Still in the grinder.

[karmaseeker]

Hello,

It has been a while. I needed a break from all things divorce (as it's not my divorce) and I was going mental.

But, I need to gauge what might happen next as I have zero faith left in the word JUSTICE.

Here we go:
My partner is fighting to keep his kids and his head above water. His vindictive ex is out for blood. Fighting for sole custody - no just cause and lots more $$$.

Case conference last summer. Temp order made on child support and section 7 conditional on full disclosure of ROE's, NOA, tax returns, proof of payments etc (none was provided by her and still not provided).

Assessment ordered. Very biased against my partner as he appeared "very negative" towards his ex. While also proving she was indeed flicking and squeezing the kids as punishment and that they were coached by their mother - still recommends her to have sole custody with provisions for all information to be provided as their is a long history of her failing to provide info on changing their schools, health decisions etc. He is seen as a good and loving parent but as they can't communicate so better for the kids to have her will sole and EOW for him. We were devastated and so are the kids.

I personally think that having a wife that committed adultery (yes, I know not relevant - don't bite my head off), a law suit brought against you, parent alienation, bullying, and general disregard to the other parent, not to mention abusing the kids is enough to make anyone "negative" toward their ex. but anyways (mini rant over).

Now we have offered to settle but she refused it (of course).

we offered to follow the recommendations of the assessor (her sole & EOW because he was never treated like he had joint when he had joint as nothing was told to him or discussed with him.

There are some seemingly crazy sticking points. She refuses first rights of refusal as "she holidays yearly and the kids should go with her mom". Recommended by assessor.

She refuses to have a stipulation in her will that if she dies - he gets automatic custody. WTF? Who else is going to get the children?

She wants downhill ski stuff paid for by him. even though she still has failed to provide any proof of payment for daycare (which she refuses to give the tax break to him so that is an additional 500 plus a month).

She refuses our recommended "conflict resolution" stipulation to use a mediatior/ arbitrator should future issues arise. and simply says they don't need it. Yet, earlier in her brief clearly states they can not communicate effectively.

Again slings crap at him saying his PTSD from his time as a soldier (over 10 years ago) means he is incapable of having a meaningful relationship with the children. Even though the assessor interviewed everyone and said that he is a good dad and the PTSD isn't an issue. Further, in her interviews with the assessor laid her performance art on real thick and she raved that he was a great dad and she just wanted the kids to have lots of time with him. (BARF!)

Now back in her brief she is fighting him having access on March break and only should have 1 of the weekends. Also recommended by the assessor to have every other march break.

My partner is unfortunately laid of work (nature of his job) but there is nothing left to live off. She refuses to adjust child support even though it is more than he makes off EI and his pension combined. She says in one part of the brief it is common for him to be laid off for stretches and then later he is intentionally under employed. He is not allowed to solicite work outside of the union or he will be fined 5,000. During their marriage he was laid off for so long at one stage he had to go out west for work. Obviously he can't do that now or he will not see his children. I am putting him though a retraining course for bar-tending so he can have a second job that won't interfere with the Union. The union provides life insurance and benefits - which she insists he have. (rock / hard place).

We have to sell the house as obviously can't pay a mortgage when he makes less that his child support obligations alone (never mind our houses expenses) I'm a start up business and not yet profitable but have a part time job too. Thinking I may need to get a third job.

Further she is arguing that she should have to provide a suitcase of clothing for his weekends as we have always provided clothing here. (UHM, because they had to wear something).

She is also arguing participating in any of the transportation as he moved back home after her affair (1hr drive) but they ad a verbal agreement to share driving. Then she gave him another agreement for less daycare $ if he did all the driving. Now screw him. She won't compromise on anything.

He is in major debt, cashed in RRSP's and cleared out life savings to stay afloat, pay the 2100 child support, and his legal fees. His parents and I paid for his last retainer. I have no more I can give him and neither do his parents.

Settlemnent Conference delayed by then twice. Now finally here next week. What Do You think we can expect????.

If she fails to agree or compromise on anything we are likely to go to trial to self represent. He has ADD - that will be a near impossible task for him. They say trial to last 6 days. Our lawyer needs 10,000 for trial. Don't have any more lines of credit.

Opinions? Comments?

I am so worried.

