Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ex threatens FRO Action

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

  • Ex threatens FRO Action

    Paying CS table amount religuosly every month based on annually full disclosure of my income. July was the annual adjustment. I use the new Minister of Justice website tables, Ex uses lawyers divorcemate. The result is there's a difference in amounts every year.
    Upon review, each year I advise Ex that divorcemate calculations are erroneous due to missing information and lack of proper calculations of deductions not being applied. she refuses to revise or recalculate.
    Regardless, For sake of argument and to be reasonable, I propose splitting the difference and then begin making payments.

    She threatens me that I MUST pay what her lawyers calculated CS amount vs table amount I use on Justice website or she will report me to FRO and further states that I'm in arrears for the difference from all past years based on this same scenario.

    Question:
    Would FRO actually action this? Do they take her word over mine? Does her lawyers calculations trump the Justice Guideline Table amounts?
    Or would they advise EX to work it out with each parties lawyers for any adjustments that may be applicable??

    Am I to be held captive under my Ex's constant threats of FRO?
    Suggestions/advice please?

  • #2
    Originally posted by timberlandman View Post
    Question:
    Would FRO actually action this? Do they take her word over mine? Does her lawyers calculations trump the Justice Guideline Table amounts?
    Or would they advise EX to work it out with each parties lawyers for any adjustments that may be applicable??

    Am I to be held captive under my Ex's constant threats of FRO?
    Suggestions/advice please?
    No. FRO needs a court order that outlines the exact amount of CS to be paid. They can only enforce orders. So the other parent needs to go on motion and get an order for the numbers they are producing.

    FYI: If you make over 150,000 the table from the justice guidelines screw up.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks Taken...

      to clarify, our SA states that "table amount" shall be paid monthly....to which I believe that I've upheld in adhering to the Justices table guidelines. Is the SA sufficient as an "court order" or did you mean a full motion filed to obtain a new court order for an adjusted amount of CS???

      TIA

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by timberlandman View Post
        Upon review, each year I advise Ex that divorcemate calculations are erroneous due to missing information and lack of proper calculations of deductions not being applied. she refuses to revise or recalculate.
        What information is missing or wrong? CS is based on income. Only section 7 expenses have deductions. Unless you are self employed and those deductions from income are interpreted differently between tax law and family law. If the discrepancy is because of self employment deductions, you may want cruise cases on canlii to see what a judge accepts as a deduction from income. Otherwise nothing should be deducted from the CS amount.

        She threatens me that I MUST pay what her lawyers calculated CS amount vs table amount I use on Justice website or she will report me to FRO and further states that I'm in arrears for the difference from all past years based on this same scenario.

        If you have an old agreement for an amount she can have that turned into an order for FRO to recover. Otherwise she will need a new order. If she disagrees with the amount and claims arrears she would need to file a motion to change which you can then respond to.

        I would simply advise that your income is X and therefore your CS is Y. Section 7 expenses are split in accordance with income less the tax benefits. If she disagrees she is welcome to attend mediation or seek an order from the court.

        But I would double check the numbers if you are self employed. Judges don’t accept some of the deductions to self employment income and that may be where the disagreement comes from.

        Comment


        • #5
          Assuming your numbers are correct, then FRO is not a major threat. She either registers or does not, it should not affect you much either way.

          Comment


          • #6
            As I have said many times before, Lawyers and Judges know nothing about financial calculations. Regardless of whether you are using Divorcemate or the Minister of Justice Tables, the amount of child support should be the same. This means you must be using different income amounts. Based on your description of not taking into account deductions, you must be self employed (likely incorporated)

            divorcemate calculations are erroneous due to missing information and lack of proper calculations of deductions not being applied. she refuses to revise or recalculate.

            Likely her lawyer is just inputting line 150 into the Divorcemate calculation (which is wrong) which is causing the discrepancy.

            There must have been some agreement as to how your income would be calculated. On the surface, it sounds like you are right.

            I could calculate your correct income for you but I'd need your tax documents to do so which you may not be willing to provide.

            A final point and I've said this many times before. Divorcemate is garbage. The program has numerous errors in it and the problems are compounded by lawyers not knowing how to input financial information properly.

            Accountant.

            Comment


            • #7
              Is divorcement appropriate just for people with straight wage income then, and not the self employed? How would you recommend figuring out how to make the calculations if can’t use divorce mate?, should people hire an accountant. We have just used the table tables but then that is for a regular wage

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by denbigh View Post
                Is divorcement appropriate just for people with straight wage income then, and not the self employed? How would you recommend figuring out how to make the calculations if can’t use divorce mate?, should people hire an accountant. We have just used the table tables but then that is for a regular wage


                If you have a regular wage then you use line 150. Self employed people have a different income than regular T4 people.

                Comment


                • #9
                  So do self employed people then need to share the entire tax form instead of just the notice of assessment, to prove what their expenses were?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Line 150 is not income for salaried people or self employed people. Yes I know the fraudulent guidelines say so but this been proven to not be true. Here is an example.

