Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Support Variation

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

  • #46
    [QUOTE=Decent Dad]
    Originally posted by wildrose
    As far as the case that is pending in court. I don't want an increase, I just want what was agreed upon in the beginning. QUOTE]

    BTW, what DID you agree on? Spousal support for life. Or just spousal support? I would like to see the fine print. Most spousal support clauses have a release for re-marriage, termination upon death, etc. Some have term limits. Some not. Does the line in your agreement basically say: $2000 SS per month? Perhaps that is where the confusion lies. Each party with different expectations.
    Our spousal support agreement states $2000.00 per month with no time limits. It has no terms as far as remarriage, termination upon death, etc. It states that the amount of $2000.00 per month is to be paid in two installments of $1000.00 on the 15th day of the month and $1000.00 on the last day of the month. It is all laid out very clearly. This was agreed upon out of court, in my lawyers office in a meeting with my ex and his lawyer, myself and my lawyer all in attendance. They were then given a month to digest it all while my laywer filed the settlement with the court.....I believe it was a Notice of Motion but not sure of the correct term. Anyway, that's why I pay her to know what these things are called. My ex is now stating that he signed the agreement under duress because he was stressed out about our daughters upcoming wedding and his financial obligatoins for that which I paid half of.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Decent Dad
      woooh. Did I miss something here. Are you living with your new partner? Just trying to clarify the "we".
      Yes, I now live with a partner and before everyone gets all bent out of shape, his annual salary is $24,000.00 working as a labourer and he pays his own child support of $600.00 per month for two children. We split all household bills 50/50 and my share of the household expenses is $1938.00. Contrary to belief on this site, we do not live a large lifestyle. We maybe eat out once a month. We live in a manufactured home (trailer) on a lot in a small town of 1300 people. We pay vehicle expenses, property taxes, utilities, medical bills, groceries, etc etc etc just like everyone else. We don't take vacations because we can't afford it and the last piece of new clothing I bought was a new sweater last fall to wear to a family function. So if others on here don't believe that our monthly expenses are what they are, then I guess that is their perogative.

      Comment


      • #48
        [QUOTE=wildrose]
        Originally posted by Decent Dad

        Our spousal support agreement states $2000.00 per month with no time limits. It has no terms as far as remarriage, termination upon death, etc. It states that the amount of $2000.00 per month is to be paid in two installments of $1000.00 on the 15th day of the month and $1000.00 on the last day of the month. It is all laid out very clearly. This was agreed upon out of court, in my lawyers office in a meeting with my ex and his lawyer, myself and my lawyer all in attendance. They were then given a month to digest it all while my laywer filed the settlement with the court.....I believe it was a Notice of Motion but not sure of the correct term. Anyway, that's why I pay her to know what these things are called. My ex is now stating that he signed the agreement under duress because he was stressed out about our daughters upcoming wedding and his financial obligatoins for that which I paid half of.
        Usually a support clause has terms, especially "terminates upon remariage". Although clauses on spousal support are basically useless.

        The problem is the clause is very simple. Yes, it was agreed upon by everyone, as court orders are. And yes it is laid out very clearly: two payments of $1K each. And your ex paid his support.

        But simple can be good, or bad. Depending if you are the payor or the recipient, and what the "material change" is. So, that nice, simple, clearly laid out and ordered line is the problem.

        It does not say:

        "$2000 spousal support for life regardless"

        as you think, nor does it say...

        "$2000 spousal support, termination upon remarriage, loss of job, etc"

        as your ex would like.

        It just says, $2000 per month. Therefore your ex is fully within his rights to attempt to reduce or terminate it. Thats the law. Oddly, if it had a time limit, it would have been harder to terminate it before the time limit ends. And, if it had a remarriage clause, it would be hard to evoke that clause and terminiate since people usually co-habitate long before marriage, or may not remarry. That remarriage clause is useless anyway (note: see a previous post of mine about spousal support termination clauses regarding "spirit of intent").

        So, in the end, your ex is not playing unfair at all. He is playing by the Divorce Act. He has several material changes (loss of job, remarriage, etc). And actually so do you (new income, living with someone, etc). The whole kit and kaboodle will be plopped onto the judge to figure out.

