I hope somebody could lend their knowledge and experience in the court process when it comes to proving or disproving our financials which dictatte the final net family properties for both of us and finally the equalization payment. Naturally from the Ex it is all denial, lies or she has no recollection. Her lawyer likes to call me bizarre!! (ok maybe I am but the claims aren't.... and perhaps after how many months of trying to figure all that went on under my nose - I am biased - but today my using the words lie and deny are my being polite....)
Yes I have had several people who started in disbelief and ended with their conclusion of total disbelief in what my ex actually did. The paperwork and her signatures, her bank card, her closing out joint accounts and transfering everything into her accounts. My accident 25 years ago and the settlements paid go all the way back to the 80's, important today as we decided back then to deposit them into my retirement fund, transfering as soon as possible into my RRSP and there it sits today.
Family Law states the payments for damages, pain, (all non income type payments) are now excludable as they were kept seperate and in no better place than my RRSP). I also have plenty of issues going back just a few years (3-4) when I did get real sick, but again going back to the 80's, not every receipt is still here but there is a very strong paper trail going back to the actual check stubs of the payments to the flow of the payments until my rrsp contribution room opened up to allow the deposits.
My Three Questions are:
1. The lawyer said that we would probably need to hire the forensic accountant to sign off on the paper trail and the evidence (due to the amount of money involved and how many years going back - and there are alot of bank statements I do admit but at least I have them or all would be lost). This just due to the fact that she refuses to accept anything, regardless of the issue she has chosen to lie, deny or otherwise claim no recollection eventhough there is paper records, bank account records and all the documents which tie back to day one, all the bank records with her signature, her bank card. When evidence is really obvious is there ever any reprocussion to the party who choses to deny and lie regardless (as in having to cover the cost of the accountant that just shows her lies over and over??? - In the end, that is when the evidence does prove to be overwhelming - would a judge even care what the cost was to prove a party's lies?
2. Going back to the 80's is a long time, no the records are not 100% complete but the majority is here, payment stubs, tax records, that show at least the money was saved, then the rrsp deposit records are here... does this type of evidence need to be 100% from 25 years ago or is it the case of really , really strong evidence given what records are here today enough to meet that burden of proof?
3 the last few years when I did get sick (I actually got so low as to be only be able to speak jibberish at times, short term memory was horrible and I have had to rebuild several years of my life through the help of others, with the documentation mostly and I really only learned much of my financial horror only after she said divorce as I have mentioned in the past.) So my question here is when it comes to the courts - do they put great wieght on the actual statements and documents that can be presented - more so than say what I may say or she may say..... The court would rather see and accept her signature on a document(s) or her signature at the bank, or her bank card and pin number begin to carry more wieght than "her lies"?
Yes I have had several people who started in disbelief and ended with their conclusion of total disbelief in what my ex actually did. The paperwork and her signatures, her bank card, her closing out joint accounts and transfering everything into her accounts. My accident 25 years ago and the settlements paid go all the way back to the 80's, important today as we decided back then to deposit them into my retirement fund, transfering as soon as possible into my RRSP and there it sits today.
Family Law states the payments for damages, pain, (all non income type payments) are now excludable as they were kept seperate and in no better place than my RRSP). I also have plenty of issues going back just a few years (3-4) when I did get real sick, but again going back to the 80's, not every receipt is still here but there is a very strong paper trail going back to the actual check stubs of the payments to the flow of the payments until my rrsp contribution room opened up to allow the deposits.
My Three Questions are:
1. The lawyer said that we would probably need to hire the forensic accountant to sign off on the paper trail and the evidence (due to the amount of money involved and how many years going back - and there are alot of bank statements I do admit but at least I have them or all would be lost). This just due to the fact that she refuses to accept anything, regardless of the issue she has chosen to lie, deny or otherwise claim no recollection eventhough there is paper records, bank account records and all the documents which tie back to day one, all the bank records with her signature, her bank card. When evidence is really obvious is there ever any reprocussion to the party who choses to deny and lie regardless (as in having to cover the cost of the accountant that just shows her lies over and over??? - In the end, that is when the evidence does prove to be overwhelming - would a judge even care what the cost was to prove a party's lies?
2. Going back to the 80's is a long time, no the records are not 100% complete but the majority is here, payment stubs, tax records, that show at least the money was saved, then the rrsp deposit records are here... does this type of evidence need to be 100% from 25 years ago or is it the case of really , really strong evidence given what records are here today enough to meet that burden of proof?
3 the last few years when I did get sick (I actually got so low as to be only be able to speak jibberish at times, short term memory was horrible and I have had to rebuild several years of my life through the help of others, with the documentation mostly and I really only learned much of my financial horror only after she said divorce as I have mentioned in the past.) So my question here is when it comes to the courts - do they put great wieght on the actual statements and documents that can be presented - more so than say what I may say or she may say..... The court would rather see and accept her signature on a document(s) or her signature at the bank, or her bank card and pin number begin to carry more wieght than "her lies"?
Comment