I just thought everyone would be interested how my family law trial went. I feel there were significant decisions made (some I was pleased about and some I was not). Overall it was a positive outcome for me.
RRSP Cashouts - This was ordered that these are not subject to child or spousal support either pre retirement or post retirement.
My Comment - The judge got it right. Hallelujah. These are savings from a prior year. In addition, after retirement they are not income either as this is generated by a lower standard of living earlier through savings.
Investment Income/Dividends/Capital Gains - This was ordered that these are not income for child support or spousal support purposes.
My comment - The judge is 2 for 2. Investment gains are generated by savings (implying a lower standard of living) or in the property split. Just because one person chooses stocks (whose gains are taxable) vs a person choosing a house (whose gains are non taxable)
Employee Profit Sharing Plan (appears on Line 104) - This was ordered as not income for child or spousal support purposes.
My comment - Judge is 3 for 3. Any income generation that requires a contribution to get that income should be inapplicable.
Salary Income - It was ordered that my line 101 income was not representative of my true income due to deferred income.
My comment - Judge is 4 for 4. My employee letter was used as income which represents my true income and my who tax return was thrown out as irrelevant.
Lesson - If any lawyer or other ilk tries to tell you that Line 150 is income for child and spousal support puirposes, they are wrong. This is the point I have been trying to make for four years. Now if they'd listened to the accountant in the first place, everything would have been fine.
Children's benefits - I was ordered to keep the children on my benefits despite the fact her benefit plan covers the children 100% for everything at no cost to her
My comment - Judge is 4 for 5. This annoyed me to no end. This is going to cost me 1,000 per year for nothing. I still can't understand it. It costs me so much because my company requires the children to be at the same benefit level that I am at and of course I am at a high level because this is my only coverage.
Driving Allowance - Judge allowed me $50 per month off the child support guidelines amount due to doing all the driving to pick up my kids. It's 110km one way so 440 km every other weekend.
My comment - I'll give him 1/2 so now 4.5 out of 6. That barely covers her portion of the gas. I had asked for $100 a month.
I went without a lawyer and she had a lawyer except for the trial.
Lesson
DON'T USE A LAWYER!! EVER!
If anyone is interested, I can tell you what to expect from a Family Law Trial. If you are getting screwed (and being on this forum means you likely are), don't be afraid to go to trial.
RRSP Cashouts - This was ordered that these are not subject to child or spousal support either pre retirement or post retirement.
My Comment - The judge got it right. Hallelujah. These are savings from a prior year. In addition, after retirement they are not income either as this is generated by a lower standard of living earlier through savings.
Investment Income/Dividends/Capital Gains - This was ordered that these are not income for child support or spousal support purposes.
My comment - The judge is 2 for 2. Investment gains are generated by savings (implying a lower standard of living) or in the property split. Just because one person chooses stocks (whose gains are taxable) vs a person choosing a house (whose gains are non taxable)
Employee Profit Sharing Plan (appears on Line 104) - This was ordered as not income for child or spousal support purposes.
My comment - Judge is 3 for 3. Any income generation that requires a contribution to get that income should be inapplicable.
Salary Income - It was ordered that my line 101 income was not representative of my true income due to deferred income.
My comment - Judge is 4 for 4. My employee letter was used as income which represents my true income and my who tax return was thrown out as irrelevant.
Lesson - If any lawyer or other ilk tries to tell you that Line 150 is income for child and spousal support puirposes, they are wrong. This is the point I have been trying to make for four years. Now if they'd listened to the accountant in the first place, everything would have been fine.
Children's benefits - I was ordered to keep the children on my benefits despite the fact her benefit plan covers the children 100% for everything at no cost to her
My comment - Judge is 4 for 5. This annoyed me to no end. This is going to cost me 1,000 per year for nothing. I still can't understand it. It costs me so much because my company requires the children to be at the same benefit level that I am at and of course I am at a high level because this is my only coverage.
Driving Allowance - Judge allowed me $50 per month off the child support guidelines amount due to doing all the driving to pick up my kids. It's 110km one way so 440 km every other weekend.
My comment - I'll give him 1/2 so now 4.5 out of 6. That barely covers her portion of the gas. I had asked for $100 a month.
I went without a lawyer and she had a lawyer except for the trial.
Lesson
DON'T USE A LAWYER!! EVER!
If anyone is interested, I can tell you what to expect from a Family Law Trial. If you are getting screwed (and being on this forum means you likely are), don't be afraid to go to trial.
Comment