Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What is your opinion??

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by arabian View Post
    MSMom - A valid point you raise and likely one of the reasons ex in this case was, according to poster, awarded SS.
    Its not VALID - its the "accepted" arguement for SS entitlement.

    You live with me and you want to stay home and watch soap operas that's fine... I'll support you.

    You DON'T live with me and want to stay home and watch soap operas.... I HAVE to support you?

    Its absolute BS and I guarantee in 10 years it will not be like that any more, keep your eye on the pendulum

    Comment


    • #32
      So you did not have to pay SS Links17? You must be from that other country - Quebec LOL.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by arabian View Post
        So you did not have to pay SS Links17? You must be from that other country - Quebec LOL.
        I am paying, like an idiot I signed the civil marriage agreement having no idea what it entailed. The upside for me is that at least we had kids and except for since the separation when the kids have been in school full-time she was still "theoretically" taking care of them.

        If I had known, I would have never signed that agreement - I never knew that you could sign an agreement with "unwritten" liability.

        Comment


        • #34
          [QUOTE=Links17;155679]Its not VALID - its the "accepted" arguement for SS entitlement.

          Um no - it's the law in Canada.

          Comment


          • #35
            LInks17 - you sound like the guy who says "Yes I had sex with her but I had no idea it would cause her to be pregnant."

            You were only married for 7 yrs so your SS is likely minimal.

            Just curious - have you found another sucker to move in with you? If so, did you have documentation drawn up to protect you from paying this one when the relationship ends?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Links17 View Post
              Its not VALID - its the "accepted" arguement for SS entitlement.

              You live with me and you want to stay home and watch soap operas that's fine... I'll support you.

              You DON'T live with me and want to stay home and watch soap operas.... I HAVE to support you?

              Its absolute BS and I guarantee in 10 years it will not be like that any more, keep your eye on the pendulum
              Links - If someone is choosing to be "taken care of" when they're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, they don't magically change once you split, even if your expectations of them do.

              You spent XX number of years enabling the behavior, and expect it to take a month to take all that back and make the person independent again. It doesn't take more than a couple of years out of the workforce to make it difficult to re-enter it, and you're starting out all over again.

              It was obviously a joint decision for one person to remain out of the workforce, otherwise the split would have happened much sooner, and probably on the "working person's" terms.

              There needs to be some responsibility on the person who allowed the situation to become the norm, therefore giving the expectation.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by arabian View Post
                LInks17 - you sound like the guy who says "Yes I had sex with her but I had no idea it would cause her to be pregnant."

                You were only married for 7 yrs so your SS is likely minimal.

                Just curious - have you found another sucker to move in with you? If so, did you have documentation drawn up to protect you from paying this one when the relationship ends?
                There is no next one, I won't let anybody hold me by the balls anymore, no kids to torture me with, no marriage agreements to punish me with. When things get hectic and she gets demanding, she gtfo the way she came - thank you very much.


                ______________________

                Go do a survey on the street of single 25yr old guys (and women) ask them the following:

                -If you marry (or live with her) a girl and you provide her for 10 years (either to be nice, or because her income is so low that it is not worth it)

                -One day for whatever reason - because the reason doesn't matter (even if she was having sex with your uncle) - the marriage ends.

                -Did you know that the "Guidelines" state that you will now have to pay her 40% of you salary for 5yrs or more BECAUSE she didn't work (the reasons she didn't work doesn't really matter)?

                ____________________

                People who don't have direct/indirect experience with divorce will think you're crazy and wouldn't believe it.

                but that is the reality her.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by MS Mom View Post
                  Links - If someone is choosing to be "taken care of" when they're perfectly capable of taking care of themselves, they don't magically change once you split, even if your expectations of them do.

                  You spent XX number of years enabling the behavior, and expect it to take a month to take all that back and make the person independent again. It doesn't take more than a couple of years out of the workforce to make it difficult to re-enter it, and you're starting out all over again.

                  It was obviously a joint decision for one person to remain out of the workforce, otherwise the split would have happened much sooner, and probably on the "working person's" terms.

                  There needs to be some responsibility on the person who allowed the situation to become the norm, therefore giving the expectation.

                  Really, I expect them to be forced to go work as soon as possible, Minumum wage, professional or whatever. The reality is that payees have "personal freedom" and can drag it out.... If my ex was working right now +35hrs/week, I'd have no problem supporting her even if it was minimum wage. The idea that she still wants to be a "stay-at-home" mother right now is baffling, I understand she is on boyfriend/marriage prospect #3 since the divorce but if that doesn't work out then will I still be on the hook or will they let her go on welfare?

