Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paying Full Table CS with 50/50 Shared Parenting

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

  • #16
    I would put my focus on imputing an income when the circumstances are ripe more so than on her obtaining employment. You can't make her work, but you can try to have an income imputed so that the offset CS and percentage of S7 will be more reasonable. Hopefully by now you are receiving your portion of the monthly child benefit also. She would receive half of her entitlement and you would receive half of your entitlement under shared custody.

    Don't let her rent so much space in your head for free. Easier said than done, I know, but it will make your life more peaceful if you can.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by PeacefulMoments View Post
      I would put my focus on imputing an income when the circumstances are ripe more so than on her obtaining employment. You can't make her work, but you can try to have an income imputed so that the offset CS and percentage of S7 will be more reasonable. Hopefully by now you are receiving your portion of the monthly child benefit also. She would receive half of her entitlement and you would receive half of your entitlement under shared custody.

      Don't let her rent so much space in your head for free. Easier said than done, I know, but it will make your life more peaceful if you can.
      All good points.

      My order states that I get all child tax benefits in even years and she gets odd years. So of course I applied and received a letter from CRA back stating that there were "residency issues" so I couldn't have it. Pretty sure its because 2016 benefits were for 2015 year, and I didn't have 50/50 then. So I guess I get it next year?

      Regarding imputing her income .. I'm being told to wait 2 years for that by most. I'm guessing there's a good reason for that. Not sure.

      Rock .. yea the thought crossed my mind about reporting......just hate rocking any boats.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by rockscan View Post
        Have you reported her to welfare? You *could* also call CAS to investigate the daycare...just saying...if they have the report of the daycare then welfare will have proof its happening...
        I would strongly advise against this. CAS exists to protect children at risk of abuse or neglect. Unless there is evidence that Mom is neglecting or abusing children, calling CAS just to get proof that she's looking after kids in her home is inappropriate.

        I agree with most other posters, focus on imputing income rather than getting Mom employed. It's up to her whether to seek work, stay home all day, whatever. But if she is able to work, whether she actually works or not, she should be paying CS based on an estimated income.

        Comment


        • #19
          Actually, running a home based business while on social assistance is fraud. So she is breaking the law. Added to that, if she isnt operating the in home day care safely or even securing the kids in car seats properly shes also breaking the law. Ontario has had a major issue with unsafe in home daycares and many agencies mandated to investigate these have been called out after a death at one on Vaughn. If something was to happen to any of these kids in her care due to her negligence which was encourage because she didnt want to follow a court order to find a job that would be a huge issue.

          Im not saying do it, Im saying there are channels to go through to ensure this "business" is on the up and up. LF32 has previously stated all the car seats in her car which was a red flag to me. Fraudulent home based day cares are a major issue in bigger Ontario cities. That is bigger than his CS issue. Thinking shes in the clear just perpetuates the problem.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by stripes View Post
            It's up to her whether to seek work, stay home all day, whatever
            I'm confused. It's up to her? But there's an order saying it's not up her, that she must seek employment.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
              I'm confused. It's up to her? But there's an order saying it's not up her, that she must seek employment.
              I guess it's the unspoken "or else". I presume the "or else" is imputed income. Nobody can actually be forced to work, just to suffer some consequences as a result of not working. Just like you can't physically force a child to eat broccoli, you can just enforce consequences. (or drown it in cheese sauce)

              Comment


              • #22
                Your lawyer was incompetent. She'd be the last person on my list to pay....

                Comment


                • #23
                  Then it's the court's problem if she isn't seeking work, not yours.

                  I'm not saying it's a good idea for her to stay home and not be employed, I'm saying that if you want to move to offset CS, which seems reasonable to me, imputing an income to her seems more straightforward than getting caught up in whether she is or is not complying with the order.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by PeacefulMoments View Post
                    I guess it's the unspoken "or else". I presume the "or else" is imputed income. Nobody can actually be forced to work, just to suffer some consequences as a result of not working. Just like you can't physically force a child to eat broccoli, you can just enforce consequences. (or drown it in cheese sauce)
                    cheese sauce is great .. personally I mince garlic....the kids love my veggies. :-)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Lets back up. What was said when you exchanged taxes? Anything?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by PeacefulMoments View Post
                        I guess it's the unspoken "or else". I presume the "or else" is imputed income. Nobody can actually be forced to work, just to suffer some consequences as a result of not working. Just like you can't physically force a child to eat broccoli, you can just enforce consequences. (or drown it in cheese sauce)
                        cheese sauce is great .. personally I mince garlic....the kids love my veggies. :-)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          If the only work she finds is in PQ Imhope you have a no relocate clause that's iron clad.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Beachnana View Post
                            If the only work she finds is in PQ Imhope you have a no relocate clause that's iron clad.
                            one thing I have learned..there is no such thing as "iron clad" in family law.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              A judge can't order someone to work so I doubt the order specifically says she must obtain employment. Seeking (looking) for employment is very different than obtaining employment. No one can be forced to work, regardless of an order. Mom could get a part time job making under $10k a year and you would still be paying full CS. This is why your focus needs to be on imputing income rather than trying to force her to work.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                I would think also that the longer one waits to impute income then the better her argument that absence from the workforce is a factor that should be considered when contemplating imputing income. Wait 2 years? I wouldn't do that. The kid isn't "on the teat." Also I think you could possibly contemplate a few years of stalling tactics to go along with endless case conferences - the Ontario way.

                                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