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 09-23-2019, 09:24 AM
Gilligan Gilligan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 240
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Should Dad suffer because he got crappy legal advise? This isn't about Dad or Mom, but if CS & S7 are always modified by changes in income, then why isn't post secondary a standard formula?

Seems the consensus is "you hired a crappy lawyer, then it's your fault and you should suffer for the outcome"? The law is supposed to be without emotion and follow strict guidelines, why is it applied with such variability?

My ex has brought me to court several times, a material change in circumstances was never questioned and automatic when income changes, regardless of how minor.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-23-2019, 09:46 AM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,688
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligan View Post
Should Dad suffer because he got crappy legal advise? This isn't about Dad or Mom, but if CS & S7 are always modified by changes in income, then why isn't post secondary a standard formula?

Seems the consensus is "you hired a crappy lawyer, then it's your fault and you should suffer for the outcome"? The law is supposed to be without emotion and follow strict guidelines, why is it applied with such variability?

My ex has brought me to court several times, a material change in circumstances was never questioned and automatic when income changes, regardless of how minor.


The theory behind post secondary is that children of divorce should not have to suffer as a result of their parents decisions. Add in that they should not be crippled by student loans.

Every case is different though and just because you prevailed doesn’t mean everyone does. There are different aspects to every case, every judge, every argument and every litigant.

It is disingenuous to come on here and beat your chest about your wins when others are working their way through the system. No two cases are the same.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-23-2019, 10:30 AM
Gilligan Gilligan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 240
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
The theory behind post secondary is that children of divorce should not have to suffer as a result of their parents decisions. Add in that they should not be crippled by student loans.

Every case is different though and just because you prevailed doesn’t mean everyone does. There are different aspects to every case, every judge, every argument and every litigant.

It is disingenuous to come on here and beat your chest about your wins when others are working their way through the system. No two cases are the same.
I am not beating my chest here and I am not suggesting the children should suffer, but these cases aren't really different are they? It seems people often like to hide behind "every case is different" and I see judges routinely just apply the tables.

From my perspective and experience, if we simply apply table amounts and and consider this to be a fair and equitable system, then why are people spending their time in court arguing not even considering the extremely expensive lawyers.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:37 AM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,688
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligan View Post
From my perspective and experience, if we simply apply table amounts and and consider this to be a fair and equitable system, then why are people spending their time in court arguing not even considering the extremely expensive lawyers.

Because inevitably these cases involve an unreasonable person who does not want to pay. Or an unreasonable person who thinks they are entitled to more than what the precedent is.

When it comes to s7 and school expenses, no two cases are the same. Child support and the tables are completely different. For kids over 18 and away at school, the court expects you to prove why section 3 of the FCSG is unreasonable to determine cs amounts. For school expenses, its either agreed upon or a judge decides.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:43 AM
Gilligan Gilligan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 240
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Because inevitably these cases involve an unreasonable person who does not want to pay. Or an unreasonable person who thinks they are entitled to more than what the precedent is.

When it comes to s7 and school expenses, no two cases are the same. Child support and the tables are completely different. For kids over 18 and away at school, the court expects you to prove why section 3 of the FCSG is unreasonable to determine cs amounts. For school expenses, its either agreed upon or a judge decides.
I see a contradiction here. Child Support is almost always based on the table amount. How are they completely different?

Also, I just looked at my own order and I'm worried... seems my lawyer wasn't very good and has me listed as providing support (although it's 50/50) while the child is away at school. However my ex has taken me to court several times. Does the original agreement stand, or are they null and void because of the 3 judgement after the fact? The new orders are just updates to CS & S7.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:50 AM
Gilligan Gilligan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 240
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligan View Post
I see a contradiction here. Child Support is almost always based on the table amount. How are they completely different?

Also, I just looked at my own order and I'm worried... seems my lawyer wasn't very good and has me listed as providing support (although it's 50/50) while the child is away at school. However my ex has taken me to court several times. Does the original agreement stand, or are they null and void because of the 3 judgement after the fact? The new orders are just updates to CS & S7.

I should also ask, does it make me un-reasonable if I think this should be revisited knowing that the child will be 18 and couldn't foresee changes in support (e.g. mother now on disability therefore increasing my support obligations significantly and I still have to support child 50% at my home plus provide 80% for S.7.)
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:53 AM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,688
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Read up on section 3 of the FCSG specifically the item on “Child the age of majority or over”.

Bottom line is, if a judge has to decide, they will decide what the appropriate cs amount is “having regard to the condition, means, needs and other circumstances if the child and the financial ability of each spouse to contribute to the support of the child.”
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-23-2019, 11:58 AM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,688
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligan View Post
I should also ask, does it make me un-reasonable if I think this should be revisited knowing that the child will be 18 and couldn't foresee changes in support (e.g. mother now on disability therefore increasing my support obligations significantly and I still have to support child 50% at my home plus provide 80% for S.7.)

Is her disability legitimate or are you saying she has done it to stop working? You would need to prove purpose underemployment.

If you child goes away to school then child support would change. That is the part that may be battled. Your ex would obviously not want to lose support. If the child stays home and goes to school then the costs are significantly less. They would be tuition, books, supplies and transportation (if applicable). When you consider the grants taken off tuition and the child’s contribution, the amount left is not as high as you may think.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:03 PM
Gilligan Gilligan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 240
Gilligan is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockscan View Post
Is her disability legitimate or are you saying she has done it to stop working? You would need to prove purpose underemployment.

That's a loaded question... there is a long history of my ex doing this type of thing before (i have witnessed it while in our relationship), however she's got a medical note and on LTD so there is very little argument to be made (the irony is she has more take home now than if she was working).

I would expect my ex to want full offset while the child is away, so this is what is concerning to me. I'm paying a large % for S7 and paying close to full table support even though it's 50/50.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-23-2019, 12:20 PM
rockscan rockscan is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 4,688
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

But if she is making more take home why is it such an issue? You are paying off set based on either the same or more income?

80% seems staggering but there are a number of other factors at play in the amounts. They include:

1. Grants that reduce the amount
2. Kid sharing the cost which you could argue should be 1/3
3. Tax benefits coming off depending on who claims them

While it may seem like you are paying 80% of say $10,000. In reality that amount would be lowered by grants, kid and tax. Meaning that 10 could be reduced to 4 and then split accordingly.

Its up to you though. If it is worth spending thousands on a lawyer do it but if it is reasonable and you would win, it may be worth it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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
child support while child is in university verytiredmother Divorce & Family Law 43 01-13-2013 04:02 AM
Annual Support Review: child & SSAG Furpo Financial Issues 2 06-01-2011 03:03 PM
Retroactive Child Support (Ont) Mess Divorce & Family Law 21 03-02-2010 01:41 AM
Joint Effort to Change Table Amounts of CS 350_dad Political Issues 43 12-18-2009 02:01 AM
What Were They Thinking........ FL_Needs_To_Change Divorce & Family Law 6 05-25-2007 10:47 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:26 AM.