Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

4 over 5 year plan

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Okay...so you have 1 child, which based on $124k would be $1709 OR $1660 based on $120K... so a difference of $49 a month or $588 a year and $2940 over 5 years... again...is $2940 that you would receive in 5 years, worth a court battle?

    If he was paying $1400 a month in CS based on 2008, that would mean his income would have to be $170k... is that correct?
    Last edited by Berner_Faith; 09-26-2012, 02:19 PM. Reason: Missed that you had 2 kids

    Comment


    • #32
      No, I said I have two children. Why do people not read more carefully?

      Again the question was and remains: To What extent is it reasonable to expect the amount of child support be based on what his salary would be, had he not registered on to this savings plan?

      I don't know the answer, that is why I am asking.
      Last edited by Nadia; 09-26-2012, 02:20 PM.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Nadia View Post
        No, I said I have two children. Why do people not read more carefully?
        If you were not soo quick to jump you would have realized I was editing my post to reflect TWO children... still $2940 only works out to about 9 hours of a lawyers time... do you think you will get this settled in 9 hours?

        Comment


        • #34
          The legal costs are definitely something that needs to be considered. Although as pointed out in my earlier posts, the costs are supposed to be awarded in favor of the person who has been forced to bring forward the action.

          But yes, you are correct, as with everything else, one has to weigh up the cost of going to court (financial as well as emotional) not to mention adding to conflict that already exists.
          Last edited by Nadia; 09-26-2012, 02:32 PM.

          Comment


          • #35
            The difference between what he should be paying on $120K and $124K is $588 per year, which works out to $2940 over the next 5 years.

            Your agreement may stipulate that, however as others have pointed out, you may not be in the right here, because CS is based on income, and you have always used his line 150... the 20% he is putting away, is not considered income, therefore you may be seen as unreasonable, in which case, costs may be awarded against you.

            Comment


            • #36
              Um, where did you get the 120,00 figure from?

              He is paying child support based on 100,000. The difference between that and 124,000 would be substantial for our family.
              Last edited by Nadia; 09-26-2012, 02:42 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Okay so it should have been $100k vs $124k... so if his actual income is $100k, the numbers are still around the same...

                But hey...do what you want... I think you are being petty and are wanting to double dip... you clearly are not seeing what me and other posters are saying... if you want to use his actual income of $124K for the first 4 years and then use his income of $0 for year 5, fine go for it...but in year 5, don't expect a judge to award you CS, because he has already over paid for 4 years.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Berner_Faith, I'm not sure where you are getting these figures from.

                  His full time salary is $124,000.

                  80% of his salary would be $99,200 (not $120,000??)

                  His CS payment should be $1,709 monthly, $20,508 yearly, 102,510 over 5 years, on a full time salary for two children.

                  His CS payment on a 80% salary would be $1,406 monthly, $16,824 yearly, $84,120 over 5 years.

                  The 4 in 5 plan would mean a reduction in Child Support of $18,420 over the 5 years of the plan.

                  He is currently paying $1,089 based on income from 2008. He is currently underpaying by $620 per month, $7440 per year.

                  The support order should be updated regardless at this time to reflect his current income. Since the 4 in 5 plan has come up, it would be reasonable to have this addressed at the same time; it is not like Nadia would be going to court just over the 4 in 5. The issue of support needs to be updated no matter what.

                  It is perfectly reasonable to ask if the 4 in 5 is a legitimate reduction in income, or is it an unreasonable form of underemployment. It is one or the other, we all have different opinions.

                  Since this is not a common thing to my knowledge, I haven't found any case law dealing with it, so it is hard to predict how a judge would treat it.

                  Again, in my opinion, if he decided to take a year off without pay, I feel a judge would say fine, but you pay your full CS amount out of your savings.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Mess it was a mistype with the $120K, and no I don't think he should be shrinking his responsibilities, however if he is only making $100K for 4 years because he is putting $24k away, but has to pay off $124K, in the 5th year, she would be double dipping, as he has already paid off his "savings" during years 1-4...no?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      No. Read my post. He is paying over $18,000 less child support because of this plan.

                      It is not double dipping. It is a question of whether someone who has voluntarily ceased to work for a full year should see a reduction in child support responsibilities.

                      It is not as though he is laid off and is collecting EI for a year while he i constantly searching for work. He has decided to not work, that is why his income is lower.

                      He is saving $18,000 in child support payments and applying that amount to his year long vacation, if that clarifies the ethics for you.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Berner_Faith View Post
                        Mess it was a mistype with the $120K,
                        I realize you made a mistake, but your mistake was also claiming the effect over 5 years was $2940, not $18420. That is a substantial mistake. You could sound a bit more contrite about that.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          I guess I am seeing it differently... and yes the mistake makes a huge difference, I guess I see it at double dipping because in year 5 he is not making anything, he would be paying off income that he already earned, plus paid CS for?

                          Like I stated, I am not saying he is in the right, it is clear they have not updated their agreement since 2008, which they both are at fault for... however he is paying a substantial amount, and seeing as there is no such case on Canlii about this, it is hard to say what a judge may order, even at that $18,000, with a lawyer at $300 per hour, that is only 60 hours worth of work...again can this be solved in 60 hours worth of a lawyers time? Or would the money she is receiving be best spent on the children, rather then being paid to a lawyer?

                          It was already stated that the judge was aware of this 4/5 year plan, if he didn't force the issue then, why would he force it now?

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Mess View Post
                            sahibjee, please don't pull the thread off topic. Nadia has a legitimate question. You may start your own thread if you don't want to help her.
                            sure thats fair, and her question is very interesting too.

                            i'd say the man is entitled to vacation time. I think the courts will see that he has stacked his vacation for 4 years and worked very hard for those four years to provide for the very *family* who is coming after him and trying to make him work the fifth year while he is fully entitled to vacation. i think it may backfire and OP may be stuck with costs

                            however if he is taking yearly vacations and also going for the 4/5 then the situation may be different.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I think it is an interesting case and would be interested on the outcome, however I would hate to see it work against the OP and her having to end up paying costs...

                              OP- what exactly did the Judge take into consideration when dealing with section 7 expenses?

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I think the courts will see that he has stacked his vacation for 4 years and worked very hard for those four years to provide for the very *family* who is coming after him and trying to make him work the fifth year while he is fully entitled to vacation.
                                He is working four regular years for a fifth off. A year of vacation is not likely to be seen as reasonable.

                                To What extent is it reasonable to expect the amount of child support be based on what his salary would be, had he not registered on to this savings plan?
                                As has been articulated, that depends upon the fact situation. Does the sabbatical advance his career? Was it contemplated before the separation? There are a number of factors that will be considered, to determine whether he is unreasonably underemployed or pursuing a valid career path.

                                You are likely to find people who support both sides. Keep in mind, the onus is on you to show that he should reasonably be earning a higher income.

                                At present, some would consider it prudent advice to keep what FRO is garnishing and appreciate that, at some point in the future, you will receive a windfall of arrears.

                                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