Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Matrimonial debt and credit cards

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Newfie76 View Post
    SS on what grounds?
    I think in this case Arabian meant it as a workaround to get him paying his share of the joint debts. If he chooses not to pay (because he is likely looking at bankruptcy anyway with that credit card debt) the wife can easily get her assets trashed.

    Any time a women or man decides on his/her own to not get an education or work while married [they] should never be entitled to SS.
    I said this to Arabian not too long ago, but words like "never" rarely have an appropriate place in an opinionated statement. I'm hardly a fan of SS, and I think that the quantum and duration of SS awards handed out in court are crazy, but there are many situations where SS is quite appropriate.

    Essentially, compensatory SS can make sense. Needs based SS often makes substantially less sense.

    Comment


    • #17
      Arabian's ex declared bankruptcy immediately at the time of separation leaving Arabian personally on the hook for corporate and personal debt (Director's liability for company debt). The only way Arabian was able to recoup SOME money was through maintenance enforcement.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by arabian View Post
        I'm sure it happens frequently^especially if bills are sent by email. However, to pretend to not know about "10" cards if bills were coming to the home all along? Even the standard of living would/should alert someone. I can assure you that I would have noticed if my ex racked up 100k in restaurant/booze.
        My ex forged my signature to get a credit card in my name, then racked up debt. I never had a clue. I never saw the mail, found out much later. It was easy to prove. But you know what? It was marital debt. Case closed.
        A court doesnt care about details of debt as much as many people think.
        Credit cards with huge debts before separation are marital debt - don't bother with this kind of stuff, just be bitter and move forward.....

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Carnut View Post
          My ex forged my signature to get a credit card in my name, then racked up debt. I never had a clue. I never saw the mail, found out much later. It was easy to prove. But you know what? It was marital debt. Case closed.
          A court doesnt care about details of debt as much as many people think.
          Credit cards with huge debts before separation are marital debt - don't bother with this kind of stuff, just be bitter and move forward.....
          There are other ways to deal with that issue. First you should be working with the credit card company to resolve the issue. They issued a card to a fraudulent holder.

          Identity Theft and Identity Fraud - Royal Canadian Mounted Police

          Family Court is a civil court. You can't make claims of criminal conduct in them. If you have a case do what the RCMP recommends to resolve the issue.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Tayken View Post
            There are other ways to deal with that issue. First you should be working with the credit card company to resolve the issue. They issued a card to a fraudulent holder.

            Identity Theft and Identity Fraud - Royal Canadian Mounted Police

            Family Court is a civil court. You can't make claims of criminal conduct in them. If you have a case do what the RCMP recommends to resolve the issue.
            I never tried to make claims in court. My ex was brutal in stealing money from my family. Last six months she funneled tens of thousands straight out of family account. It was all on paper. She drained family money the whole marriage.
            Lied in court. Said she never worked the whole marriage to try to STEAL spousal support from me. I laughed. I said LOOK AT HER T4s!!!! Judge refused. I now pay spousal support for the rest of my working life.

            Those of you who think there is "justice" in family law better BUCKLE UP. It sure isn't what I would call "justice".

            Comment


            • #21
              Carnut - were you and your ex self-employed by your own business perhaps? That might explain why your ex's T4's were not reviewed. Do you recall an argument in court regarding 'income splitting'?

              Comment


              • #22
                The worst thing a lawyer ever said to me was "don't confuse justice with the law".

                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