Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Respondent presence

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

  • #16
    Not wanting or needing it is not the point. Any parent who doesn't financially, physically or emotionally take care of their child is a douchebag. So will I cut him down...damn right. Just as any one else would. He hasn't seen his child in years, calls maybe once every 2 or 4 months. This was all his own choice. Even now since a judge has ordered no access, in my last offer to settle, I advised that he or any of his family are welcome to skype, phone, email etc.

    Would child support be helpful...you betcha. But anything my child needs or wants, I will figure it out. She won't suffer because the sperm that helped create her is a polygamist deadbeat.

    Comment


    • #17
      I would focus on the fact that you are stuck paying off marital debt he is partly responsible for, and would like to have his equity in the house as compensation for this. Only if there would be money left over should you bring up the fact that he pays unreliable CS.

      Keeping it strictly to equalization may keep it simpler, which everyone likes to see.

      All he has to do is assure the judge he will pay CS, run off with his share of the house, and then reneg. As you say, he is in a country where Canada's laws can't catch up to him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by takeontheworld View Post
        I realize I have made some enemies on her due to my opinions on ss. But equity in lieu can not be misconstrued as ss. If you would like to think it so to make yourself feel better, knock yourself out. But in no shape or form am I benefiting from the house being awarded to me. If he were an honest man and living in Canada he would be paying high levels of cs every month. To date, he's paid almost nothing.
        I think enemies is a fairly strong word, no? I don't really care about your opinion of ss, it's got nothing to do with me. And of course receiving the equity in the house benefits you.

        I'm not trying to be argumentative with you, I get that he owes you cs and is not paying. Are his current arrears equivalent to the value of his equity? I just don't understand how you justify to yourself that transferring title to the house to your name alone, is in lieu of cs, but you seem to have no issues with it. We'll have to agree to disagree. [I'm also not in favour of payment of high levels of cs based on higher income, which is why I've never accepted table cs amount, but looks like we'll disagree on that as well].
        Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Pursuinghappiness View Post
          Now you've done it....Blink's gonna paste the pic of the dead horse again.

          Reminds you of that annoying creep in high school that turned stalker hostile after you rejected his name-dropping stories...lmao.
          oops! that was to be a pm!
          hahahaa

          Where's the horse?
          Last edited by mcdreamy; 10-22-2013, 07:28 PM.
          Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

          Comment


          • #20


            He's saving our country, one villain at a time.
            Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Rioe View Post
              I would focus on the fact that you are stuck paying off marital debt he is partly responsible for, and would like to have his equity in the house as compensation for this. Only if there would be money left over should you bring up the fact that he pays unreliable CS.

              Keeping it strictly to equalization may keep it simpler, which everyone likes to see.

              All he has to do is assure the judge he will pay CS, run off with his share of the house, and then reneg. As you say, he is in a country where Canada's laws can't catch up to him.
              Thats good advice. Ive never thought about the equalization part. Thank you.

              Comment


              • #22

                What have you done for your country lately apart from looking for handouts?



                I'm not really a man

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by mcdreamy View Post
                  I'm not trying to be argumentative with you, I get that he owes you cs and is not paying. Are his current arrears equivalent to the value of his equity? I just don't understand how you justify to yourself that transferring title to the house to your name alone, is in lieu of cs, but you seem to have no issues with it.
                  This seems fairly obvious to me. Think of it as being like a lump sum of CS.

                  Say his share of the house is $100k. Say a guess at his income (because he won't disclose) means he owes about $10k a year CS. Say he hasn't paid at all, ever, in the three years since he ran off to the Middle East. So he's now in arrears $30k. He lives outside the reach of Canada, so there's no way to make him pay it.

                  So a judge gives her his share of the house in lieu of CS. His name comes off title. He's down $100k and she's up $100k, even if it's tied up in an asset she doesn't intend to sell. This covers his $30k CS arrears, plus about 7 more years worth of CS. After that, she's on her own.

                  But, I still recommend that she pursue the avenue of getting his share of the house to balance also being stuck with his share of the family debt, which she mentioned she's also paying off. Only bring CS into it if necessary.

                  As for the original question, I don't have any idea if you can find out in advance if he intends to show up in person or not. Just prepare yourself for that scenario, and you get to relax if it doesn't happen that way.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Having towards CS is not taxable...ss would be...I can see why you would want it to offset CS as opposed to ss

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      I would want it as child support because I have a child. Cs is the right of every single child because they cant take care of themselves. Im adult who does take care of herself. I work full time, I take care of my child alone as all of my family lives on the east coast. Her before and after day care I pay for on my own. Theres no break for me for when I need some alone time. I currently have been taking wednesdays off from work so i can get some alone time to focus on the trial and it doesnt take away from my daughter's time, which also is reducing my salary. If I wanted his money, trust that I never would of left. My life was much easier.

                      I find it so interesting that many of you do not think my child is entitled to cs. Says alot about your characters.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I didn't take any of the replies to state that you don't deserve child support.

                        As I read the replies, there is concern that the transfer of ownership would not be seen legally as payment of support. It would be a lump sum capital gain (non-taxable) on your part, and there is no accounting to show whether it is the appropriate amount.

                        The responses you are getting aren't saying it is wrong or unethical, they are saying that it may not fly in court.

                        Answers here are often blunt without intention to be hostile.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Can lii is a free website for all to research...equity in lieu of child support happens.
                          As for the accounting...we know how much the property is worth, we know how much is left on the mortgage, we sort of know how much debt there is...as it seems theres always some new stuff popping up I never knew about and we know how much money he has provided as cs. What I dont know is how much he has made since seperation. I do know how much he made prior to seperation...6 figures all tax free plus housing, car, medical and school allowances. To claim now that he is unemployed for a few years is not going to fly.

                          Posters were implying I was trying to obtain the house for my own gain and shouldnt be entitled. My guess is that the men are intimidated by a strong woman and women that are opposing are jealous that Ive handled things entirely on my own. If I dont ask for his equity...the child is getting squat. They were indeed implying my child is not entitled.

                          However you want to spin it, my child is entitled to little extra perks if the parents can provide it, things like science programs, rep soccer, etc. Things to truly make them into well rounded awesome people. If you want to call it cs or ss its up to you. Either way, any money I receive goes to my child.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Mess View Post

                            Answers here are often blunt without intention to be hostile.
                            Being blunt and having your nose up your ass are two entirely different things.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              He's saving our country, one villain at a time
                              Ok that was simultaneously the funniest and one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen. Its also probably far too close to reality...lmao. Too funny.
                              Last edited by Pursuinghappiness; 10-23-2013, 11:19 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                My guess is that the men are intimidated by a strong woman and women that are opposing are jealous that Ive handled things entirely on my own. If I dont ask for his equity...the child is getting squat. They were indeed implying my child is not entitled.
                                I didn't read this into any of the posts.

                                No one implied anything of the kind and no one said that your child isn't entitled to be supported by both parents.

                                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