Hi everyone,
I know I've pasted somewhat similar to this previously. I have a long motion tomorrow. I am using case law cited on here to try to obtain costs as a self rep.
I am also going to attempt to argue capital gains. I'm in search of case law and running into a bit of trouble.
My respondent owned his primary residence (with a tenant in the basement), a second residence (with two separate families as tenants) and a cottage property.
He disposed of the cottage property. He asked one set of the tenants in the rental property to leave and evicted the others. He owned this rental property for three years. He then made improvements and sold the rental property for a profit of $200k (after mortgage paid).
I am going to try to argue that this rental property was bought with the intention of being a second income, then sold at a large profit instead. If we were in the same home, the surplus of income would benefit the child. In addition he has the option to now invest that money and profit from any further gains.
My respondent has not filed his financials so the motion had proceeded without notice, for tomorrow.
Any thoughts?
I know I've pasted somewhat similar to this previously. I have a long motion tomorrow. I am using case law cited on here to try to obtain costs as a self rep.
I am also going to attempt to argue capital gains. I'm in search of case law and running into a bit of trouble.
My respondent owned his primary residence (with a tenant in the basement), a second residence (with two separate families as tenants) and a cottage property.
He disposed of the cottage property. He asked one set of the tenants in the rental property to leave and evicted the others. He owned this rental property for three years. He then made improvements and sold the rental property for a profit of $200k (after mortgage paid).
I am going to try to argue that this rental property was bought with the intention of being a second income, then sold at a large profit instead. If we were in the same home, the surplus of income would benefit the child. In addition he has the option to now invest that money and profit from any further gains.
My respondent has not filed his financials so the motion had proceeded without notice, for tomorrow.
Any thoughts?
Comment