        Welcome to Canadian Divorce 101. Marriage may not last, but divorce lasts forever.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by wildrose
          Yes, I now live with a partner and before everyone gets all bent out of shape, his annual salary is $24,000.00 working as a labourer and he pays his own child support of $600.00 per month for two children. We split all household bills 50/50 and my share of the household expenses is $1938.00. Contrary to belief on this site, we do not live a large lifestyle. We maybe eat out once a month. We live in a manufactured home (trailer) on a lot in a small town of 1300 people. We pay vehicle expenses, property taxes, utilities, medical bills, groceries, etc etc etc just like everyone else. We don't take vacations because we can't afford it and the last piece of new clothing I bought was a new sweater last fall to wear to a family function. So if others on here don't believe that our monthly expenses are what they are, then I guess that is their perogative.
          The reason I asked, co-habitating/remarriage is a material change that can trigger a SS review. In the good old days that would have also terminated your support. No questions asked. But in the wild-west divorce rodeo we have right now, it really does not matter too much. They'll just put his income on the form.

          BTW, we all pay bills...

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Decent Dad
            The reason I asked, co-habitating/remarriage is a material change that can trigger a SS review. In the good old days that would have also terminated your support. No questions asked. But in the wild-west divorce rodeo we have right now, it really does not matter too much. They'll just put his income on the form.

            BTW, we all pay bills...
            Yes, you are so right. It will all be plopped in front of a judge and we'll see what happens. I am not saying it's right or wrong. The whole beginning of this was just to see if anyone else had been in this situaton and I was only asking if anyone had experience with this sort of thing.

            And yes, we all have bills to pay. I guess the problem I have is people on this board questioning how our money is spent. Either we are the only ones on the planet that pay huge utility and property tax bills or we are being screwed by someone sending phantom bills in the mail!

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Decent Dad
              Hello Grace. Out of court yet?

              DD
              No DD, there is still no end in sight, 5 years later. Like LV always said, patience is a virtue in Family Law. How is the book coming along???

              Comment


              • #52
                Hi ya grace, good to see you again. The scales of Justice do move slow at times. Persistent effort will pay off.


                Wildrose,

                as you mentioned,

                I would like to thank you for your response and it is nice to see someone asking constructive questions. My ex has applied for EI benefits but as of today's date he states that no decision by EI has been made as to whether he will receive benefits or not. The reason for his termination states "reorganization of department". He was upper level management and has stated he did not like the new head of his dept and they had a disagreement. This was stated in his affadavit of Nov. 06.
                Every employer in Canada is obligated under law to issue separation papers when the employee leaves. Therefore, it is imperative that you receive a copy of such. The employer states on the form the reason why the employee is leaving IE: fired, quit, laid off, sickness etc.

                He has been unemployed since Sept 06
                That is a little over 4 months, sometimes it is difficult to secure a similar position especially if they are specialized. The length of time in not unreasonable. The important fact to determine is the true reason why they left. Ask for a copy of the employment separation paper or disclosure and access to his EI records.


                as of today's date has sent out 7 random resumes to companies that are not in his field of expertise.
                That appears to be a minimum amount of resumes. Most people send hundreds out if they are sincere in gaining employment. It is a tough competitive world out there.

                He has also incurred $35,000 in debt since Sept 06 to purchase a coffee vending business which he stated in an earlier affadavit was a part time venture to supplement his income.

                Did the individual not receive a severance when leaving employment. Generally, a severance pay is payable IE: 1 to 2 weeks pay for every year of service up to a maximum of so many weeks. If they failed to receive such, this suggests they were fired. Severance pay is taxable and should show up on his income tax as taxable income. The other thing to remember is that EI will ensure that an individual uses up their severance pay first before granting EI. If the individual is hurting for income, then why on earth are they still participating in luxury activities of attending the gym?

