Making sure im on the right path.

Child Support:

12. No child support will be made. The custodial parent shall cover expenses excluding s.7 costs

Section 7 Expenses

13. The parties shall contribute, in proportion to their respective incomes, any special or extraordinary expense for Child, as defined by Section 7 of the Child Support Guidelines. Any such expense shall be the
“net” expense after applying both the tax deduction benefit for child-care expenses, as well as the increase in National Child Benefit for the previous tax year, received by either party.

14. The party requesting the Section 7 expense reimbursement shall provide the other party with a copy of the original receipt(s) showing the full cost of the expense incurred and offer them the opportunity to pay their (agreed upon)
expense portion directly.

15. The parties agree that only expenses that total more than a $200 calendar month threshold shall be eligible to be deemed an s-7 special or extraordinary expense.
Click to expand...

You are going to have issues with this section...

As has been stated, you cannot sign away the child's rights to CS... the offset method will apply and as far as I know, this document will not hold up in court with this sort of clause in there.

Furthermore, you state in #13 that, The parties shall contribute, in proportion to their respective incomes, how is this far? You have already stated you have an income of $0, which is suggesting that the other party be responsible for 100% of these costs.

Your best bet is to assume you will be imputed a wage of at least $20K and place an offset calculation into your offer. If the other parent makes say 40K a year, your clause should read somewhere along the lines of,

"The Applicant will pay the Respondent $160 per month in CS as per the Federal CS guidelines based on an income of $20,000 and the Respondent will pay the Applicant $360 per month in CS as per the Federal CS guidelines based on an income of $40,000. To simplify this process the Respondent shall pay the Applicant $200 per month."

Others will be able to offer better wording, but you have been told before you cannot have an income of $0, whether you pay taxes or not, whether you work for "gifts" or not, the point is, you cannot have an income of $0.
 
In your offer to settle (and I am sure it is an oversight) you mentioned your child's full name. That is fine for court, but maybe you want to edit that portion for the internet.
 
madm82 said:
In your offer to settle (and I am sure it is an oversight) you mentioned your child's full name. That is fine for court, but maybe you want to edit that portion for the internet.
Click to expand...

As you noticed this mistake could you please kindly go to the message that this happened in and push the button that looks like an Alarm Bell on the message in question and ask the moderators to remove the personal information. I went looking for it but couldn't find it.
 
Tayken said:
As you noticed this mistake could you please kindly go to the message that this happened in and push the button that looks like an Alarm Bell on the message in question and ask the moderators to remove the personal information. I went looking for it but couldn't find it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. Thank you for that as I did not know what the alarm was for :o
 
Berner_Faith said:
You are going to have issues with this section...

As has been stated, you cannot sign away the child's rights to CS... the offset method will apply and as far as I know, this document will not hold up in court with this sort of clause in there.
Click to expand...

Berner_Faith is absolutely correct and here is the thread that outlines this and the supporting jurisprudence to this fact:

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/child-support-access-right-child-13856/

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
madm82 said:
In your offer to settle (and I am sure it is an oversight) you mentioned your child's full name. That is fine for court, but maybe you want to edit that portion for the internet.
Click to expand...

Actually, I believe we have just learned SynGreis' full name.

And we have also learned that he is a manipulative, loophole-seeking, argumentative individual, and I am sadly getting the impression that he is treating the child like a possession of his which has been stolen by his ex.

What about a plan for a gradual transition to 50-50 care, so it's less abrupt for the child to suddenly be cared for by a near-stranger? You need to show that you are sensitive to the needs of the child.

Also, what happens if/when your ex's work schedule changes?

And yes, you cannot avoid child support or imputation of income, either to minimum wage, or more based on your education and what you do to support yourself.

Lastly, I don't think much of people who work under the table or in barter. People resident in Canada, citizen or not, should contribute to the taxes that provide you with health care, paved roads, police protection, garbage service, criminal justice, education, traffic lights, emergency services, plowing of streets, the military, public playgrounds, firefighting, family court, etc etc etc. You cannot convince me that you do not benefit from any of those.

You may feel superior and that you are in the right, but just because you can do things doesn't mean you should. And when the forum posters are overwhelming telling you you're off base, I think you should realize that any judge you find yourself before may see things our way and not yours.
 
