Thoughts, Comments concerns...all welcomed...

[stripes]

Bluster and storming is a common tactic by those who know they don't have substantive grounds for what they want. Throwing around legal terms is another. My ex does both.

I suggest writing back to your ex (not his wife - she needs to be kept out of the loop), saying that you have received his wife's email and you do not agree with her proposed changes to child support and S7. He is responsible for upholding his commitments under the order; if he seeks to change the order, there are procedures available to him through the courts. That's the end of your communication. Then, as other posters suggested, file your order with FRO.

With respect to the daycare thing, all he's really entitled to are the receipts, but I can't see how it could hurt to provide as much info as possible about the provider. With respect to the clothes, as Rioe suggested, packing a bag with a couple of extra outfits for the kids, to be left at his place, seems reasonable, as that's what the CS is meant to be for.

[rockscan]

My partners ex likes to send lengthy non-sensical emails that have no real argument. He gets really upset and then takes a deep breath. If she had any leg to stand on there would have been papers filed by now.

Im currently dealing with a situation where ridiculous allegations have been made against me to have an actual court order thrown out (not family law related).

As scary and intimidating as the process all is, having the ability to defend yourself to a judge is helpful. My attitude this week has been just that: let them make their statements, until a judge decides theyre all just blusterings.

[Busch]

Thanks Stripes. At least I know I'm not the only one subjected to as you say "Bluster and storming".

When it comes to the day care I had sent an email with all details of all 3 care providers that I had searched out. I asked for his choice as we do have joint custody and I feel he does have the right to be involved in such choices. I have never kept details from him when it comes to the boys and their needs...actually I think I may give him too much info overwhelming him at times. So to see this type of demand was actually shocking. But I do provide all the information that I can in that aspect.

The clothing issue is a minor one. Rioe, as well as yourself are correct. It is my responsibility to send the clothes as this is covered in CS. I don't mind sending a bag of clothes to stay at their home, however, they do not approve of what I have sent in the past, and have made synical remarks about it. That is the reason that I had said to them that I would no longer send clothing. Right or wrong...it was just me having a fit and stomping my feet. However this wasn't an issue for 2 years. I sent an email 08-03-13 stating that as of the beginning of the next month I was no longer sending clothes. He said that was fine.....but NOW it's an issue?! But the clothes I will accept to handle. Thank you for your insight, it's nice to see things from others perspectives.

[stripes]

Thanks Stripes. At least I know I'm not the only one subjected to as you say "Bluster and storming".

My ex does this frequently and rather predictably (see my recent thread on tax matters). It used to send me into panic mode until I realized he didn't actually know the meanings of a lot of the terminology he was using. So my default response now is to send back one message saying that I do not agree to whatever he insists I have to agree to, cite the relevant paragraph in the divorce order or family law, and remind him that if he seeks a change in the divorce order his next step should be to propose mediation per our order. Then ignore the rest.

[Busch]

My ex does this frequently and rather predictably (see my recent thread on tax matters). It used to send me into panic mode until I realized he didn't actually know the meanings of a lot of the terminology he was using. So my default response now is to send back one message saying that I do not agree to whatever he insists I have to agree to, cite the relevant paragraph in the divorce order or family law, and remind him that if he seeks a change in the divorce order his next step should be to propose mediation per our order. Then ignore the rest.

I literally have 2 copies of our Order, one at work and one at home, so that I can quote the relevant parts in our agreement! I can't count the number of times I have quoted the order accompanied with a link for the Motion to Change from the Family Law Forms page.

[Busch]

I now have more questions.......
I went to the FLIC office, and was told that becuause my income was over 30K, I did not qualify for information or help from them. I need to consult a lawyer. I would rather not spend any money on hiring a lawyer, so I am hoping that someone here might have a few thoughts or possible answers to my questions.
I have not been served any COM papers from the ex....as I suspected he is full of smoke and bull &*$". However I did not receive the difference in child care costs from him, and I need to have that money, as every little bit helps. As I have stated before my Order is not registered with FRO, and a few people have mentioned that I do just that. I have tried to call and speak with someone, but to no avail. Can I just fill out the documents and file with FRO, and let them deal with him or will I need a new order, as the one we have is in Canadian $`s, and there is no exchange rate allocated to the agreement. I don`t want to change anything on our order, with the exception of being paid on time and in full.