[hadenough]

A 6 day trial will cost a hell of a lot of dough. If he's in that much debt and the loans/debts are unsecured - maybe he should look at considering personal bankruptcy. A last resort of course - but might alleviate some of the burden. It won't excuse any CS obligations but assuming your house has little/no equity - you'd likely be able to keep it.

Does he qualify for Legal Aid?

I commend you for supporting him through all of this. It seems the ex is getting away with quite a lot, by your account. I know it's all very stressful. I do hope you can avoid going to Trial.

[karmaseeker]

by his earnings last year he doesn't qualify for legal aid.

I don't really know why she would want it to go to trial. Wouldn't that mean she would finally have to show financial disclosure and provide all the disclosure the judge ordered at case conference?

I just hope a judge says "enough of this nonsense!" There are far worse cases out there but she can't agree to anything. We know she has a personality disorder but the psych eval came back inconclusive (meaning she lied on the test to make her self look good and the test couldn't understand the inconsistencies.

Staying here has been the hardest thing I have ever done in my life.

[knackered]

I hear you on it karmaseeker....I am in a similar situation financially because of my ex. If it wasn't for my GF, I would have had to quit my job/go on welfare and ex wouldn't be getting the child support.

We are just making ends meet or in the negatives each month. We see bankruptcy in the future.

[hadenough]

KS: do some research on requesting a Summary Judgment. How many Formal Offers to settle, have you made to the Other Party, if any?

[May_May]

My friend was just in a 5 day trial (due to her ex wanting 2 ridiculous demands), and it cost both of them $30K each. In turn now the ex husband has to also pay her $30K for the costs. $60K !!

Karma-Do you have an option to bring a renter into the basement perhaps to assist with the bills so you don't have to move ?

[Tayken]

Hello,
But, I need to gauge what might happen next as I have zero faith left in the word JUSTICE.

Family law isn't about "justice". It is about families. Going to court to seek "justice" is the wrong attitude.

Case conference last summer. Temp order made on child support and section 7 conditional on full disclosure of ROE's, NOA, tax returns, proof of payments etc (none was provided by her and still not provided).

Serve a Form 20 (Request for Information) attach the endorsement for this information and in 20 days do what the RFI form says... File a motion requesting the disclosure and questioning.

Assessment ordered. Very biased against my partner as he appeared "very negative" towards his ex.

General statement always made but, what evidence in support of it. Did the evaluator differentiate the difference between being critical and "critical thinking"? There are a significant amount of flaws to calling someone "very negative". To use this term clinically the person in question would have had to be incredibly harsh (swear etc...) and without reason to the concerns raised or supporting evidence.

While also proving she was indeed flicking and squeezing the kids as punishment and that they were coached by their mother

I haven't seen the report but, if the report does confirm this it is a form of child abuse and/or neglect and/or maltreatment. Depending on how the statement is made in the assessment on cross examination you can really corner an "evaluator" for failing to identify why this does not constitute the mentioned forms of abuse. There are a pile of abuse scales you can apply this conduct to if documented correctly (or not enough) to raise serious concerns about the evaluator's "judgement".

- still recommends her to have sole custody with provisions for all information to be provided as their is a long history of her failing to provide info on changing their schools, health decisions etc. He is seen as a good and loving parent but as they can't communicate so better for the kids to have her will sole and EOW for him. We were devastated and so are the kids.

See my other thread with instruction and the CASE LAW that can be used to counter the "opinion" of the "evaluator". The evaluator may be of this opinion but the requirement as stated in the other thread the court expects is quite high. If brought to trial with the right supporting case law the "opinion" is in contravention of case law potentially.

I personally think that having a wife that committed adultery (yes, I know not relevant - don't bite my head off), a law suit brought against you, parent alienation, bullying, and general disregard to the other parent, not to mention abusing the kids is enough to make anyone "negative" toward their ex. but anyways (mini rant over).

All leads to "unnecessary litigation". Unless there is a finding of the children at being of risk of emotional and/or physical harm while residing with their father the recommendations are just that... Recommendations. Furthermore, the conflict will only continue if one parent is eliminated and the likelihood of success of the child as an adult diminishes. There is another recent thread with the facts (clinical studies) that support this.

Now we have offered to settle but she refused it (of course).

Reasonable offer to settle. Keep making them. If you are unrepresented there is a load of great information on creating "parallel parenting" agreements that negate all of the allegations being raised in the OCL report. Base your offer to settle on those and use the existing and free templates.

we offered to follow the recommendations of the assessor (her sole & EOW because he was never treated like he had joint when he had joint as nothing was told to him or discussed with him.