Rioe said:
And we have also learned that he is a manipulative, loophole-seeking, argumentative individual, and I am sadly getting the impression that he is treating the child like a possession of his which has been stolen by his ex.
Click to expand...
Agreed. That is why I have not gone on to try to give him advice.
 
Tayken said:
That is unfortunate as I am sure everyone would really appreciate your learned advice...

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/...e-divorce-worth-13937/index15.html#post120147

Because... "Anyone can link 'evidence' from 'professionals' on this thread to support their point of view." as you once said recently...

Good Luck!
Tayken
Click to expand...
You truly make me laugh. Please re-read the above quoted where I stated it was specific to that particular thread.
Take your games elsewhere Tayken.
You love to attempt to beat down and harass when someone has knocked you off your high horse some.
Good Luck to you ;)
 
Rioe said:
Actually, I believe we have just learned SynGreis' full name.

And we have also learned that he is a manipulative, loophole-seeking, argumentative individual, and I am sadly getting the impression that he is treating the child like a possession of his which has been stolen by his ex.

What about a plan for a gradual transition to 50-50 care, so it's less abrupt for the child to suddenly be cared for by a near-stranger? You need to show that you are sensitive to the needs of the child.

Also, what happens if/when your ex's work schedule changes?

And yes, you cannot avoid child support or imputation of income, either to minimum wage, or more based on your education and what you do to support yourself.

Lastly, I don't think much of people who work under the table or in barter. People resident in Canada, citizen or not, should contribute to the taxes that provide you with health care, paved roads, police protection, garbage service, criminal justice, education, traffic lights, emergency services, plowing of streets, the military, public playgrounds, firefighting, family court, etc etc etc. You cannot convince me that you do not benefit from any of those.

You may feel superior and that you are in the right, but just because you can do things doesn't mean you should. And when the forum posters are overwhelming telling you you're off base, I think you should realize that any judge you find yourself before may see things our way and not yours.
Click to expand...
very good post!! He neglects that Canada is made up of provinces which is made up from counties and regions. Using his logic I am a not a resident of Ontario or Canada but of Waterloo Region. The provinces are just part of the little pictures that make the big picture which is Canada. I am Canadian.
 
madm82 said:
You truly make me laugh. Please re-read the above quoted where I stated it was specific to that particular thread.
Click to expand...

You didn't but here is the *relevance* and *reason* the link was provided as you have asked.

You stated that you are not contributing advice to this thread yet, you are posting an opinion to this thread. The opinion and possible reason (relevance) as to why you may not be contributing constructively to this thread is because of the above stated quote.

Contrary to your thin review of this thread the OP in question is someone who has explicitly stated that they are going to demonstrate that in law they are not required to file taxes and can claim to file a 0$ income tax with the courts for the determination of Child Support.

The people responding are providing actual valuable evidence counter to that opinion. In fact, Mess provided some excellent insight into the possible view a court may take to that kind of rhetoric and possible tactic and that it could impact custody and access to the child in question.

It is a similar tactic that those who bring forward false allegations of "child abuse" and "domestic violence" often bring forward in their arguments. Which often relates to "guru-like" OACP litigation strategies which many suspect the OP is involved with. These tactics just like the tactics of many highly conflicted individuals who attempt to make baseless and unsubstantiated claims of "domestic violence" to "gain an upper hand" are often demonstrative of those with a truly "controlling" personality.

madm82 said:
Take your games elsewhere Tayken.
You love to attempt to beat down and harass when someone has knocked you off your high horse some.
Good Luck to you ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, relating relevant evidence to the arguments that people have made in the past on this message board is no different than identifying the waffling affirmations of truth that often highly conflicted litigants make in numerous "affirmations to the truth".

Often, I find that the most highly conflicted and combative posters are no different than the same people who attempt this failed strategy before the courts. They make all sorts of allegations, claims against others, engage in unnecessary conflict in an attempt to paint themselves in the best light. But, when they are called on their conduct and their own words quoted from these postings which persist on this message board (just as they do in their continuing records) are leveraged... They often cry fowl and make allegations of "harassment" which is yet another example of how these highly conflicted people attempt to gain control in a dispute/debate.

