View Single Post
Old 08-08-2020, 02:40 PM
Taher Taher is offline
Junior Member
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Montreal
Posts: 16
Taher is on a distinguished road

Originally Posted by Janus View Post
I'll go through each part of the scenario:

S7 expenses are split proportional to income. If the mother does not have an adequate income, father can get income imputed. That said, since mother did not work before separation, she is unlikely to have any meaningful income imputed, so it is probably not worth the fight.

Why would that matter?

Why would that matter?

I'm not sure if "full" spousal support has any meaning. Assuming it means high-end spousal support, why would that matter?

If father is paying table child support, then the father does not have custody. If the father does not have custody, then his living arrangements are not really a concern, since it does not affect the children.

Father can live in a rented basement apartment, for example. Father can also eat more kraft dinner and ramen noodles. Father possibly should have thought of this before giving up custody, because nobody cares about fathers who give up custody.

The child support guidelines assume that if you have less than 40% custody, then you are spending ZERO dollars on the child. Seriously, that is the official presumption of the child support calculations. In theory, the custodial parent is supposed to be providing the NCP with clothing during the NCP's parenting time.

The father probably should stop bringing the kid to play places, parks are free. The father can also start feeding the kid kraft dinner, kid will survive. If the custodial parent won't provide clothing, you can get a full set of clothing at walmart for $8 ($4 bottoms, $4 tops). Buy two sets, and wash them. Alternatively, there are many second hand clothing shops everywhere.

The father needs to understand that he gets absolutely no credit for any money directly spent on the child. It is considered a gift that he freely gives above and beyond his child support and S7 obligations.

You again seem to have this weird idea that people care about the father (or more generally, the non-custodial parent). The father definitely has the resources, he just has to reduce his standard of living. The courts do not mind if the father's standard of living is far below that of the mother, because the child's standard of living is equal to the mother's standard of living.

If the father does not pay the S7 expenses, then the enforcement agencies will take his license, his passport, and will directly garnish the money from any tax refunds or other money that the father might get.

If the father honestly feels that he cannot cut expenses at all, then the father needs to go to court. The father should be aware though that nothing he has said here will be persuasive, and he will lose the money he pays his lawyer, plus the money that the mother paid for her lawyer.
Janus, thanks for taking time to answer the questions thoroughly. Basically, what I deduce from the above is: fathers have no rights!

Another question if you don't mind answering: how difficult it is to get the 50/50 custody of a child considering that the mother and child are living together for about 7-8 months (status quo), the father doesn't have any charges or anything and the current court order is for father to see the child over the weekend only for 10-ish hours? (The father has not fought for the 50/50 custody yet as the father works full time)
Also, if the father loses this battle, the father would have to pay for the mother's lawyer as well? What could be the reason for a father to lose a 50/50 custody? I thought a 50/50 should be a default unless one gives up?
Is it possible to fight this battle without a lawyer? (self-representation?)
Sorry for asking too many questions
Reply With Quote