My brother and his common law girlfriend split up last 9 months ago. He was telling her for months before that he wanted to split up but she wouldnt accept it. He finally sent her an email to notify her legally they were splitting up. Since then they have been living separate lives in the same house, he paid all the mortgage. She paid a portion of the utilities. He went to a lawyer and offered her support according to spousal support guidelines, but she thought it was too low. She went and saw a lawyer and told her lawyer his income was higher than what he provided on his T4's and she didnt tell the lawyer he has child support from his first marriage. Long story short she has not yet agreed to an amount for support. They sold the house they owned together and she wouldnt agree to split the equity from the house because they havent made an agreement for spousal support. How can she do this. The house was sold over a month ago and my brother still hasnt heard from her lawyer. He had to go and rent somewhere now because he cant afford to buy a home as his equity is tied up. She is back living with family now. What are his options that won't cost a fortune and he can move on with his life. Can he come after her for legal costs for this delay in getting money. Any advice would be great.
Funds frozen
- Thread starter kelly001
- Start date
- Status
FL_Needs_To_Change
Moderator
It is very important that the amount of CS is subtracted from the income total before doing the table calculations for spousal support.
If there has been no mention thus far on any documents with the courts that he indeed pays child support, it is imperative that he gets that information to the forefront right away.
As far as her claim that he makes more then his T'4s indicate, that's a very difficult thing to show, I would stay my course with respect to the table calculations for support, with the deduction of the child support amount. The courts will not allow his income to be set at an amount when the CS is not accounted for, the children come first!
As for the freeze of funds from the sale of the house, I am not positive but I think that it cannot be touched until the entitlement to assets are determined.
Your friend could possible ask that the assets be dealt with separate from the issue of SS in order that he may be able to free up his share of equity so that he can have a decent place to live.
If there has been no mention thus far on any documents with the courts that he indeed pays child support, it is imperative that he gets that information to the forefront right away.
As far as her claim that he makes more then his T'4s indicate, that's a very difficult thing to show, I would stay my course with respect to the table calculations for support, with the deduction of the child support amount. The courts will not allow his income to be set at an amount when the CS is not accounted for, the children come first!
As for the freeze of funds from the sale of the house, I am not positive but I think that it cannot be touched until the entitlement to assets are determined.
Your friend could possible ask that the assets be dealt with separate from the issue of SS in order that he may be able to free up his share of equity so that he can have a decent place to live.
This has not gone to court yet. My brother wants to settle this without going to court. He sent his t4 to them which is 60k minus his child support of about 6400k per year so for calculation purposes it is 54k. They sent back a spousal support guideline showing his income at 70k!Her lawyer is asking for a t4a form. He doesnt have one. That is his income. And they didnt put his child support in their figures. They are holding up funds based on misinformation from her. No idea why she did this. The entitlement to asset is to split the equity 50-50. He is not arguing that. She wouldnt agree to split the equity until spousal support is agreed on. But she wants more than what spousal support calculations are telling her. She thinks she is entitled to twice what the guidelines indicate. I am worried for my brother that this will have to go to court because she is a greedy person who wants more than she is entitled. Which in my opinion she is not. I dont' even think she should get support. They never had kids together and they both work and she never had to give up anything for him or he never stopped her from working or trying to get a better job. I guess court is the only way to go in order to get the money unfrozen? If she is being unreasonable my brother has to pay the price.
FL_Needs_To_Change
Moderator
This is a stall tactic, and a simple case of greed on her part.
If this was me, I would send them a "copy" (kkep the orginial) of my notice of asssssment received from the CCRA.
Then I would clearly reiterate the amount on line 150, less the CS and then ask that they apply the SS calculation math. To do otherwise is simply her lawyer taking advanatage of him. It is not hard to show income and then subtract CDS and then calculate SS. Even if this ended up in court she would NOT win to have the income artificallu inflated to her expectations without concrete documentation to prove receipt of that income.\
Tell him not to worry, send them a registered letter with proper calculations and a copy of the CCRA assessment. There is no way thay can argue that, not even in court!
Oh I do! And I think you do too.
Which is fair. So for her to refuse to settle on the equity issues because he will not pay at her SS level is again a lawyer taking advantage of a self represented individual.
Again, simply have him send a registered letter re-iterating where they both agree, IE equity splitting and as such there is no issues there, and then go on to outline fair and just SS based on his actual income and the SS guidelines/calculations.
To keep a cool head and simple restate his position will not make him look bad or harm his case should this end in court.
He needs to be just as firm as her lawyer is tactful.
State it like t is and make sure he can track all correspondence and keep copies for himself.
He is in a good position, offering a very fair settlement with the assets, and even the SS.
This is a good thing to note. If this ends up in court, she may end up with nothing for her greed. SS is based on need and means. If she gave up nothing during the relationship IE to support/care for children, nor did they have children together, then there is very little need as she worked prior to the relationship and supported herself, and continued during and after, then the need angle is gone.
Also, since he has children that he is supporting from a previous relationship, his means decreases, despite her stand that CS is not to be included. The courts WILL include the deduction for CS and then determine his ability to pay, and not before.
The courts will NOT take money away from children to give SS to an individual fully capable of self sustainability that gave up nothing and lost nothing to the relationship nor the subsiquent breakdown thereof.
He is in a very strong position even if he is feeling worried, there is no need for him to worry, she is the one that needs to worry!!
FL
FL - thanks for your info. Very helpful. I totally agree that she shouldnt get a dime, but my brothers lawyer says if it goes to court, she would probably be entitled to some support due to the income difference, about 27k or so. He also said it depends on who the judge is and what mood he is in. Pretty ridiculous that some judge on a bench is having a bad day and someone suffers for it. Are there no clear guidelines when it comes to entitlement to spousal support. I would agree totally if there were kids involved and she had to give up part of her career for that , then yes, that is what spousal support is for. But for a capable women able to leech off a man simply because they lived together for an 8 year period is disgusting. It seems to be a very grey area.
My brothers lawyer sent them a letter re-iterating everything you basically said and actually imputed her income to higher than what she says she makes. Since my brother told her last november they were splitting up, her income went from 32K in 2006 to 27K in 2007. He thinks she deliberately underemployed herself to embellish spousal support, that is how pathetic she is. She has flexible work hours in her job.
I just think it is so unfair that she can freeze money without a valid reason, so my brother has to put his life on hold or spend thousands of dollars and go to court due to a leeches greed.
My brothers lawyer sent them a letter re-iterating everything you basically said and actually imputed her income to higher than what she says she makes. Since my brother told her last november they were splitting up, her income went from 32K in 2006 to 27K in 2007. He thinks she deliberately underemployed herself to embellish spousal support, that is how pathetic she is. She has flexible work hours in her job.
I just think it is so unfair that she can freeze money without a valid reason, so my brother has to put his life on hold or spend thousands of dollars and go to court due to a leeches greed.
- Status