Ex not cashing cheques

[rockscan]

Thanks Rioe. It is acceptable if income doesnt fluctuate. And he thought he was ok until his company suddenly cut half their local staff. Two weeks prior they were promising a permanent position. If that had been the case he would have had no problem. But $24000 a year is very different than $60000 a year. The lawyer said line 150 is standard but the law is the law. Which is why they had the clause to increase support based on income if he found work in 2012 (which he did). The ex doesnt like any instance where he doesnt pay what she feels hes supposed to-regardless of what the law or a judge or their agreement says.

Its not a wash in the end. Right now its $360 versus $900. And on $1600 a month, thats a big impact. Added to that, if hes working next year, instead of 20% for post secondary, it will be probably 40%.

She'd never consent to anything that didnt work in her favour. This is a person who still feels he shouldnt have gotten equalization.

Ive told him the longer she takes to cash cheques, the worse it will be for her to claim "broke" if it goes to court.

[MrToronto]

FRO and support adjustments are always a year behind (judges know that) very slow to turn the Titanic around with regard to support (even without the FRO) Yearly income is WELL yearly. Guess if push comes to shove 3 UI paystubs and a projection is all your friend has for this year..

Arrears will accumulate with the FRO but so what, send them the same info with a repayment plan (if there FRO package arrives) The FRO package is similar to a Form 13.

There's a support default hearing the FRO might do to squeeze blood out of stone but what a waste of time. Your friend needs the layoff notice or termination and maybe the application for EI and some EI checks bring it to the default hearing

It be nice if your friend sent a note that he's broke and a reply from ex saying who cares. (notification)

Even Pinocchio wished things were different but facts are facts , I don't know why your friend is wasting money on lawyers 24k income is barely above the requirement to even pay CS.

I know for a fact fathers with close relationships with kids pay, the fathers without close relationships with kids have a real problem paying. Who's fault that is can be traced somewhere.(I'll leave it at that.

Life happens sadly but not for Family Law (with a separation agreement where support only can go up)

Your friends ex is lucky 90k job has the kids, guess sometimes things are just never enough and as a role model for the kids it's fantastic for them that things are never good enough. Great teachings

[rockscan]

Hes not upset about paying, he just wants to make sure its up to date. He provided her with all documentation from EI and his termination. His ex keeps saying stuff about the money paid to him in equalization, as in, what happened to all the money you took from me? She doesnt understand its income based not what he has in equity. Hes also worried about FRO and the catch up when things change (ie oldest graduates uni). The ex still owes him money as part of their settlement and he isnt expecting to get that either.

[rockscan]

So my partner got a letter from FRO today. His ex filed their separation agreement for enforcement. Heres the kicker though--they're enforcing the amount stated in the order from Feb 2012 which is only $5 more than what he's paying her currently and LESS than what he paid her based on income adjustments. This is all because their separation agreement isnt clear which is what FRO told him when he called a few weeks ago. He wanted to save the court costs and try to work together, she refused possibly thinking FRO will just come in and take all his money. But their agreement isnt clear enough for that. He obviously has to provide income information--all of which he did.

The caseworker with FRO also wasnt really clear on how they update the support amounts in the enforcement, since the language says based on annual income. She said their mandate is to do so based on that amount that was stated. And that amount was the low amount when he was unemployed at divorce. I dont know if FRO explained this to her or not but its kind of ridiculous that she has now made her own life infinitely difficult because he will push to have all s7 expenses enforced through FRO via notarized receipt and affidavit of percentage. Every time she wants a s7 expense reimbursed, she will have to get an affidavit outlining his percentage and provide a notarized receipt. She refuses to give him receipts, now she has to go through this process instead of how theyve been working together.

Hes got an appt with his lawyer on friday to move forward on a change to the agreement for a set support criteria for updating to be filed with fro to clarify everything. Because she refuses to agree to anything or be reasonable he'll ask for costs.

Sad comment? "I guess this explains why my kids havent spoken to me in two weeks."

[rockscan]

Also, ive been pushing for him to go through fro and have a clearly worded support order for a few months now. He felt that it would add another layer of difficulty with his kids and wanted to work with his ex. Obviously that wont happen so he has to protect himself and make sure the support gets paid. And hey, no more uncashed cheques!

[Rioe]

And hey, no more uncashed cheques!

Now that FRO is involved, I would advise him to contact his bank and have the cheques voided so she can't ever cash them. FRO may go after him for arrears, and it would absolutely suck to have him pay them a bunch of arrears and then have her cash the cheques.

[rockscan]

Nope he cancelled them right after he spoke to fro. Im going to dome digging about how they accept updated income information and then hopefully he'll get more information on next steps from his lawyer.

[rockscan]

I did some digging, and I"m waiting on some info from the moderator at FROstrating but this whole thing has actually come out to be a little funny. (Sorry, sometimes I have to laugh at the stupidity and since my father was actually a deadbeat, I find people who bandy that term about for people who actually pay support, annoying).

Apparently FRO will only enforce the dollar amount in the agreement as it stands. And they will only enforce the percentage for s7 as it stands with an affidavit and notarized receipt. This is for the amount of his income in 2012. No updates, no changes, no taxes, nothing. Just that amount.

So if my partner was an ass, he could just say "ok fine, I'll pay FRO from now on the amount in our agreement" and leave it at that. But he's not an ass and wants to make sure it's based on actual updated income. Which he tried to discuss and agree to with her without going to court. Now someone has to get an updated agreement with god knows what language FRO will accept and file it. He'll be discussing this with his lawyer on Friday. But as it stands right now, the only amount he pays is the amount in the agreement. And if no one does anything, he can prove he *technically* overpaid last year by increasing his payments based on income.

To think, she figured it would be ok to file with FRO and they would just come after him for whatever amount she thought was right. The amount she thinks he's supposed to pay is actually $550 more than what FRO is coming after him for. And when he gets a job, he was willing to raise it to that amount when he found out his salary. Now the amount is the number from two years ago and will continue to be this amount until either one of them seeks a court order that FRO can enforce.