Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Just general venting as this forum suggests

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

  • Just general venting as this forum suggests

    My new partner and I have been separated for almost same length of time.

    My separation has been legally done for well over a year.

    His ex is so bitter that I cant see an end to it. I think after the visit to court in January it would be mandated by a judge as they are still far apart in any sort of agreement. Then came the covid-19, cancelling the next court date.

    She wants a third of his pension and his half of the mortgage free house. Obviously a big no. Courts need to reopen.

    Here's a question I searched for an answer, she was granted exclusive possession of the home in January, he's not allowed in, does anyone know if he still has to pay half the property taxes dues in July, as there is no way this can be settled in time.

  • #2
    As long as my name is on title, I would be paying for half of everything and ensuring that everything is up to date. During settlement I got credits applied to the division of assets for anything that I paid that I shouldn’t have.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • #3
      That makes sense..thank you
      I read elsewhere that he can ask for rent payments if this drags on and on.

      Comment


      • #4
        Your partner can request occupation rent. Whether or not he gets it is another story. Why did his ex get exclusive possession of the matrimonial home? Was he charged with domestic violence? Judges do not arbitrarily award exclusive possession.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by canthisberight View Post
          That makes sense..thank you
          I read elsewhere that he can ask for rent payments if this drags on and on.
          The term you are looking for is occupation rent

          https://canliiconnects.org/fr/résumé/34819

          Who is making the mortgage payments?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by canthisberight View Post
            she was granted exclusive possession of the home in January, he's not allowed in
            Think long and hard as to why your "new partner" lost exclusive possession of the home. Reasons for this kind of ruling generally don't paint your "new partner" in the best light. Do you really know who your "new partner" is? Just being overly cautious here and warning you as there may be some horrible things in the past relationship that could impact you.

            Originally posted by canthisberight View Post
            does anyone know if he still has to pay half the property taxes dues in July, as there is no way this can be settled in time.
            Petty conduct and unwise. He already lost access to the home. For a reason. ("She was granted" is not "he consented to her having exclusive possession of the home".)

            Comment


            • #7
              You are not liking that she is asking for a third of pension but has the equalization been calculated? She may be entitled to more. When equalization was calculated for my case, I owe my ex spouse half my pension. And why do you say it's a big no for half the house? If they are both on title 50/50 is the norm.

              Comment


              • #8
                The house is paid for...

                There is no hidden assault. He was living with me 2 hours away on weekends..but due to owning half the house he didn't want to pay rent on two places, so he lived in a separate room in the house he still owns half of. Dhe rightfully so didn't like this.

                They had already been to a case settlement and were so far apart. He had moved out full time last June and in January the judge granted her the exclusive possession, so that he couldn't go in when he wanted.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by canthisberight View Post
                  There is no hidden assault. He was living with me 2 hours away on weekends..but due to owning half the house he didn't want to pay rent on two places, so he lived in a separate room in the house he still owns half of. Dhe rightfully so didn't like this.

                  They had already been to a case settlement and were so far apart. He had moved out full time last June and in January the judge granted her the exclusive possession, so that he couldn't go in when he wanted.
                  why would he be paying rent in two places? You said the house was mortgage free so if he was renting a place to get out then it would just be one place. Unless you were wanting him to pay rent at your place when he was just there weekends.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    He insists on paying some of the rent here...he is paying rent near where he works...and still has to pay costs at the house he's not allowed to use

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      What has his lawyer said to him? Being “very far apart” just wastes money on lawyers. If they owned the house she gets half. If he has a pension she is entitled to a portion. If she didn’t work or stayed home to further his career she is entitled to spousal support. If they have kids she is entitled to support for them. He needs to wrap his head around what they need to split and make an offer otherwise he will waste money fighting for nothing.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Answers

                        Hes in 100% agreement of her getting half, but not the whole thing..its literally so she gets everything up front, no support payments..but the judge said that would be ridiculous as he can retire in 4 years.

                        She had a better paying teaching job then he did, retired 4 years ago.

                        Her pension is higher then his.

                        But hes still working, hence the income disparity.

                        One child, 22, mental issues, has started 4 different college/university programs, with nothing to show...

                        Yet he has to pay 67%, while his ex pays 33%

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thats based on income. Technically if the kid is not in school he pays nothing and she is also 22 so I am really not sure why a judge is agreeing to that.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            She enrolls..does ok for a bit..them her mental issues kock on..she drops out
                            .but then wants to try again.
                            I sympathize as my daughter is same
                            .but at what point can parents say no?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              This must be very frustrating and upsetting.

                              The COVID 19 has shut down the court, and they will be extremely occupied and probably unavailable to many people, for a considerable period of time.

                              There is an option. Mediation involved a discussion towards resolution, in the best person to deal with financial issues is a lawyer/mediator. A lawyer/mediator should understand all of the financial concerns, as well as a personal wishes and concerns.

                              Mediation can be attended with both sides bringing lawyers, one side bringing a lawyer, or neither side bringing a lawyer. Traditionally they were with personal attendance is, but now many lawyer/mediators are able to comply with all the requirements of mediation, and move forward, by Zoom. This can result in considerable cost savings, and can work through a resolution in perhaps two or three sessions. These sessions might be one week apart. By the end of the time, for a few thousand dollars, the lawyer/mediator may be putting together a proposed agreement, if both sides of, that far forward.

                              Although you say that you do not find it fair which he is requesting, that cannot be commented on without knowing all of the facts. A person does not have to be willing to be extremely giving, what they do need to have these criteria if the mediation is going to work: consideration; compassion and compromise.

                              Consideration is to consider what a court might do, consider all of the options, consider what would be the cost of the alternative of not reaching an agreement.

                              Compassion is to at least be receptive to the emotions of the other, especially when children are involved.

                              Compromise means of a recognition, that you cannot get everything you want. However, if your prior rise, and the other side does the same, then usually resolutions can be made.

                              It is surprising to people who do mediation, that in cases where people think the other will never make a compromise or never agree to this approach, it works out just fine. It is quite often worth a try. Especially since right now, with the court.” There really is no alternatives. Also, the court system is required to encourage people to try other systems, and this is a system that works probably 90% of the time.

                              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