Undue hardship

[blinkandimgone]

Lols. Undue hardship claims should be reserved for those exceptional circumstances, of which, yours is not. You're in the same situation many, if not most divorced parents are. You are not special, nor is your situation special or exceptional.

When you have to choose which kids to feed today, are living with zero extras, including internet (which you clearly are not), cell phones, cable tv, choose between putting gas in your car or paying your insurance, get groceries from the food bank and snowsuits from the snowsuit fund, THEN you may have an exceptional situation worthy of an undue hardship claim.

You. Just. Don't.

It may sound like a broken record having heard it so many times, but when you're told the truth over and over and keep demanding people tell you something different, perhaps it's time to reconsider your position, hmmm?

[Nadia]

Why was the cost of access (specifically cost of flights) not taken into consideration when Child Support was visited?

Its been a while since I read this thread and you might have answered this already.

Undue hardship is the exception and very difficult to prove. For example, you are going to have to explain why you and your husband were able to spend $11,000 in legal fees. These are the kind of questions an opposing party might ask in response to a undue hardship claim. Your spending habits 6 months prior to the claim will be placed under the microscope.

[Unevenplayingground]

Lols. Undue hardship claims should be reserved for those exceptional circumstances, of which, yours is not. You're in the same situation many, if not most divorced parents are. You are not special, nor is your situation special or exceptional.

When you have to choose which kids to feed today, are living with zero extras, including internet (which you clearly are not), cell phones, cable tv, choose between putting gas in your car or paying your insurance, get groceries from the food bank and snowsuits from the snowsuit fund, THEN you may have an exceptional situation worthy of an undue hardship claim.

You. Just. Don't.

It may sound like a broken record having heard it so many times, but when you're told the truth over and over and keep demanding people tell you something different, perhaps it's time to reconsider your position, hmmm?

I wasn't asking for a different response, why can't you get past this? I was stating that we would pass the first part of test. I was not saying anything else. Can we please get over whatever issue you have and move on? I actually would have liked to have heard from people that have experienced this. So if you have nothing productive to post what interest do you have with this thread? I have read some posts that you have made that seem to be really helpful, why not put your efforts there?

[blinkandimgone]

Sometimes the best help you can give someone is the truth and a reality check.

[Unevenplayingground]

Sometimes the best help you can give someone is the truth and a reality check.

I think what you are not getting, it would probably help you, is that I know we would never be approved for undue hardship. Is that what you needed, for me to say it to you?

What I am saying is, that we would pass both parts of the test, BUT AGAIN, I have no doubt that the judge would rule against us, if we actually applied for it, which we are not.

Does this help you? Can you get past this now?

[Unevenplayingground]

Why was the cost of access (specifically cost of flights) not taken into consideration when Child Support was visited?

Its been a while since I read this thread and you might have answered this already.

Undue hardship is the exception and very difficult to prove. For example, you are going to have to explain why you and your husband were able to spend $11,000 in legal fees. These are the kind of questions an opposing party might ask in response to a undue hardship claim. Your spending habits 6 months prior to the claim will be placed under the microscope.

Nadia, I'm not really sure why the access was not dealt with, we had issues with our lawyer, and could not hire another lawyer in time. We literally hired a new lawyer the day before the final order was done. Most of the items we wanted in the final agreement were not put in, numerous issues. Our lawyer did not communicate with us. She also told my husband that he had to pay for his son's gym membership. Not pro-ratia, I argued this with the lawyer. She just put it in. We are in NB and this all happened in Ontario. We found out the next day what happened. The new lawyer said there was nothing we could do about it, mind you when we talked to her prior to the final order she was going to sort it all out. So I don't know.

