Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Financial Issues

Financial Issues This forum is for discussing any of the financial issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 05-15-2019, 04:16 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,180
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

That case is apples to oranges. Maybe even apples to filet mignon. That man was unemployed and owed thousands in arrears to both baby mamas.

Your husband makes $96,000 a year. He negotiated his equalization poorly. Thats the end.

What his ex wife makes, her spouse earns, their house is worth, how many louis vitton purses she has, and the volume of diamonds she wears means nothing. Like I said, there are men on this forum who live on friends couches, in parents basements or in their car and they still do not qualify for hardship.

The answer to your question is no he cannot successfully argue this. Your response is thank you.

Everything else you say is white noise. Go search canlii and find all the hardship cases you want. Before you wave them about triumphantly make sure you read the circumstances. A guy earning $28,000 on EI with two kids to support has hardship—barely.

We aren’t specifically targeting you. You asked a question, we gave answers. Whether you like the answers means nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-15-2019, 04:52 PM
arabian's Avatar
arabian arabian is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 10,518
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

When one goes to court a basic requirement is to complete a financial statement. this includes all household income. Might be a good idea to look at the form carefully.

Going to court over this matter may backfire and result in increased imputed income. You can find the form under Ontario Court Forms - 13.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-15-2019, 04:57 PM
Selfrepmom Selfrepmom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 106
Selfrepmom is on a distinguished road
Default

I feel like everyone is missing the main issue here....

This guy is making $96,000, and is only paying $375/month for his first child
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:04 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,180
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selfrepmom View Post
I feel like everyone is missing the main issue here....



This guy is making $96,000, and is only paying $375/month for his first child


I have a feeling it was based on a lower income and was never updated.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-15-2019, 05:18 PM
Selfrepmom Selfrepmom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 106
Selfrepmom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
I have a feeling it was based on a lower income and was never updated.
So do I. What I don’t think OP realizes is that if her hubby brings an undue hardship claim to court- based on this outdated amount- he will most likely leave having to pay his first ex around $850 a month, and the $1350 to the other one.

Like I said 10 times already. Make sure you support all your kids equally. Baby mamas talk, and it’s only a matter of time before one of them realizes they’re getting stiffed. Then he’s really in for it.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-15-2019, 06:58 PM
StillPaying StillPaying is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 165
StillPaying is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm assuming you guys would be ok with a cs reduction if there were high travel costs for access, so I'm not sure what's different here. This is not a parent simply arguing the tables are too much; then your arguments have merit. The undue hardship clause has a list of what qualifies, including high access costs, other cs orders, etc. This first "undue hardship" step is the easier one for OP to meet. The second step is to compare household incomes and standard of living, and it sounds like this should be met as well. There's a reason cs for 2 kids is not the cs for 1 kid times 2. The case law quoted is a good one and explains it well. Keep checking canlii, there are more.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-15-2019, 07:57 PM
Selfrepmom Selfrepmom is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 106
Selfrepmom is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by StillPaying View Post
I'm assuming you guys would be ok with a cs reduction if there were high travel costs for access, so I'm not sure what's different here. This is not a parent simply arguing the tables are too much; then your arguments have merit. The undue hardship clause has a list of what qualifies, including high access costs, other cs orders, etc. This first "undue hardship" step is the easier one for OP to meet. The second step is to compare household incomes and standard of living, and it sounds like this should be met as well. There's a reason cs for 2 kids is not the cs for 1 kid times 2. The case law quoted is a good one and explains it well. Keep checking canlii, there are more.
There is a difference between arguing undue hardship because you have to fly across the country every month and rent hotels etc just to see your kid, and claiming undue hardship because you pay support for another child )who you aren’t even paying 50% of guideline support to begin with)

While I think that you are right that her husband “technically” qualifies based on the one listed criteria, we all know that family law isn’t just simply checking off a box and skipping on your way. I’ve never heard of someone qualifying based solely on having another kid. I think it has to be coupled with low income and/or lots of debt and/or other qualifying factors. I’ll eat my words if someone finds case law that says otherwise, but I highly doubt it’s out there.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-15-2019, 08:31 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,180
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

As my partners lawyer said...when my man was paying higher than table for two kids when one was eligible because his ex refused to update and he was making 20 grand a year on ei benefits and had no phone, cable or internet and refused to turn on the ac or heat and ate at his moms...not only will it be a brutal battle because judges hate undue hardship, you open yourself up to so much scrutiny over every single penny you have.

You will spend thousands on a battle you can’t win because you are unhappy the ex has a better life.

* also note the judge could also order increased cs for kid 1...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-16-2019, 06:47 AM
tilt tilt is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 75
tilt is on a distinguished road
Default

You at one point stated the eldest child is 16 and her underpaid CS would end in two years, at which point your partner would increase CS to his younger two children. It is entirely possible the CS payments would continue past 18 (as they should since I am assuming he is encouraging his daughter to pursue a career and HS alone does not cut it anymore). In theory, the youngest children could be looking at your proposed lowered CS for another seven years. Both the second baby mama and the Judge would be award of that and reluctant to create a status quo against the second childrens’ entitlement. I strongly doubt you will be successful in getting CS lowered on $96,000 income - the formula is there precisely because too many payouts were gaming the system and not paying fairly (like he appears to be doing with his first child).

back when they were together… his ex was outraged at having to pay $375 for his first daughter… now that it's her turn… $500 per kids is not enough… strange

Your partner seems to have a pattern in relationships where he plays his current partner’s financial wants against his childrens’ needs. Just know that that if you break up he will do the same to you, and keep those finances separate (although him paying half the mortgage may now entitle him to a later equalization payment from you to him as the case law around common law marriage is in flux). But he has a good deal with you financially supporting him and going to bat for him underpaying his kids, so your relationship will most likely last.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-16-2019, 11:12 AM
StillPaying StillPaying is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 165
StillPaying is on a distinguished road
Default

If you don't see it through the step child or high access costs example, just go with common sense. Cs is set at a good portion of your income, higher income equals higher support. If you have 1 kid with 10 people each, how many kids would get full table cs before the money is gone. At some point, the undue hardship will force some of those kids into a smaller cs amount.

* you don't really think this judge could change support for kid #1 do you?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
child support, standard of living, undue hardship


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ex is claiming Undue Hardship... representingself Financial Issues 32 10-24-2012 01:43 AM
Undue Hardship LotusFlower Divorce & Family Law 22 08-31-2011 02:37 PM
Undue Hardship MommaMouse Divorce & Family Law 6 08-26-2011 04:54 PM
Undue hardship in 50/50 custody! What do I do... Brianfox Financial Issues 27 12-03-2010 04:12 PM
Undue Hardship hubby Financial Issues 3 01-26-2006 11:57 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:37 PM.