                    Line 150 includes RRSP cashouts. Lets say to pay lawyers fees one person cashed out RRSP's and the other person borrowed from a line of credit. One causes line 150 to be higher and the other one has no effect. Should the person who cashed out RRSP's have a higher income? Of course not.

                    I have written many posts about self employed income on this site. You should search them out.

                    Divorcemate has several issues and I assure you it is not the only accurate calculator. It is inaccurate like the rest of them. I found it ironic that in their last News and Notes, they finally fixed an error that I told them about 10 years ago. The bigger problem is lawyers don't know how to input the financial information correctly and they use the wrong financial information. GIGO (garbage in garbage out).

                    The information an accountant would need would be as follows:

                    First 4 pages of the last two T1's
                    Notice to Reader Balance Sheet and Income Statement for the last two years
                    T2 Schedule 1 for both years (this reconciles profit for accounting purposes to profit for tax purposes). It gets rid of personal expenses out of the business
                    T2 Schedule 8 (this is the depreciation statement - this will ensure the corporate owner isn't jacking up Capital Cost Allowance unreasonably to reduce income)
                    Percentage of voting shares the shareholder owns in the corporation

                    All this information is needed for all corporations. Many shareholders own a holdco as well or could have multiple opco's.

                    The revised profit would be an imputed dividend
                    You can choose any FYE you want for a corporation so you need an accountant to match things up properly to the T1 to get the proper corporate salary.

                    If you have a lawyer or a judge try to figure this out, this happens

                    https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chr...to-his-ex-wife

                    I know this guy personally and he got screwed royally. I've seen all the financial information on this case and the Judge and lawyers didn't have the foggiest clue what they were doing.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Desperate_Dad View Post
                      Line 150 is not income for salaried people or self employed people. Yes I know the fraudulent guidelines say so but this been proven to not be true. Here is an example.

                      Line 150 includes RRSP cashouts. Lets say to pay lawyers fees one person cashed out RRSP's and the other person borrowed from a line of credit. One causes line 150 to be higher and the other one has no effect. Should the person who cashed out RRSP's have a higher income? Of course not.

                      I have written many posts about self employed income on this site. You should search them out.

                      Divorcemate has several issues and I assure you it is not the only accurate calculator. It is inaccurate like the rest of them. I found it ironic that in their last News and Notes, they finally fixed an error that I told them about 10 years ago. The bigger problem is lawyers don't know how to input the financial information correctly and they use the wrong financial information. GIGO (garbage in garbage out).

                      The information an accountant would need would be as follows:

                      First 4 pages of the last two T1's
                      Notice to Reader Balance Sheet and Income Statement for the last two years
                      T2 Schedule 1 for both years (this reconciles profit for accounting purposes to profit for tax purposes). It gets rid of personal expenses out of the business
                      T2 Schedule 8 (this is the depreciation statement - this will ensure the corporate owner isn't jacking up Capital Cost Allowance unreasonably to reduce income)
                      Percentage of voting shares the shareholder owns in the corporation

                      All this information is needed for all corporations. Many shareholders own a holdco as well or could have multiple opco's.

                      The revised profit would be an imputed dividend
                      You can choose any FYE you want for a corporation so you need an accountant to match things up properly to the T1 to get the proper corporate salary.

                      If you have a lawyer or a judge try to figure this out, this happens

                      https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chr...to-his-ex-wife

                      I know this guy personally and he got screwed royally. I've seen all the financial information on this case and the Judge and lawyers didn't have the foggiest clue what they were doing.
                      Good post. Yes those schedules are essential. I have never understood how so many judges subscribe to "line 150" ... perhaps just sheer work/file volume/laziness. If someone is self-employed and contemplating divorce they should make sure their lawyer knows how to interpret financial statements for a start. Too many clowns representing people out there... keep in mind Judge's are, in fact, lawyers. Retaining accountant is logical.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        A failed trick my ex used to try (which backfired on him big-time) was to file his taxes and then do an adjusting filing later in the year. He thought he was cleaver as he would of course just submit the first filing. This was annoying as everything in court was delayed. Last few years his submissions are pretty much disregarded by court... history of not coming to court with clean hands, etc.

                        FRO is a good deal. You don't have to converse with your ex and the collection action is free! I don't understand why people are threatened by FRO/maintenance enforcement agencies. As stated in previous posts, FRO only collects on court orders.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I agree, Arabian. I find FRO to be very useful for me and I have never had an issue with them.

                          And I am the support payor in this case, not the recipient. I like the convenience of paying them directly, not having to deal with my ex, and most importantly, substantiate my support payments to the CRA (and to my ex in the event she claims I am not paying her).

                          Nothing to fear at all, IMHO.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            There are plenty of cases on canlii where the self employed income has been outlined. I found the cases to be fair. For instance truckers who claim their income is $15,000 after deductions meanwhile their gross was $150,000. The judge ruled around $70,000.

                            For one time pay outs like an RRSP there is an argument (a good one) to not have it included as it was a one time payment.

                            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