makes sense but the judges still do not know what it has taken me to sift through the tracability of these things when she did things "on her own accord" is the best I can come up with now and the fact that I had to start from nothing to see money flow in and out of 30 seperate accounts funneling through our one joint account 30...... then another 20 plus at bank 2 and then another few at that bank, a few at this bank --- there are accounts fricken everywhere!!

**arabian** · 12-11-2012, 10:35 PM

An Interim Order is just that "interim" - not finalized.

You point out the deficiencies to your lawyer and work together to successfully have the next order revised. You have spent alot of time and money to have this lawyer get to know your case. If you were to get another lawyer you will have to spend the same amount of time and money to get them up-to-speed. IT's your call. Make sure you aren't like my ex who goes through lots of lawyers and fires them when they don't tell him what he wants to hear.

Announcement

So it actually happened - everything that can go wrong in a SS motion!!

So it actually happened - everything that can go wrong in a SS motion!!

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment