Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Father finds out the hard way that bad faith can cost you big time in court

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by rockscan View Post
    W-O-W

    I almost want to sit in on that shitshow.
    I don't think I could stand to watch the respondent mother in action, however, I am looking forward to reading Justice Pazaratz's summary and final order regarding the mother's behaviour.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Tayken View Post
      @Janus

      This is a whopper:

      http://canlii.ca/t/j0cct
      Normally I like that Paza guy, but I'm less impressed here.

      Summary:

      Mom is getting likely unwarranted spousal support. She is completely broke. Any payments she gets she will not have to pay back because she has no money. Dad is getting a little pissed that he has to pay 2k a month to this woman plus his lawyer fees.

      Mom continuously calls in sick, and says she is too stressed to complete the trial. Everyone on the planet knows she is trying to delay the trial because she likes getting the spousal support.

      The following ensues (from the judge):

      1) Mom, stop stalling, or there will be trouble
      2) Seriously mom, stop stalling
      3) C'mon mom, stop stalling, final warning
      4) That's it, no more warnings
      5) Except this warning, which is the last one
      6) Ok, we really mean it now, no more warnings
      7) Do you not understand court orders? This is your final warning.
      8) Fine, we are slightly reducing your spousal support now, BOOM! mic drop

      Oh, and a bonus:

      9) Mom has her child support obligations completely suspended, because, y'know



      (Disclosure: technically, the SS was suspended as well, and recharacterized as arrears repayment, for arrears that I suspect probably do not even exist, so Dad is still paying SS)

      Comment


      • #18
        Oh, and forgot to mention, mom is not too sick to pursue other trials. The judge is aware of this, and still lets her delay and delay...

        The father’s counsel Mr. Fazari notes that at the same time that the mother keeps saying she is too sick to participate in this family trial, she is aggressively pursuing two separate civil actions: One against the father in Newmarket for $1,000,000.00 in damages. And a separate damages claim against FACS.

        Comment


        • #19
          How can mom be broke if she is as sick as she says? She would be eligible for ODSP, or at a minimum, OW. Which, aren’t much, but at least are something. She was getting $3,400 a month from her ex, which is more than enough for a single person to live frugally on.

          I assume she cannot access legal aide because her case does not fall within their perameters (I think they only fund child support claims?). But that she can’t find a lawyer to assist her for delayed payment from the money she claims she is owed is instructive that no lawyer will touch her/believes her case is winnable.

          Reality is, trials cost and everyone has to balance the cost of litigation vs possible ROI. But with an unemployed self rep who is judgement-proof there is no downside to screwing around deliberately like she has done. I wonder why a psychological examination has not been Ordered to give clarity to the judge? Tough case, but I can see how he is careful to not make anything appealable as whatever he decides will most likely be appealed.

          Comment


          • #20
            What others fail to realize too is you have to pay for a sick note in some cases and most doctors have a set form where you check the boxes. It sounds like this is what she got from her repeated visits.

            Im also with Janus on the number of warnings. If it was a lawyer would the judge have been so lenient?

            Comment


            • #21
              If you have built up a relationship with a Health Care provider they will waive/reduce the fee. But it sounded like she was Doctor shopping, using walk-ins and not being truthful about the purpose of the note (all the references to “work” which indicate the Doctors were unaware she had not worked for many years.) being that I’ll and yet not having a primary doctor is a red flag for someone with diminished capacity to care for themselves or someone manipulative enough to use the system to harm others.

              It is unfortunate that mentally ill/personality distorted/manipulative/entitled litigants can’t be properly served by the justice system - to the detriment of the children and other parties dragged into their mess. Not sure what the answer could be though, without depriving people of their right to access justice.

              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