The legal fees were paid by me. Long story short, I bought a house (we are military) my husband was posted to Ontario and I was posted to NS. The house was brand new, there were major issues with it. It was a year and half nightmare. Atlantic home warranty ended up cutting me a cheque because they couldn't afford to fix it with the problems it had. So I had to use the money to fix all of the problems, and the leftover amount I used to pay for the lawyer. My step-son wanted to live with us when we moved to NB. Keep in mind that my husband didn't pay as much in child support before because he had shared custody, his son was actually at his house more than his mothers. My husband kept track of the time on a calender. It worked out to about 58% or more depending on the year.

It is a bit confusing because it started out dealing with custody, we went with the OCL recommendation because we were told we would lose in court, if the OCL didn't recommend the father. Our lawyer (who was not a good one) did say they didn't recommend his son coming here because in the end his son said he didn't care where he went. I don't know if that is true or not.

I hope I am making sense here, so much information to pass.

I think next year when they exchange income tax, we are going to request a pro-ratia amount for the access and the gym membership.

I know it was extremely hard dealing with everything here in NB, when everything was happening in Ontario.

[wife#2]

I have spent the past hour reading this thread! Still did not get through it all! I just want to say that I completely sympathize with your situation and do feel you are not being treated very respectfully by all. The problem my husband and I have had is very similar. We choose to have a child together, knowing he had both child and spousal support obligations. We accepted that. We prepared a budget before buying our home a little over a year ago. Since that time, his oldest child who was never entitled to support (agreed to by both my husband and his ex) decided to move back home with his mother (after 2 years out of the house) and go back to school full time. As well, we also fought for shared time with his youngest which we had for a year and a half, until sept this year. This added cost to support for both kids is approx $1000 more a month for us now, plus tuition costs, something that was not a factor 2 years ago. So I totally understand! Although we both have excellent incomes, it really does not matter, and is not the point. We are selling a car and have been debating for months whether or not to sell the house, which would cost us a $9000 fine backing out of the mortgage. People need to understand this system and stop jumping down people's throats. How are we to ever make any plans in our life? Every time his ex's or his kids (one is a 21 year old adult!) circumstances change, so ours must as well? He is a great husband and father, but people need to understand the hardship it can and does put on second families, often through no fault of their own. Good luck to you! But I'm sure you cannot claim undue hardship and personally would not waste the time!

[wife#2]

There are also many countries that treat ALL kids equally, or strive to make it more fair to children of a second marriage. You know where I learned about that?!?! This forum! Maybe Canada should review this?

[danzuchy]

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...d-rules-12635/

Moderation
Mods will not delete or move posts willy-nilly, we will make decisions based on quantity, quality, and intensity. Mods are also ordinary members and post frequently, this has nothing to do with being Mods. Moderation is just housekeeping performed by an agreement between the board owner and the Mods. Do not complain about the Mods on the board, such posts will be immediately removed.

<!-- / message -->

<!-- controls -->

[HammerDad]

There are also many countries that treat ALL kids equally, or strive to make it more fair to children of a second marriage.

While I agree in part, I feel there is a certain reality missing.

Second marriages and more children are a choice. The person who chooses to have more kids, knowing full well that they have certain obligations to the children of a prior marriage, should be the party who assumes the responsibilty for their actions.

One doesn't buy a car they can't afford. One shouldn't have children if it would cause financial hardship and a living environment that is less than ideal.

There will always be twists and turns in life. However, a responsible person does what they can to plan for these and not make decisions that could have large adverse reprocussions down the road.

[Unevenplayingground]

There are also many countries that treat ALL kids equally, or strive to make it more fair to children of a second marriage. You know where I learned about that?!?! This forum! Maybe Canada should review this?

I'm not sure, you talk to one lawyer and they will tell you that the law cannot ignore your obligation to any child, the order of appearance doesn't matter. And I have heard the opposite, but lawyers with different advice, from 3 different provinces.

I think they system needs a complete overhaul. I have read threads on here (take it with a grain of salt) where the mother that was receiving cs has a second marriage, has another baby, and the ex had to up his cs for a certain amount of time while she was on parental benefits. What sense does that make? Trust me, the same compassion would not be shown to him if he had another baby. He would have it thrown in his face that he new he had another child, but the mother's income drops because she is on EI (parental reasons) and he still has to pay her more???