So why won't they accept this offer. It is quite reasonable. Maybe too reasonable.

There are some seemingly crazy sticking points. She refuses first rights of refusal as "she holidays yearly and the kids should go with her mom". Recommended by assessor.

First off, right of first refusal being recommended but, that there is too much conflict to have joint residency?! The "evaluator" can't blow hot and cold on that one. If the evaluator was half brained they would have removed RoFR from both parents to negate future conflict. RoFR just CREATES conflict. Especially in EoW situations!

She refuses to have a stipulation in her will that if she dies - he gets automatic custody. WTF? Who else is going to get the children?

You answered your own question. It isn't required. It goes to the surviving parent.

She wants downhill ski stuff paid for by him. even though she still has failed to provide any proof of payment for daycare (which she refuses to give the tax break to him so that is an additional 500 plus a month).

Unless the kids are in the olympics child support covers it and is her responsibility. Daycare is S7 though in this situation and as the custodial parent with primary residence, he can't claim it.

She refuses our recommended "conflict resolution" stipulation to use a mediatior/ arbitrator should future issues arise. and simply says they don't need it. Yet, earlier in her brief clearly states they can not communicate effectively.

Doesn't have to agree to this but, a judge would force this on them if brought on motion or to trial probably.

Again slings crap at him saying his PTSD from his time as a soldier (over 10 years ago) means he is incapable of having a meaningful relationship with the children.

This is actually legal discrimination under the Human Rights Act. PTSD is a recognized disability and unless a clinician feels his PTSD (disability) is a danger to the children her raising this is discrimination. You can leverage this fact back at them and ask them to stop the discriminatory comments in the communications or you will file a complaint with the Human Rights Commission.

Even though the assessor interviewed everyone and said that he is a good dad and the PTSD isn't an issue. Further, in her interviews with the assessor laid her performance art on real thick and she raved that he was a great dad and she just wanted the kids to have lots of time with him. (BARF!)

Relate communications where she is high-conflict to the soft statements given to the evaluator. What people say and do are two different things. All the correspondence you have exchanged can be used to counter these statements if you have good relevant evidence to her high-conflict behavior.

Now back in her brief she is fighting him having access on March break and only should have 1 of the weekends. Also recommended by the assessor to have every other march break.

Minor detail in light of the other issues on the file.

My partner is unfortunately laid of work (nature of his job) but there is nothing left ... hildren. I am putting him though a retraining course for bar-tending so he can have a second job that won't interfere with the Union. The union provides life insurance and benefits - which she insists he have. (rock / hard place).

Change of circumstance bring the matter on motion and request an adjustment to CS.

Further she is arguing that she should have to provide a suitcase of clothing for his weekends as we have always provided clothing here. (UHM, because they had to wear something).

Technically as the custodial parent it is her responsibility to do this. She can't blow hot and cold on this one.

If she fails to agree or compromise on anything we are likely to go to trial to self represent. He has ADD - that will be a near impossible task for him. They say trial to last 6 days. Our lawyer needs 10,000 for trial. Don't have any more lines of credit.

ADD is again a recognized disability and you can request accommodations from the court for both of his disabilities listed. You could possibly leverage this to get him legal representation to assist. Look into the options in the rules in the Courts of Justice Act. Even people with recognized disabilities have a right to a fair trial.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[hadenough]

Tayken hit all the nails on the head, as always

May_May - Oh God don't get me started on Tenants. Just went thru total HELL in that regard. Like I needed another headache :s

I too may need to high-tail soon. Forecast is not promising at all

Too right: Family Law is not about "Justice."

[karmaseeker]

omg Thank you so much for this feedback it has been invaluable.

To try to answer some of the questions:

Bankruptcy is an option he is speaking with a debt consultant on tues.

We are trying to sell the house to a member of my family (we are common law) and we will rent off them. Once they title isn't in his name. Their would be an add in KIJIJI for bsmt for rent within the hour. If he was bringing in rental income she would go after more child support.

Tayken - thank you thank you thank you! You are a gem and a wealth of info.

We are asking for change in cs, sec 7 in settlement conference next week. if she refuses we have a motion prepared. (According to our lawyer).

We are also bringing attention to the lack of disclosure.