Thoughts, comments, suggestions....bring em on!

[arabian]

There was a site started by one of the forum members last year, perhaps you could check it out for info on FRO:

frostrating.com or frostrating.ca (can't remember which one).

[Busch]

Thanks Arabian...I did a search and this is what just came back...

Oh no! This blog’s domain <CODE>frostrating.com</CODE> expired 43 days ago!
Unfortunately you cannot access this blog from <CODE>frostrating.com</CODE> any more. This domain name expired on Sunday, March 1, 2015 and will soon be canceled.
Please contact the owners of this website and remind them to renew this domain before it’s too late. They need your help!

I was looking forward to reading and learning more about dealing with FRO. I will keep searching, and researching the best I can. Thank you again for your direction

[arabian]

Too bad. I'll send a message to the site owner.

[rockscan]

Thoughts, Comments concerns...all welcomed...

It doesnt matter if your agreement is in cdn $$$ and he lives in the states. YOU live here, YOUR KIDS are here and your COURT ORDER is here. The onus to change the currency and fix things is on HIM. You file it with FRO because HE isnt meeting the conditions of the ORDER. He can move to Timbuktu if he wants, he still has an order in Canada he has to adhere to. FRO will send him everything he needs to do to meet the order and he can worry about how he will do just that. Plus he will have to get off his ass and do something.

His decisions to lapse his payments put you in this mess. Dont let his poor decisions make you feel bad. If he had met the conditions of the order all of this mess wouldnt be in place.

When you do register with FRO, any money he hasnt paid in full for items in the order you submit as a statement of arrears. Youll need proof of the expense and proof of what he paid. Once you register you'll get assigned a caseworker who can answer your questions. Might require another trip to the court house. My partners caseworker is really helpful and very informative. As long as your order is clear on costs and breakdown of expenses, youll be ok.

[arabian]

Busch - you can access the site: frostrating.wordpress.com

[Canadaguy]

1 - CS: why did he leave his position and take a lower paying job? If he left his job voluntarily for whatever reason - especially moving away - it is appropriate to keep CS payments at the imputed level.

Blink,

Do you have case law to back this or any legislation? I have heard voluntary leaving a job can be justified. Is this true?

[stripes]

I don't think "for whatever reason" applies here. There are legitimate reasons why people leave jobs - health issues, have to go back to school, reduced hours to care for family, industry contracting, etc - when it's not appropriate to impute an income. If he's working way below his capacity, like an engineer doing a few shifts at Starbucks, imputing is reasonable, as he could be earning much more but is choosing not to. However, if the situation is such that there are good reasons why he is earning less - see above - imputing at his former income may not be successful. But you can always try.

[Canadaguy]

I don't think "for whatever reason" applies here. There are legitimate reasons why people leave jobs - health issues, have to go back to school, reduced hours to care for family, industry contracting, etc - when it's not appropriate to impute an income. If he's working way below his capacity, like an engineer doing a few shifts at Starbucks, imputing is reasonable, as he could be earning much more but is choosing not to. However, if the situation is such that there are good reasons why he is earning less - see above - imputing at his former income may not be successful. But you can always try.

But where do you draw the line? I have a job I "don't like" that causes me health issues. All jobs are stressful, but we can't all quit our jobs due to stress. I pump gas for a living but can't quit my job because it is unhealthy to smell gas fumes and get gas on my hands all day.

Do those reason make it acceptable to quit a job for a lower paying job, thus reducing ones CS? I think not.

[stripes]

I don't think there's a bright line dividing "good" and "bad" reasons to reduce income. Obviously everyone who quits a higher paying job will think they are justified in doing so. But can they make a case that will be plausible to someone else? Taking a salary cut in order to spend more time with kids, to retrain for something else, or because a doctor has told you to do so might be plausible to everyone; reducing work hours because you don't like getting up in the morning or you want to follow your dream of being an artist is not too convincing. The cases that I've seen in which income is imputed are those in which the decrease income is clearly a lifestyle choice, not something that comes about because of genuine health issues or because of changes in the job market.

The cash value of the decrease in CS also has to be balanced against the benefit to the kids of having a reasonably healthy and active parent.