We did the same thing when we decided to have our children. We looked at our budget, we knew we could do it. Then things changed, drastically. I had one person actually say we should have anticipated financial issues. I find this funny because how could you ever anticipate everything.

For instance, we both have medical plans, really good ones (very lucky) but we still had to pay a little over $1000 in medical expenses this year, over $4000 in flights (in flights related to access and court), my husbands lawyer inflated his income and he was overplaying around $100 a month until the final order was done. He is still overpaying, but not as much. I could go on and on.

All in all, Canada has to address the need for a HUGE change. The traditional family is pretty much gone. You can't expect to keep the receiving cs family family to eat steak and leave the paying family to eat no name kraft dinner. The cs rates are completely inflated, and I am speaking as a receiver of cs and as a step-mom who's husband pays it. S7 is absolutely ridiculous. There is a need for it but when people start nickle and diming the payer over $200 for the one sport the child is in? Really? I think the receiver of cs has to really think about how much they are contributing to their child.

Anyway, IF, anything ever changes, our children will be all out of the home.

[Pursuinghappiness]

Hammerdad:

There will always be twists and turns in life. However, a responsible person does what they can to plan for these and not make decisions that could have large adverse reprocussions down the road.

Yea, I totally agree with you here and frankly, I'm not a big fan of whining.

People have difficult circumstances every day that don't seem fair. People get sick, they lose jobs, they get in car accidents, etc....

The idea that you want a map of exactly what the kids might do that might cost you money is a little ridiculous. Life is full of curves.

As for this:

Since that time, his oldest child who was never entitled to support (agreed to by both my husband and his ex) decided to move back home with his mother (after 2 years out of the house) and go back to school full time.

GOOD! That this child is going to school is a good thing that should be celebrated by their father.

I'm shocked that people don't understand their obligations. A kid can always choose to go to school. And up to University age, you are financially responsible for your children. I don't care what kind of agreement he thinks he made with his ex. Its not his ex's money...its the kid's money...period. As a father, he should have NEVER overlooked his potential financial obligation to a minor child...kids aren't disposable.

If you didn't have a mitigation plan in place for this, you have zero business whining. Things change...kids change...and that this particular child got their act together and made a choice to do something productive for their life is a wonderful thing. I'm sure its resulted in additional expenses for the child's mother also...but kids are the most important investment we make.

There are also many countries that treat ALL kids equally, or strive to make it more fair to children of a second marriage.

There's nothing "unfair" about making a father pay child support and tuition for a dependent. I think what's "unfair" is that you don't understand that as the new wife to a man who had children...that he has an obligation to those children first. I find it hard to grasp that you're complaining about a kid getting educated and getting her life together.

I feel very sorry for these kids getting caught up in the "old kid" vs "shiny new kid" crap between the old partner and the new partner. Its tragic for the kids.

And please spare me the "bitter ex-wife" comments too. I chose my divorce and my ex doesn't have a new wife or gf. I'm starting to realize that as bad as a partner my ex was...he at least has the decency to understand what his obligations to his children are.

Sometimes I find the things people post here extremely disturbing....sigh.

[wife#2]

@HammerDad I agree with you completely. My only point is that some people, including myself and my husband, and it sounds like the op as well have tried to be responsible and plan for the future. We budgeted with his support obligations in mind, both child and spousal, as per the guidelines. I admit we were early on in the divorce process, and did not have a clue how bad things could get, but even still, we could not have anticipated what has happened to us. We also had no idea about the court process and never in our wildest dreams would we have thought we would spend 20k on a lawyer in a 2 year time frame! And my husband started self representing over a year ago to save money, but things did not go well for us for the past year, so this last time (yesterday) he took a lawyer to court again. Even yesterday is a great example of the crap we have been going through for 2 years. It was a settlement conference. The judge gave her opinion on a number of issues, some against my husband, some against his ex. My husband was willing to settle on the issues, even the ones against him, but the ex refuses to take the judges input on her outrageous claims of back support, and is now pushing for trial. Its the system that is wrong here. There is no reason we should have been in court over 10 times in the past 2 years. The system feeds these crazies who think they are entiled to everything, even when a judge looks right at them and says they are not! I don't know anyone in our situation who was wanting children who would have said, 'oh, and lets set aside 20 to 30k for lawyer bills for the next few years!' My husband has no problem paying his obligations, as many men don't. But with all these court dates, the parental alienation he has suffered, the changes in circumstance, etc, it is hard not to complain. And then you are labeled 'deadbeat'.