Unfortunate for them that their unkind, insulting and highly conflicted statements persist and are often used to demonstrate this pattern of behaviour. It ultimately happens to them in their matters before the court.

As I have stated before... Family Court is not a "win-lose" battle. It appears to me and possibly others that you are attempting to make allegations that won't hold weight in court. Furthermore, I question your ability to provide any constructive advice to any member of this forum. Those who disagree with you or even question your motive are automatically "harassing" you and have "mental illnesses". This unfortunately is William Eddy 101 stuff and incredibly easy to identify to any educated person on the subject matter.

The one thing that you should note is that I don't "play games" on this message forum or with the observations I make or the advice I provide.

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Tayken, you are the only one to which I have had an issue with.
Choosing to not offer advice is a valid choice.
Stop trying to defame me.
Stop twisting words.
I think the above written (by you) is YOU to a tee.
Thank you for that.
 
Telling someone to 'go to hell' Madm and then having to have the Mods edit it is all you.

Almost always, if not always, the people that need to be edited are high conflict.
 
madm82 said:
Tayken, you are the only one to which I have had an issue with.
Choosing to not offer advice is a valid choice.
Stop trying to defame me.
Stop twisting words.
I think the above written (by you) is YOU to a tee.
Thank you for that.
Click to expand...

is this person for real?

anyways i somehow missed that, thanks for the find for my name. i edited it out and reuploaded it.

OCPD or whatever makes claims with no paperwork, i have the paperwork. I also talked to a judge when she was alone(only 1 other person was there) and i went up to her to see if i can get some sort of insight. Although she was discouraged that i dont file taxes, nevertheless it should not matter as long as i have evidence that the needs of the child was met that would be sufficient.

She was aware of the freeman approach but rarely do they bring evidence to reinforce that position so the court has no other option but to dismiss it as a simple claim, she was impressed that i had evidence to back what i say as very few "freeman" do bring with them. She commented that there is alot of odd people but have vast amounts of parenting skills and that is the important factor. Yes i actually went to court this morning, very dead and actually posed the question. I also received commendation for taking a proactive role in the childs life and procedures of court and that will be reflected for case conference, i have shown some critical documents to her.
 
Last edited:
Syngreis you were in court today? Good for you. I am very interested in learning more about your day. Did you bring forth a motion or were you there to observe another case?

You obviously live an alternative lifestyle to mainstream Canadians and I am quite interested to learn more about it. I have you pegged somewhere between a person living off-reserve or a member of a secular community. Thanks for keeping us informed of your progress. I think many people, including myself, can benefit from information so we can be more tolerant and educated about alternative lifestyles.
 
i personally had nothing going on today, i went in to seek duty council to see what they think of my offer, they mentioned the same thing about child support, but i can also add that i seek to set off by equal time and costs.

I went in and observed some motions(i do this for civil, criminal you might get heat from officers depending on the issue) and try to "rehearse" myself to become a better talker so i dont say mumble jumble. It was by chance that i found a judge(yes a judge not a lawyer in a robe), that i was able to talk to her.

yes i do live a dramatic alternative lifestyle, and its my choice, i have given up on alot of things but in exchange do things i normally would not be able to do. and i have maintained this for years. so its not like i did this just recently.

arabian send me a pm, with your email or skype. i dont want to clog up the forums.
 
madm82 said:
In your offer to settle (and I am sure it is an oversight) you mentioned your child's full name. That is fine for court, but maybe you want to edit that portion for the internet.
Click to expand...
I have reviewed the document he posted a link to, and there is no reference to any individual's name. Possibly he noted your concern and updated the published document.
 
Mess said:
I have reviewed the document he posted a link to, and there is no reference to any individual's name. Possibly he noted your concern and updated the published document.
Click to expand...
I believe he said he edited. I'm positive it was an oversight, as no matter what, I don't think he'd ever purposely do that. :)
Thanks
 
so for the people who reviewed the document for settlement does anyone have pointers to which they can offer? i dont know how to word child support....
 
Change the date (to current) in p8

Re: Child Support.

Be specific as to who pays who what amount. in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines.
Also add you will exchange, each year on or before June 30th,, copies of completed, as filed, income tax returns and Notices of Assessment for the previous tax year.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top