Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

My Family Law Trail

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • My Family Law Trail

    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.

  • #2
    You are giving me a little bit of hope here Desperate_Dad!

    I settled out of court last year at a 4-way meeting with lawyers and feel I really got screwed.

    How much money does it cost to go to court without a lawyer? (I've always been scared to go without a lawyer, if ex has a lawyer, thinking that the judge would see me as a joke and she'd have an upperhand just for having a lawyer) But I know I wouldn't be able to afford all the lawyer fees involved to go to court using one.

    Comment


    • #3
      Wow...sounds like a good outcome, with the financial stuff anyway.
      I wouldn't sweat the child benefits coverage...that is small peanuts probably, compared to what you are saving, given the judges ruling on the other stuff.

      It is confusing though, that that was even an issue needing a ruling? Your ex has free coverage for the kids,100%, and what, she won't use her benefits? Something doesn't seem to add up there? Or does she use them, but just wants you to have them covered as well?

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm not aware of any plan that provides unlimited everything. Particularly dental, and considering the cost of orthotics, what most people who have access to two plans do is cover the cost on one plan up to its limit and then use the other plan.

        Why did it even need a ruling? Because it was one of a dozen issues that were put in the application.

        Comment


        • #5
          Congratulations DD

          What arguments did you use to get investment income and profit sharing excluded from income for support purposes?

          Hawk

          Comment


          • #6
            With benefits.
            A comment here, I think the judge was right to order you to continue coverage of the children, an order is for going forward i.e. future.
            What happens if mom loses her job due to no fault of her own, say the company goes under. The children would still require the benefits from your benefits.
            One other thing, Benefits for people must be claimed by the first birthday in the calandar year. If your birthday was in say Jan, and your ex's was in say March, all benefits must be claimed under your plan before they can be claimed under her plan. This includes her benefits and your benefits.
            For example if you and your ex were back together and she was on your plan, she would have to claim everything under your plan before she claimed under her plan.
            This is a requirement of all benefit claims and companies in Canada. I'm not sure if it is law, but every company has this requirement.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by oink View Post
              Not bloody well likely I am guessing?
              Tell me about it, but it was an example.

              Comment


              • #8
                First to answer the questions..

                Investment and Capital Gains, EPSP etc being excluded.

                I used two basic arguments. Her assets that appreciate are non taxable ie house appreciation. Why should I be punished for having taxable assets?

                EPSP requires a contribution on my part. If I don't make that contribution, the income disappears (I have to make a 6% contribution to get a 3% match).

                If someone gives you something that requires no contribution on your part, then its included. If it requires a contribution on your part, it is excluded.

                She did the same thing when they had that home renovation credit. Spent money to fix up her house and got some of it back. I didn't include that as income to her and it shouldn't be.

                I should have been more detailed on the children's benefits. I did have them on the plan and requested I be allowed to remove them in 2 years - July 1, 2015. There are two gaps in her plan. Orthodontic charges are only covered 50% by her plan and major restorative dental work is only covered 50%. Everything else is covered 100%. The kids did have orthodontic work and my plan is maxxed out as is hers for orthodontic work. I said allow me to take the children off the plan and I will cover all charges her plan doesn't cover 100%. Because I would be saving 1,000 per year. I also said if she isn't covered for whatever reason, I would put the children back on my plan.

                Now if there are any further charges, there will be another war because I am paying 1,000 per year for nothing when I could use that to pick up any charges her plan does not cover..

                Also note that even though my birthday is first in the year which means my plan should pay first, things are changing in the insurance world. It is now my understanding that the parent who the children rside with pays first.

                Hope that claifies things.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I hadn't heard that, but it does make more sense.

                  Do you have a link to more information on the changes?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Congratulations. I agree wholeheartedly with you about line 150 - should not be used for spousal support determination. Good you had a judge who recognized this.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Just to comment on the benefits portion... if both spouse's have coverage, they must claim on their benefits before their claim on the other spouse... at least that is the way our benefits have been working for years... for children, they are to be claimed by the CP first, or in the event of 50-50 the parent with the earliest birthday... this is something that is outlined in each benefit package and may differ from company to company.

                      Good job on the rest of it!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Desperate_Dad View Post
                        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.

                        Me not being familiar with court rulings, but can you appeal this decision and provide more evidence on why it will cost you $1,000 a year and why her's is free? Or even ask for an explination on why the judge ruled in this direction? Did the judge maybe not understand the facts provided?

                        Originally posted by Desperate_Dad View Post
                        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.
                        Same here, can you not present him the travel distance and say that milage at $0.43/km (includes gas and vehicle depreciation) is actually $189.20 per week? Or when a judge rules there is no recourse to changing anything.

                        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