Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New user with law question

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

  • New user with law question

    I have been self-representing. I have had some success and some failures. At the end of the day, I just cannot afford a lawyer.

    Here is a little background and my dilemma.

    History:

    Ex runs into to some personal (legal) problems and for a period of about 5 months I had the kids fulltime. In September we will be going back to the 50/50 schedule.

    During this time he refused to pay CS. We went to mediation and he brought his lawyer to mediation. We worked out an agreement for CS arrears and I agreed that he could pay this over 12 months which is probably what a court would give him anyways.

    I have been working 2 jobs since we separated. With my 2 jobs my ex and I make close to the same annual income. We have 50/50 so neither one of pay CS (when things are normal). At mediation I brought up that we should discuss CS as I would be terminating my p/t job. I cannot physically care for my kids, work 60-70 hours a week, maintain my house and have a life. His lawyer shot down this discussion saying that this provision was already included in our SA. I dropped the issue knowing that this clause was included.

    -SA says that the person requesting CS is to give written notice. Check
    -SA says that once a year we trade NOA's and the person owing the other will pay or repay if there is an overpayment.

    Help me with this:

    I sent an email to the ex stating that I was requesting CS start in the fall of this year. I provided him with the off-set amount from his income to my income without the second job. (It's a couple hundred bucks)

    Obviously not happy with this request he went to his lawyer. His lawyer sent me a letter basically stating the following:
    -that I cannot voluntarily quit my job (I'm only quitting my 2nd job, I will still be working f/t)

    -there was an order signed on CS and I cannot change it for 6 months. (I am not trying to change the agreement we came to in mediation, this is a material change and our SA clearly states this)

    -If I want CS I need to wait 6 months or apply for leave from the courts. (Do the courts look badly on this? Do they view this like "you made your bed, lie in it" or more like "the wording is unclear, vague and there is a difference in opinion, this needs fixin'"

    -They want detailed reasoning as to why I am leaving my second job. (I'm completely burnt out, I can't keep working avg65 hours a week, my kids have asked me to cut down)

    It seems like everything is such a big battle with the ex. I'm very much open to suggestions, advice, pm's ect. I'm sure I left a lot out but this is the jist of it.

  • #2
    If this were me I would file a motion for support. You may do this yourself. Apart from the time involved, it won't cost anything. Make it a simple variation of child support and you will need little supporting materials.

    Of course you can quit your job. Print that letter from the lawyer, highlight this offensive sentence, and include it with your affidavit. State in your affidavit that the ex and his lawyer have been making extremely aggressive, controlling, and inappropriate demands, and you therefore need a clear decision from the courts on the matter.

    Your reason for quitting is simply that you are exhausted from working that number of hours. You do not need to answer any further than that simple sentence. The demand for a detailed reason is just aggression. They are trying to intimidate you.

    If your agreement was signed into an order, then yes you would ordinarily wait 6 months to file another motion order. Leave to file from the courts would be given if there was a drastic material change.

    I am unclear on the timeline if you have now had the children full time for 5 months.

    You have an offer in play for setoff child support. They are not responding with reasonable negotiations. File the motion, and serve him (through his lawyer.) This will make it clear they cannot bully you into compliance. Likely they will settle out of court before the first case conference. If they don't then this in itself is plenty of reason to file.

    Comment


    • #3
      /agree with Mess.

      Also, if you REALLY wanted to provide them a reason for quitting...

      "My reason for taking the second job was that your client was playing games with his CS obligations, and due to his legal troubles, refused to pay anything for a period of 5 months. Additionally his issues required me to care for the children full time as he was unable to exercise his parenting time. Due to both this, and the increased financial requirements of having the children full time for that period, I had no recourse but to take a part time, second job to make ends meet.

      Now that your client's issues have stabilized, I am no longer able to physically keep working 65+ hours/week. I am now working full time at Job A, and effective date will be making X annually".

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not saying I disagree with the OPs reason for quitting her second job due to exhaustion and large number of hours. HOWEVER, let's say you had a "sole breadwinner" who also was say working extra overtime hours (let's say 65 + per week) for some time prior to separation to try and get extra cash for house, car, etc.

        My understanding is that in the above scenario, because the person had proven they COULD work that number of hours (even if they only planned it to be temporary) the opposition spouse could likely be successful in imputing income based on 65 hours.

        To be blunt and politically incorrect, if a male reduced his heavy workload from 65 to 40 hours a week, wouldn't he be at risk at being imputed the 65 hour income level ?

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm not saying I disagree with the OPs reason for quitting her second job due to exhaustion and large number of hours. HOWEVER, let's say you had a "sole breadwinner" who also was say working extra overtime hours (let's say 65 + per week) for some time prior to separation to try and get extra cash for house, car, etc.

          My understanding is that in the above scenario, because the person had proven they COULD work that number of hours (even if they only planned it to be temporary) the opposition spouse could likely be successful in imputing income based on 65 hours.

          To be blunt and politically incorrect, if a male reduced his heavy workload from 65 to 40 hours a week, wouldn't he be at risk at being imputed the 65 hour income level ?
          If he has the kids fulltime? Unlikely...

          Its unreasonable to expect someone whether male or female to work those kind of hours and solely manage the children.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by shellshocked22 View Post
            I'm not saying I disagree with the OPs reason for quitting her second job due to exhaustion and large number of hours. HOWEVER, let's say you had a "sole breadwinner" who also was say working extra overtime hours (let's say 65 + per week) for some time prior to separation to try and get extra cash for house, car, etc.

            My understanding is that in the above scenario, because the person had proven they COULD work that number of hours (even if they only planned it to be temporary) the opposition spouse could likely be successful in imputing income based on 65 hours.

            To be blunt and politically incorrect, if a male reduced his heavy workload from 65 to 40 hours a week, wouldn't he be at risk at being imputed the 65 hour income level ?
            Don't know where you get that understanding, but the courts cannot order someone to work 65 hours a week, or to maintain that workload.

            It would be a simple thing to get a doctor's letter to state that the workload was too much of a strain.

            Comment


            • #7
              You are quitting your second job to reduce the stress and demands on your time during a period when you have 100% custody of the children. It is unreasonable to be expected to work more than one full time job.

              Ordinarily, your drop in income would be accounted for at the next annual adjustment, so your ex is correct that it should not be changed earlier than that. However, as you are having a recalculation due to the anticipated switch from full to offset in September when he resumes 50-50 custody, so you could try to make the argument that the amounts be brought up to date then too, but I don't know how hard I'd fight for it. You would be setting a precedent that any future changes in income should be done immediately, instead of waiting for the annual adjustment.

              If you have the kids full time, even temporarily, it is reasonable to expect the CS to be calculated appropriately during that time period. However, if he is unable to work during this time period (do his legal troubles involve serving time? I can't think why else he couldn't keep the kids) then the CS amount may be very little. And there are big kid expenses that continue even when the kids aren't there, mainly the cost of maintaining a home of sufficient size that they have bedrooms.

              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