                Ultimately, the onus is on them to prove the material change of circumstance before the court will order a change in support. If the material change was self inflicted by quitting or fired from employment; I suspect the court will not recognize same. Therefore, it is imperative that you receive disclosure of the individuals employment separation papers and also access to his EI information. Put the pressure on them by requesting such. If they have nothing to hide, they will disclose freely to support their cause.

                lv
                Last edited by logicalvelocity; 01-27-2007, 08:33 AM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  I'm not receiving child support as my ex doesn't work. Refuses to get help for his mental health issues so I'm not "banking on" ever receiving any assistance with the costs of raising our daughter.

                  I consider myself to live in an expensive area, I'm in Ottawa. Housing is definatly not cheap. I don't rent, I own - well me and the bank for another 17 years.

                  I certainly have all the regular bills, plus my child care expenses. I live on less than 4000 dollars a month.

                  mominont

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    The difference is she is living with someone and they are paying 50% of the costs of running the household.

                    I live on approximently 3 grand a month but don't forget that I have 3 year old in my house, that I am fully financially responsible for.

                    mominont

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Actually I'm quite sure a 3 year old doesn't eat as much as a grown man - but thanks for pointing that out. However I'm also sure "most" grown men don't require 38 dollars a day in daycare expenses either.

                      If her ex husband can show/prove that another adult is living in the household, his salary will come into play, if only for the reason of shared housing costs.

                      I'm a believer that her settlement not including her monthly spousal support was adaquate for her stay at home years.

                      mominont

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by yoyo
                        ....and for direct compensation of the work she did. One on one childcare for a couple of kids, house cleaning etc. Her staying at home and doing these things allowed him to advance in her career. I doubt many people would get high up in a lot of organizations without overtime and focus on your career- hard to do that without someone staying at home and doing that stuff for you.
                        I beleive the direct compensation is the equalization payment. Everyone seems to forget that payout in these support discussions. I am sure she walked with 250K (or around that). That's the golden handshake.

                        If they were married and he got laid off.. she *gasp* may have to go back to work (think "Mr Mom"). So no real difference here.

                        I guess my big problem is it moved from being a need to an entitlement (at least in these side discussions). And that what rubs most people (well payors, um, men) the wrong way.

                        So what you are saying she is entitled to support since he advanced his career while she did not. Support is all about needs and means. But, that is quickly lost and usually forgotten in the law, trial and discussions. That's why judges just rubber-stamp an increase or status quo. So support becomes another compensation package, or worse, a means for revenge. I see it all the time (actually I'm living it... but I digress).

                        I honestly belive that Wildrose would support divorce reform. Why? Becuase she was in a long-term marriage of a day gone by. But, all these people in short term marriages get the same treatment. Compensation package upon compensation package. None of it makes any sense...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Decent Dad
                          I beleive the direct compensation is the equalization payment. Everyone seems to forget that payout in these support discussions. I am sure she walked with 250K (or around that). That's the golden handshake.

                          If they were married and he got laid off.. she *gasp* may have to go back to work (think "Mr Mom"). So no real difference here.

                          I guess my big problem is it moved from being a need to an entitlement (at least in these side discussions). And that what rubs most people (well payors, um, men) the wrong way.

                          So what you are saying she is entitled to support since he advanced his career while she did not. Support is all about needs and means. But, that is quickly lost and usually forgotten in the law, trial and discussions. That's why judges just rubber-stamp an increase or status quo. So support becomes another compensation package, or worse, a means for revenge. I see it all the time (actually I'm living it... but I digress).

                          I honestly belive that Wildrose would support divorce reform. Why? Becuase she was in a long-term marriage of a day gone by. But, all these people in short term marriages get the same treatment. Compensation package upon compensation package. None of it makes any sense...

                          I am not sure how you are figuring your facts but you are way out in left field. When our marriage ended I received half of the equity in our matrimonial home plus half of the equity in a rental property which was the sum total of approx. $30,000 plus I was able to keep the amounts in spousal RRSP that was approx. $30,000. So I am not sure where you figure I walked away with 250K. Believe me, if I had received that kind of compensation package, I would have walked away and been happy as could be. Unfortunately it didn't work that way.