[Unevenplayingground]

Hammerdad:



Yea, I totally agree with you here and frankly, I'm not a big fan of whining.

People have difficult circumstances every day that don't seem fair. People get sick, they lose jobs, they get in car accidents, etc....

The idea that you want a map of exactly what the kids might do that might cost you money is a little ridiculous. Life is full of curves.

As for this:


GOOD! That this child is going to school is a good thing that should be celebrated by their father.

I'm shocked that people don't understand their obligations. A kid can always choose to go to school. And up to University age, you are financially responsible for your children. I don't care what kind of agreement he thinks he made with his ex. Its not his ex's money...its the kid's money...period. As a father, he should have NEVER overlooked his potential financial obligation to a minor child...kids aren't disposable.

If you didn't have a mitigation plan in place for this, you have zero business whining. Things change...kids change...and that this particular child got their act together and made a choice to do something productive for their life is a wonderful thing. I'm sure its resulted in additional expenses for the child's mother also...but kids are the most important investment we make.



There's nothing "unfair" about making a father pay child support and tuition for a dependent. I think what's "unfair" is that you don't understand that as the new wife to a man who had children...that he has an obligation to those children first. I find it hard to grasp that you're complaining about a kid getting educated and getting her life together.

I feel very sorry for these kids getting caught up in the "old kid" vs "shiny new kid" crap between the old partner and the new partner. Its tragic for the kids.

And please spare me the "bitter ex-wife" comments too. I chose my divorce and my ex doesn't have a new wife or gf. I'm starting to realize that as bad as a partner my ex was...he at least has the decency to understand what his obligations to his children are.

Sometimes I find the things people post here extremely disturbing....sigh.

So what are your thoughts on a reversed situation, such as a receiving cs parent having their payment upped because they go on parental leave (because she had a baby with her new partner), so her income goes down. Should the father of her first child pay more because of her choice? Because it happens, and woman like that get away with it. Would you agree it is a double standard?

[Pursuinghappiness]

Uneven:

While you could feasibly make an argument that some things need to change....they don't need to change because you made a decision to have a lot of kids.

Again, no one gets a roadmap in life. Not of health issues, not of expenses, not of anything. And the more variables you introduce..ie, divorce, new marriage, 5 children....the more potential hazards you may encounter.

You want to continue to have this "war of the old vs new children" and frankly its extremely distasteful to me. Your husband's child with his previous spouse does not have to live at the standard that you want to impose because you chose to have a lot of children.

Anyway, IF, anything ever changes, our children will be all out of the home.

So what? This applies to everyone in the country. We all make choices, stuff happens...divorce, death, illness...and we all have to manage those changes. You are not special. You made a decision to have a big family..and while I'm sure that's a fun, lovely thing (I wish I had more children but I couldn't afford them)...it comes with some peril, including a lot of financial peril. Big families come with a lot of wonderful pluses...and a lot of negatives. This is particularly true because you have a blended family and that comes with additional issues such as the one you're experiencing.

What are you whining about? The fact that you can't have a bunch of new kids with your husband and impose a reduced lifestyle on his previous child because you think all the kids should be living at the level you decide because you made an irresponsible decision to have too many of them?

You don't get a roadmap in life. You plan for the worst situations and when you plan badly, you pay the price. Join the club.