Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When is "indefinite", "forever"

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

  • #16
    Feel free to start a thread to discuss your opinions rather than hijacking the OP's thread on whether you should be trying to get he and the wife back together.

    Let's stick to the actual financial questions asked in the financial forums in this thread about finances.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by MommyTime View Post
      As stated, I provided both. Whether asked for or not, both are there. Wouldn't anyone else here have appreciated the *challenge* to consider all options before that horrific divorce route? In court? The OP is not yet in court. There is still a possibility of hope.

      I answered OP's questions to the best of my ability; and also added what could be considered outside of it. Is that an issue for anyone? Do we all strive for a court process? It's not necessarily the case for all of us. And this can become a consideration for anyone seeking advice. The OP has not been adamant about seeking a divorce. Those are the facts as *presented.*
      I think you need to consider that you are projecting onto him. He asked for financial advice. If you want to derail his thread into something that YOU think he needs, you will be called on it.

      Comment


      • #18
        In order to keep this thread on track with the original questions asked, I have moved the non-relevant posts to their very own thread.

        And will continue to do so if needed.

        Comment


        • #19
          A key issue in your situation is that your pension will also be divided with her during the equalization process. So a double dipping sort of problem can arise.

          Say you pay her SS until you retire, when you begin drawing from your pension. Then she gets SS from you which you are paying from your half of your pension, on top of her half of your pension to draw from.

          You need to come up with some sort of agreement where your SS amount will drop, hopefully to zero, upon your retirement. Then you are each living independently on pension income. At worst, because you've had a decade or more (assuming you are close in age to her) to make additional pension contributions, you might keep paying a reduced SS to her to account for that. Or you could argue against it on the grounds that she could have been making RRSP contributions with her income (your SS to her) after the divorce, just as you made pension contributions with your income.

          You've entered a grey area of negotiations, but don't forget to consider this. If you and she are separating fairly amicably, why not start off with an initial offer that you pay a fair SS until she turns 65. At that time she can start accessing her pension, same as you would be doing. Of course, if you had plans to retire early, this could mess them up. Same as if you had plans to keep working past 65, or start a second, more fun, retirement career. But your initial offer can be based on supporting her until pension kicks in for you, whatever your plans during the marriage had been.

          You may also want to have an exit clause that if she remarries, SS ends, as presumably another man takes over responsibility for looking after her.

          Comment


          • #20
            Thanks for getting this thread back on topic!

            Very good advice Rioe. I have no desire to retire soon, I very much like what I do.

            My lawyer told me that if my STBX remarries that it will likely make no difference in SS. I would also be worried that if you bring in a second husband, it could cause problems for my 2nd wife if I remarry.

            I'm going through the CanLii site and they state that; " “Indefinite” spousal support does not mean permanent spousal support. It simply means that the order is without a time limit at the time that it is made. Indefinite support orders remain open to variation as the circumstances of the parties change, and the orders may have review conditions attached to them. In other words, indefinite spousal support means support that is subject to the normal process of variation and review."

            It's a mouthful but it sounds like either party can open things up whenever they think they have a good reason to.

            One thing I was thinking was to offer more than I think I have to in return for her agreeing to not come and ask for more. This may not be a good idea if it has no weight before the law.

            Oh, well, back to CanLii.

            Thanks for all your help,

            Comment


            • #21
              Offering her more now in hopes of avoiding a future claim is foolhardy, as any agreement on same would not be 100% binding, should a negative change in circumstances occur for her.

              You should spend some significant time reviewing pension distributions and potential double dipping. I think the go-to case on double dipping here in Ontario is Boston v Boston, linked below. As you manoevre through Canlii, keep in mind the more times a case is cited, the better a precedent.

              CanLII - 2001 SCC 43 (CanLII)

              oh, by the way, when you cut/paste from cases, blogs, etc. would you mind citing the material for future reference? Thanks!
              Last edited by mcdreamy; 10-19-2014, 08:28 PM. Reason: eta; -- OP please cite your material
              Start a discussion, not a fire. Post with kindness.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by ifonlyihadknown View Post
                I'm going through the CanLii site and they state that; " “Indefinite” spousal support does not mean permanent spousal support. It simply means that the order is without a time limit at the time that it is made. Indefinite support orders remain open to variation as the circumstances of the parties change, and the orders may have review conditions attached to them. In other words, indefinite spousal support means support that is subject to the normal process of variation and review."

                It's a mouthful but it sounds like either party can open things up whenever they think they have a good reason to.
                Any party can reopen an agreement when something known as "a material change in circumstances" occurs. This would be any major life change that wasn't accounted for in the agreement, such as someone's remarriage, or your retirement, or someone winning the lottery, etc. If you put in a clause saying that the SS is permanent no matter what happens, then there could never be a material change in circumstances.

                But two situations that you can easily foresee that may affect SS would be someone remarrying, or you retiring. So it's better to decide what should happen in those circumstances now, instead of having to deal with it later.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Many people also build in an automatic review of SS after a period of time - e.g. "Spousal support will be reviewed during October 2017, and any changes made in October 2017 shall be reviewed three years from the date of revision" or whatever. This means you don't need to initiate actions to reopen the agreement should circumstances change, because you both know a renegotiation is coming at a specific time.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by ifonlyihadknown View Post
                    ...
                    Oh, well, back to CanLii.
                    I have to say that I am very impressed with this comment. Shows thought, intelligence (on your part) and willingness to learn. Many people come on this forum with a superhero arrogance or pity-party mentality that does not bode well for them.

                    You would be in a much better place if your STBX understood finances. Looking after her might have been a manly thing but now it's coming back to bite you in the butt. Coddled people (men and women) who have never had to worry about finances in a relationship have to be the worst people to have to negotiate with. With that in mind you might give some thought on how you could "educate" your STBX on your current financial situation. Often people who don't have to pay the bills are simplistic and just see the cheques coming in without a mind for the expenses.

                    You can "educate" your ex or the courts will.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      ^^^ Very good point. Your ex may have unrealistic expectations of how far your salary can go in the future when there are two households to support, not one. Perhaps there's a friend or family member who is more savvy about personal finances who could sit down with her and help to spell out the situation, especially if you're on amicable terms right now. Realistic expectations on her part from the outset could save a lot of misunderstanding and headaches in the future.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        We're on friendly enough terms though things are hard for both of us. Her main concern is security which is understandable. My main concern is being able to earn more in the future and not always have to worry about her coming back to ask for more.

                        We're talking and are getting close to an agreement. If everything goes well, I have no problem paying her, the catch is to take into account some of the things that could go wrong.

                        Lots of good advice here. Thanks to all.

                        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