Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New personal loans after separation

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

  • New personal loans after separation

    My ex has provided updated financial disclosure and it includes a new personal debt. He doesn't list who he owes the money to (but it's a substantial amount over 6 figures) but he can show that this money was provided to him. He claims he borrowed the money to pay for living expenses for himself and the children since I won't let him access the credit available on the home equity line.

    Can my lawyer force him to disclose this source of funds and how this money was spent? He could have taken out money from his corporation but decided to borrow it instead.

  • #2
    He can borrow money after separation. He just can’t make you pay for it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rockscan View Post
      He can borrow money after separation. He just can�t make you pay for it.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      I understand that but do I have a right to know where this money comes from? I want to be able to verify he didn't take a lump sum of this money prior to us separating and is now receiving it back under the guise of a loan.

      Comment


      • #4
        I don’t think he has to divulge details. Just that its a loan. You could request additional disclosure but you would need to outline that you cannot fo forward with your case without it. That would be hard to prove.


        Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rockscan View Post
          I don�t think he has to divulge details. Just that its a loan. You could request additional disclosure but you would need to outline that you cannot fo forward with your case without it. That would be hard to prove.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
          Actually he will have to disclose the source of the money if he wants to rely upon it for any reason in the argument. As part of Rule 13 you can ask for the disclosure of the loan details. This often happens when someone tries to say they are broke and had to take a loan from their parents... But, without the proper paperwork it is NOT a loan but a gift in the eyes of the court.

          A loan is an agreement with terms signed by the person providing the loan and the person getting the loan. In accordance with Rule 13 you can request those details if they put the loan on their Form 13.1/13. Its part of financial disclosure.

          It is pretty routine disclosure to ask for... In fact, its probably money from a family member (gift) that they are trying to pass off as a loan. Quite common.

          Comment


          • #6
            What would be a reasonable argument? In my husband’s case the judge said loans or how he paid for things had no bearing on his income and he could use credit to pay for his lifestyle choices as long as he didn’t claim hardship, it didn’t matter what his credit or loans were.


            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rockscan View Post
              What would be a reasonable argument? In my husband�s case the judge said loans or how he paid for things had no bearing on his income and he could use credit to pay for his lifestyle choices as long as he didn�t claim hardship, it didn�t matter what his credit or loans were.
              Nothing churns on the loans or his credit. The judge is correct. People often try to leverage them incorrectly to say "look how broke I am your Honour" to get sympathy. They have no bearing on the argument generally.

              Where they matter is when someone is claiming they are broke, get family gifts to pay for legal fees or a life style. Some times judges will consider them to be income in extreme situations when there is significant family wealth. Especially when that party is aggressively litigating the matter.

              "Family money gives you wings..." (Same concept as Legal Aid giving someone wings to ruthlessly and recklessly litigate.)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                Actually he will have to disclose the source of the money if he wants to rely upon it for any reason in the argument. As part of Rule 13 you can ask for the disclosure of the loan details. This often happens when someone tries to say they are broke and had to take a loan from their parents... But, without the proper paperwork it is NOT a loan but a gift in the eyes of the court.

                A loan is an agreement with terms signed by the person providing the loan and the person getting the loan. In accordance with Rule 13 you can request those details if they put the loan on their Form 13.1/13. Its part of financial disclosure.

                It is pretty routine disclosure to ask for... In fact, its probably money from a family member (gift) that they are trying to pass off as a loan. Quite common.
                What if he provides a loan agreement (a document signed by both parties) with the details of the lender blacked out? Would that make the loan considered "legitimate"? All this is speculation but I am trying to prepare myself.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                  Nothing churns on the loans or his credit. The judge is correct. People often try to leverage them incorrectly to say "look how broke I am your Honour" to get sympathy. They have no bearing on the argument generally.

                  Where they matter is when someone is claiming they are broke, get family gifts to pay for legal fees or a life style. Some times judges will consider them to be income in extreme situations when there is significant family wealth. Especially when that party is aggressively litigating the matter.

                  "Family money gives you wings..." (Same concept as Legal Aid giving someone wings to ruthlessly and recklessly litigate.)
                  My ex's lawyer indicated he borrowed money from a friend since he isn't allowed access to any credit due to my name being on the family mortgage and because we have no separation agreement. It looks like they are blaming me for sitting on the matrimonial home and making me seem unreasonable for not allowing him access to credit.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by trueblue22 View Post
                    My ex's lawyer indicated he borrowed money from a friend since he isn't allowed access to any credit due to my name being on the family mortgage and because we have no separation agreement. It looks like they are blaming me for sitting on the matrimonial home and making me seem unreasonable for not allowing him access to credit.

                    Well technically you are being unreasonable. Mostly for the reasons in your other threads but now because he has no access to credit because a) you are refusing to sell his asset and b) he has no access to the line of credit on the property he owns.

                    His argument is correct.


                    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by trueblue22 View Post
                      My ex's lawyer indicated he borrowed money from a friend since he isn't allowed access to any credit due to my name being on the family mortgage and because we have no separation agreement. It looks like they are blaming me for sitting on the matrimonial home and making me seem unreasonable for not allowing him access to credit.
                      And the loan will be paid off once the house is sold. It will be sold. You are going to have to realize that the house is going to be sold. Be forewarned that if you drag out the eventual sale of the home you will be hit with having to pay costs.

                      You should agree to list and sell the home in a very reasonable time frame and move on. There have been many people that have come to this site thinking that they will get the house and some have paid big costs for delaying the inevitable.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Tayken View Post
                        And the loan will be paid off once the house is sold. It will be sold. You are going to have to realize that the house is going to be sold. Be forewarned that if you drag out the eventual sale of the home you will be hit with having to pay costs.

                        You should agree to list and sell the home in a very reasonable time frame and move on. There have been many people that have come to this site thinking that they will get the house and some have paid big costs for delaying the inevitable.
                        I understand the house will be sold but when we both had lawyers they discussed my terms to sell the house and it was my ex husband who didn't want to agree to them. He wanted me to take responsibility for money he borrowed against the house and repayment of a loan that is also a registered charge that happened during our marriage. If that money gets paid out then I will be left with almost nothing from our marriage.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          If the loan was incurred during the marriage then yes you are responsible for a portion. Just like you are entitled to a share of his acquisition of assets from his employment (like pensions etc.)


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by rockscan View Post
                            If the loan was incurred during the marriage then yes you are responsible for a portion. Just like you are entitled to a share of his acquisition of assets from his employment (like pensions etc.)


                            Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                            He plans on fighting debt that I incurred during marriage due to some financial and legal troubles that started before we met to reduce the equalization payment. Would he have any reasonable possibility of winning that? My lawyer says it's a coin toss and would depend on the judge.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              My lawyer says it's a coin toss and would depend on the judge.
                              Yes this is maybe true, but it is debt large enough to justify the legal fees.

                              You could go to vegas and put it all on black for a 'coin toss'. At least then you'll get comped a dinner if you lose.

                              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