User CP
New posts
Advertising
|
||||||
| Financial Issues This forum is for discussing any of the financial issues involved in your divorce. |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
#11
11-30-2021, 09:07 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Your case was a special one though. Not too many people have investment income and if they do, it’s their only income which is why it is considered.
For the majority of people who work a basic job (for the man) and have nothing but employment income, line 150 works. For some who have their own business, investments, special income, business expenses etc., line 150 is not applicable and it requires a deeper dive. 
|
|
#12
11-30-2021, 09:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quick update..... he did not file his pleading to ask for spousal... YET. And I say yet, as we tried to discuss among ourselves a deal but we were not successful. Lot of factors here but the main being, he got cocky and condescending, and I got triggered and couldn't continue. Since the amendment was due, his lawyer still send them to us so I was able to review them. As you may guess they were not factual (far from it). As of yesterday they still did not file them. My lawyer and I are currently putting together an offer, hopefully we can get it out this week. I like it and I think its fair, with NO spousal. Wish me luck
|
|
#13
11-30-2021, 10:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
When my husband was negotiating before his settlement conference, his ex’s lawyer got an attitude and my husband was ready to scrap everything and let the judge decide. His lawyer and I had to talk him down. When he realized he would end up paying more in fees he cooled himself.
It is hard dealing with a difficult ex but remember settlement is key. If he isn’t entitled to spousal then definitely walk. If he is, try to negotiate. I wish you all the best luck!!
|
|
#14
11-30-2021, 11:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#15
11-30-2021, 12:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I think you're fixated on this line 150 thing. All incomes will be totaled, and then exemptions will be made. Nothing special about that. With disability, about half my income is used for support purposes. Same for people with side incomes, which both you and ex had. You start with all your income sources, then argue why certain amounts shouldn't be used.
|
|
#16
12-01-2021, 03:23 PM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
 There is two sides to consider when it comes to determine support. The view of the recipient and the view of the payor. The recipient will claim that your income is line 15000 and plus more, they always do and the payor will claim that it's less than the actual figures from the NOA, they always do. The court is all aware of those fights. We all know that the judge play dumb at this and you must plead whatever you are determine what your revenue actually is. I did indicate that on my previous post: If you feel that line 15000 is not the appropriate amount to use according to your situation, then you can argue and propose your own figures based on your findings. Be prepare as those will certainly be challenged by the opposing party and only in rare and specific circumstances (like self-employed) the judge will diverge from the actual amount file with RCA. Do the maths to establish if it's worth the effort and money to argue in court. Remember that as a payor, you only have to justify your revenue if it is challenged by the opposing party. As a payor, if your revenue are strictly base on an annual job supported by T4, stick to line 15000 and don't make a fuzz on it. If you have investments, rental revenues, own business, support to previous breakdown... then adjust and plead accordingly. Quote:
Still, I would like to have a look at your judgment. It's full of intrigues and will only need to see it to believe it! It's a shame to have to deal with egocentric people on a forum that brings together people seeking support. As if their situation weren't already painful and difficult enough. Still, each of us who publish on this site are just a bunch of monkey who gives only our opinion. No legal advice. 
|
|
#17
12-02-2021, 01:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi,
I'm attaching the Department of Justice review of the Child Support Guidelines that review the adjustments to income. They give a brief background to each adjustment, the rationale and provide case law if required. https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/...p/v2/v2_6.html Scroll down to the middle of the page until you hit "Schedule III: Sections 1 to 13" These adjustments do not need to be defended. These are straight from the DOJ.
|
|
#18
12-02-2021, 10:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I always appreciate hearing how a vexatious person gets their karma handed in court, however feel I must comment on decorum.
A really smart person would know to not smile, laugh, or get excited in court if things are going their way, knowing to keep it all internal and celebrate outside or in the car on the way home. Judges see everything from up there. Whether you smile, smirk, get upset and cross your arms, posture in chair, etc. And it means something. How you behave in court does count. Verbal and non-verbal. A really smart person would be a stand-up individual and not speak ill of their former spouse in front a judge, or use profane language in a court of law. A really smart person knows that the judge is a stranger and you need to make a good impression as an individual. Keep it classy. OP might be good in math, but I would not characterize the story given as being "smart" in litigation or courtroom smart. Sorry.
|
|
#19
12-02-2021, 02:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 I sincerely like your decorum but the poster clearly stated that he was a hell of a lot smarter so this goes a lot over the "really smart" person you define here. I guest we need to multiply your definition by 2 or maybe 3?
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Spousal Support - Why It Matters | Divorcemanagement | Political Issues | 83 | 11-28-2013 10:38 AM |
| Application For Spousal? | lorlaman | Divorce & Family Law | 16 | 01-04-2011 08:42 PM |
| CS and SS Questions | Teddie | Financial Issues | 4 | 12-14-2010 04:49 PM |
| What Were They Thinking........ | FL_Needs_To_Change | Divorce & Family Law | 6 | 05-25-2007 09:47 PM |
| child and spousal support | Catherine M | Financial Issues | 9 | 02-26-2007 06:32 PM |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:11 PM.