                  We'll see..

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Links17 View Post
                    I am paying, like an idiot I signed the civil marriage agreement having no idea what it entailed.
                    So you were married - thanks for clearing that up.

                    Many of us would love to be able to go back and change parts of our lives. Family law has changed from the time I was married. Is that fair? Had I been able to predict the future I too wouldn't have gotten married. I'd bet my ex feels the same way as do countless others.

                    We did get married and divorced. There is no going back my friend.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Links17 View Post
                      Really, I expect them to be forced to go work as soon as possible, Minumum wage, professional or whatever. The reality is that payees have "personal freedom" and can drag it out.... If my ex was working right now +35hrs/week, I'd have no problem supporting her even if it was minimum wage. The idea that she still wants to be a "stay-at-home" mother right now is baffling, I understand she is on boyfriend/marriage prospect #3 since the divorce but if that doesn't work out then will I still be on the hook or will they let her go on welfare?

                      We'll see..
                      How very generous of you. Assuming you did not put a review date in your divorce agreement you can thank the good old family law act which allows you the opportunity to file a notice of motion and apply to have SS altered. So what's wrong with that process? I think it fair.

                      I have a problem with your premise that all people enjoy collecting SS. Not everyone sits on their arse and watches soap operas, waiting for the monthly SS to roll in. In many cases Welfare is a better thing than nominal SS but the recipient cannot qualify for Welfare because they are receiving SS.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by arabian View Post
                        The law protects those who might not be able to protect themselves. Do you think it at all possible that someone would take advantage of an individual by refusing to marry them fully intending to circumvent divorce law and avoid having to pay SS? Hmmm wonder if that every happens.

                        Being from Alberta I'd have to say that Quebec, to me, is another country. I have no idea what laws are in play there.
                        I don't really agree with this. If somone does not want to marry you to avoid any financial obligations after you are not together anymore it does not mean that that individual is taking advantage of you, it simply means that you have to work outside of the house. In most relationships, married couples or not, both parents work, kids get taken care of and household chores done. The solution is really simple. Nobody can force you to forgo your carreer and earning capacity if you do not agree to it. So if that person doesn't want to marry you, just continue working.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          In my opinion Family law in Quebec is years in advance to the rest of Canada. First, when you split you can't go to court directly. First you have to attend mandatory mediation sessions, six of those sessions are free and then the cost is determined based on income.
                          Child support is calculated differently, taking in consideration both parent's incomes, and if you have access for over 20% of time, the pourcentage is taken into consideration.
                          And obviously, not being obliged to support your partner after common law dissolution since both partners made a conscieous decision not to get married.

                          This is probably why shared custody is more common in Quebec then other provinces (by a lot).

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Agreed Toutou, Quebec has its own problems but the provincial rules for family law are very modern there. The rest of Canada is based on British common law, while Quebec has its own rules based on French common law.

                            If you look at Great Britain today, their system is plagued by the same problems as Canada and in many cases it is even worse and more unjust.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Who pays for "mandatory mediation" ?

                              Originally posted by Toutou View Post
                              In my opinion Family law in Quebec is years in advance to the rest of Canada. First, when you split you can't go to court directly. First you have to attend mandatory mediation sessions, six of those sessions are free and then the cost is determined based on income.
                              Child support is calculated differently, taking in consideration both parent's incomes, and if you have access for over 20% of time, the pourcentage is taken into consideration.
                              And obviously, not being obliged to support your partner after common law dissolution since both partners made a conscieous decision not to get married.

                              This is probably why shared custody is more common in Quebec then other provinces (by a lot).
                              If the taxpayer is on the hook for the mandatory mediation then it makes sense that Quebec is, indeed, a debt-laden province. Someone is making money through these mediation services. Some marital relationships are so poisonous by the time they come to an end that no amount of mediation will help. If anything it might make matters worse.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by FightingForFamily View Post
                                Agreed Toutou, Quebec has its own problems but the provincial rules for family law are very modern there. The rest of Canada is based on British common law, while Quebec has its own rules based on French common law.

                                If you look at Great Britain today, their system is plagued by the same problems as Canada and in many cases it is even worse and more unjust.


                                That very well may be but take a look at France's economy vs. Great Britain.

                                If you want to live in a socialist country then I guess France or Quebec are the places to live, just please don't laden the rest of Canada with your debt.

                                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