"General statement always made but, what evidence in support of it. Did the evaluator differentiate the difference between being critical and "critical thinking"? There are a significant amount of flaws to calling someone "very negative". To use this term clinically the person in question would have had to be incredibly harsh (swear etc...) and without reason to the concerns raised or supporting evidence. "

No she just slammed him. He was critical WITH REASON and we provided countless examples and back up info. I had prepared and gave her countless emails ( I don;t think she read them) The fact that his ex was caught in lies, coaching the kids and flicking them was all swept under the carpet (apparently this is not abuse by the social workers standards or CAS) and she was giving a glowing review as a mother. Apparently it is what she says that counts not what she does. I'd love to get my hands on Working Dad's questions for his evaluator. He sent me the liks to his trial. AMAZING!

It is absolutely unnecessary litigation. We have offered mediation 5 times, arbitration, parent coordination, multiple revised terms of agreement sent in emails, and 1 official offer to settle.

Aside from him being negative towards his ex he was seen as a good parent and sole was suggested only as a means of minimizing conflict and he was to have access to all medical, educational, information and be informed of all appointments, allowed to contact the schools and attend all meetings.)

we mentioned parallel parenting to our lawyer ages ago - she said it only works when parents get along. ???

God knows why she won't accept it - GREED? INSANITY? Unwillingness to compromise on anything ever!


Thank you for that stuff on the discrimination I will look into that immediately!

[Tayken]

omg Thank you so much for this feedback it has been invaluable.

To try to answer some of the questions:

Bankruptcy is an option he is speaking with a debt consultant on tues.

We are trying to sell the house to a member of my family (we are common law) and we will rent off them. Once they title isn't in his name. Their would be an add in KIJIJI for bsmt for rent within the hour. If he was bringing in rental income she would go after more child support.

Tayken - thank you thank you thank you! You are a gem and a wealth of info.

We are asking for change in cs, sec 7 in settlement conference next week. if she refuses we have a motion prepared. (According to our lawyer).

We are also bringing attention to the lack of disclosure.

"General statement always made but, what evidence in support of it. Did the evaluator differentiate the difference between being critical and "critical thinking"? There are a significant amount of flaws to calling someone "very negative". To use this term clinically the person in question would have had to be incredibly harsh (swear etc...) and without reason to the concerns raised or supporting evidence. "

No she just slammed him. He was critical WITH REASON and we provided countless examples and back up info. I had prepared and gave her countless emails ( I don;t think she read them) The fact that his ex was caught in lies, coaching the kids and flicking them was all swept under the carpet (apparently this is not abuse by the social workers standards or CAS) and she was giving a glowing review as a mother. Apparently it is what she says that counts not what she does. I'd love to get my hands on Working Dad's questions for his evaluator. He sent me the liks to his trial. AMAZING!

It is absolutely unnecessary litigation. We have offered mediation 5 times, arbitration, parent coordination, multiple revised terms of agreement sent in emails, and 1 official offer to settle.

Aside from him being negative towards his ex he was seen as a good parent and sole was suggested only as a means of minimizing conflict and he was to have access to all medical, educational, information and be informed of all appointments, allowed to contact the schools and attend all meetings.)

we mentioned parallel parenting to our lawyer ages ago - she said it only works when parents get along. ???

God knows why she won't accept it - GREED? INSANITY? Unwillingness to compromise on anything ever!


Thank you for that stuff on the discrimination I will look into that immediately!

Provide your solicitor WorkingDad's case which can be used. Also, reflex all the supporting case law and provide that to the solicitor.

Smack the solicitor upside the head and tell them to do their job.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[WorkingDAD]

Provide your solicitor WorkingDad's case which can be used. Also, reflex all the supporting case law and provide that to the solicitor.

Smack the solicitor upside the head and tell them to do their job.

Good Luck!
Tayken

Or tell him that you will hire WorkingDad for food )))))))))))

Just kidding ...

[hadenough]

WD: I'd hire you, if I could afford to

I will keep you up to speed on the B-court thing. I'm unrep'd for that but I'm looking forward to it and there's no prep involved for the 1 day hearing on my part. I was advised to file my family court decision w/the B-court, and I intend to. Just waiting to get notice of hearing. By Law, I will be given at least 15 days notice by mail. OSB will advise as well.

Back to the topic of this thread: I think it's spectacular that your case is helping so many others... I cannot imagine the sense of pride and accomplishment you must have, and it is so richly deserved