                          When our agreement of $2000 per month was written, I was trying to be fair. I assumed it would be enough for me to live a modest lifestyle. Have I mentioned I signed a waiver so that I wasn't entitled to his pension??? Did I mention that after we agreed on an amount for the matrimonial house using our tax assessment (because he said he was going to live there) that he sold it 8 days later for an additional $15,000 profit? Did I mention that when all was said and done, he received bonus after bonus in addition to his income that allowed him to build his RRSP's plus purchase two rental properties which he receives income?

                          As far as my $2000 per month, it was a contract. That is all I am asking for is that this contract is honored. I am not asking for anything more. The previous post states that I also pay tax on that $2000 and yes, that does reduce it to approx. $1400 per month. I am not sure how some people here budget their money but I live in a province that the average cost of a starter home is $300,000 and my last electricity bill was $280.00. We operate two vehicles which require insurance and that bill is $1700 per year. Our property taxes are $1600.00 per year.......etc etc etc.

                          Once again, I ask that before you judge, you know all the facts. It seems that when reading the posts in this site, people only read the parts they want to read.

                          Our case goes to court tomorrow and if I had known all of the underhanded, sneaky things my ex was hiding along this road I wouldn't have been as fair as I was. Oh yes, and did I mention he kept all of the household belongings which amounted to approx. $70,000 while I received my clothes, my golf clubs and a minimal amount of personal items???? I don't think I'm the one being unfair!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Oh good lord. Okay, it was not 250K, it was 100K. That 100K is half of the house, the equity and your own RRSP's. That's the equalization (or simply put - the division of assets). I assume your ex walked with the other half? The other 100K. No? Are you saying he walked with more than that? He could, btw, due to equalization. Or less. Or you did not follow equalization and just split things how you wanted. Either way, that's the direct compensation for you staying at home and him working.

                            BTW, I find 60K equitity in the house to be low (after 24 years).

                            Regarding the house. You both agreed on the value and split it according to that agreement. The fact that he managed to get another 15K after everything was signed, is of no revelance. Since, if it had gone down by 15K, it would have been his loss. Again, after ground zero (the divorce) his gains and losses are that, HIS gains and losses.

                            Regarding he bonuses and rentals properties. The market could have went bust. He could be in a position of tenants refusing to pay rent. All kinds of stuff. But that's HIS business. Again, after ground zero (the divorce) his gains and losses are that, HIS gains and losses.

                            The fact that he managed to improve his wealth from ground zero (the divorce) from the amount at equalization (lets assume also 100K). to 500K. Well good for him. Unfortunately yours went from 100K to 30K. And that is unfortunate. But it is not his fault nor his repsonsibility for that. And that's what people have to move on about.

                            It sucks about your clothes and stuff. People do all kinds of crazy things in a divorce. Burn things. Destroy things. Haul items to the dump. I've heard and seen it all. It also sucks that after 24 years, your only equity was about 200K for both of you. Yikes.

                            "Once again, I ask that before you judge, you know all the facts. It seems that when reading the posts in this site, people only read the parts they want to read."

                            That is an unfair statement. Why? Because we are reading this very thoroughly, and several people are provindnig excellent, constructive and sometimes too harsh comments. But comments none the less.

                            Did you want us to jump on the "bash the ex bandwagon"? Actually, I personally do not mind: rants, criticisms of the law, bashing, harsh comments, etc., as long as everything is within context and relavent to the statement (i.e. no whining). Or at least clarified that you are simply venting and realizing that it is not relavent to the legal facts. Venting is fine. Just make sure you know it is venting.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Decent Dad
                              Regarding the house. You both agreed on the value and split it according to that agreement. The fact that he managed to get another 15K after everything was signed, is of no revelance. Since, if it had gone down by 15K, it would have been his loss. Again, after ground zero (the divorce) his gains and losses are that, HIS gains and losses.
                              Couldn't this same argument be used regarding the $2000.00 in monthly spousal support? It was an agreement. The fact that his gains or losses have fluctuated are that, HIS gains and losses... the original agreement was $2000.00 per month in spousal support.

                              I don't see a difference...

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Thank you Phoenix. I was thinking the same thing but posting on here is like beating a dead horse so I made the choice not to bring any more information up on here. But I'm sure someone will have an argument with your post.

                                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