Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

EX "Underemployed"

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Moon View Post
    Its just unfair. I looked for job openings for her profession and they pay a lot. With a good lawyer I could do something about it but I can't afford one. If she was making what she claims I would gladly pay every penny. This is just another proof that who plays dirty has an upper hand.

    A friend of mine who is a welder gets paid $18. They imputed it to $35 because his ex's lawyer proved he can make that much.

    Thanks for your imput guys
    With your friend, did he quit a job that was paying 35hr?

    Comment


    • #17
      I believe so, Stsnding.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Moon View Post
        I believe so, Stsnding.
        if that is the case then that is probably why he had that income imputed on him. He was intentionally underemployed.

        With your ex unless she has quit a job where she was earning that kind of money and took a job paying less I think you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Moon View Post
          With a good lawyer I could do something about it but I can't afford one. If she was making what she claims I would gladly pay every penny. This is just another proof that who plays dirty has an upper hand.

          A friend of mine who is a welder gets paid $18. They imputed it to $35 because his ex's lawyer proved he can make that much.

          Thanks for your imput guys
          Ok, lets look at this from a different angle Moon. The Penny Wise Pound Foolish viewpoint.

          First, if you already have a FINAL agreement you would need to demonstrate a material change in circumstance and/or a error in law that was made if the decision resulted from a trial (appeal). By the sounds of it support has already been either agreed to or ordered by the court. So, before any of your dreams of having an income imputed on the other party you have to actually prove that the matter is material enough in nature to be heard again.

          Above you stated a "good" lawyer. I would disagree and say to do what you want to do you need "one of the best" lawyers. In Southern Ontario that kind of lawyer runs an average now of $550 an hour.

          Remember success is based on the *evidence* you are able to present and not the lawyer you have generally. If you just have wishes, hopes, dreams, and hearsay a lawyer generally won't take on your case... well "one of the best" won't. What differentiates a bad, good and one of the best lawyers is their ability to pick clients... (good client + good lawyer = good results in court)

          So, to do a motion to change lets just say that is 15 days of legal time to achieve what you want at 7.5 hours a day at 550$ an hour. (as a ballpark)

          That is $69,918 in legals (including HST) just to make the change to CS.

          You are looking to change support payments that would go from 15/hour to say 25/hour on the other party.

          At 15$ an hour that is 29,250 per year in gross income.
          At 25$ an hour that is 48,750 per year in gross income.

          On a shared model of parenting with SS included with your income at 65,000 and the other parent's at 29,250 you are at SS of $355 a month and $355 in CS (according to mysupportcalculator.ca). (710 a month or 8520 a year.)

          On a shared model of parenting with SS included with your income at 65,000 and the other parent's at 48,750 you are at SS at $295 a month and $155 a month in CS. (450 a month or 5400 a year.)

          Difference between 29,250 and 48,750 is 260/month or 3120 a year.

          Costs awards are rarely fully granted. Case on point is another poster to this forum who recently asked for 28,000 in costs and got 20,000 in costs and that was after a finding of bad faith was applied and a previous award already outstanding of 11,500 against the other party. So, you can reasonably expect to only get about 10% of your legals back as costs if successful.

          If your legals were 68,918 and you get 10% in costs you still have spent 62,926 you paid your lawyer. It will take you 242 months (or 20 years) of SS/CS savings to recoup what you spent in legals.

          I always recommend that people understand the return on investment prior to making any Application before the court or motion/etc... 9 times out of 10 it isn't worth it to seek reductions, imputed incomes etc... Even if you will be gloriously successful... You won't walk away financially better off in the majority of cases.

          Good Luck!
          Tayken

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Tayken View Post

            I always recommend that people understand the return on investment prior to making any Application before the court or motion/etc... 9 times out of 10 it isn't worth it to seek reductions, imputed incomes etc... Even if you will be gloriously successful... You won't walk away financially better off in the majority of cases.

            Good Luck!
            Tayken
            I'm having this advice printed out, framed, gift-wrapped and sent to my Ex. If only he used LOGIC instead of BITTERNESS, we could both walk away from the courthouse better off and so much sooner!!!

            Comment


            • #21
              Moon,

              Are you saying she is getting paid more under the table, or just that she could work elsewhere and make more?

              I think imputing income to what they could make, when they are full time working, is absurd.

              Imputing income to reflect what they actually make is of course reasonable though.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Moon View Post
                Its just unfair. I looked for job openings for her profession and they pay a lot. With a good lawyer I could do something about it but I can't afford one. If she was making what she claims I would gladly pay every penny. This is just another proof that who plays dirty has an upper hand.

                A friend of mine who is a welder gets paid $18. They imputed it to $35 because his ex's lawyer proved he can make that much.

                Thanks for your imput guys
                I suspect that your welder friend is perhaps a member (or eligible to be a member) of a trade union and imputed the hourly rate based on comparing a number of collective agreement pay scales. Your friend also likely has recent experience and hasn't been out of the work force at all or for a very long time.

                You can have lots of money and a very good lawyer and still be unsuccessful. Everything comes down to the judge's discretion as does everything else regarding SS.

                If your ex has recent experience (within past 24 months) showing the income that you believe she should be imputed at, then that might be relevant. You have to have evidence that her qualifications and experience and health put her in a likely position to make that money.
                If you have her income imputed to this amount and she is unable to make the money she can simply go to court a year later and request that everything be adjusted. She may or may not be successful.

                Best thing you can do is make sure that you exchange financials each and every year so if there is a huge income disparity you will have the relevant tax returns.

                Comment


                • #23
                  She works for her father, and is paid less (on paper) than a normal employee of her profession. Why?

                  Does she only work part-time hours?
                  Does her father give her additional money under the table?
                  Is another employee doing the same job paid more?

                  And whichever it is, can you prove it in court with supporting documentation? I agree that it's unfair that you have to pay more offset CS to subsidize her father underpaying her, but you have to prove that to a judge.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I "suspect" my ex works for a company which is registered under one of his employees and my ex is merely recorded as an employee. Can I do anything about it? Nope. Nothing. Insidious isn't it?

                    Personal experience has left me with the knowledge that you can have plenty of evidence, presented by a competent lawyer, and it still comes down to a judge's discretion - which is quite broad I can assure you.

                    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