support recipient getting A lot of extra $$$

K

Kkc

New member
hi

if anyone has dealt with this, the input would be appreciated
remember...i am dealing with an ex who cannot be negotiated with

finally got all her bank records and one of her CC records
she exluded one of the CCs..which is suspicious
when going through her bank records, there was another credit card she was paying off which was surprising

anyways, the meat

in the last 4 years it appears that she has received 150K extra from her parents (cash and discounted rent). This does not include cashing out an rrsp or the CCB.
Her bf lives with her..though she claims he does not, but she has not paid for groceries since march of last year
she just got a new car and there are no car payments or lease payments
Her latest financial statement does not indicate a matching loan to her parents...so its supplementing lifestyle

I basically want to use this as leverage because support is based on a 50/50 NDI as the judge felt it was important for the children to have access to equal financial resources between houses...when I am giving her half my income and she is getting that much more...i mean does she really need my support?
 
I just read a recent case where both parents were receiving funds from their parents. He was an only child and it was to cover him not working and hers was part of her inheritance. The judge did consider the money he received as a way to avoid working but in your case it may be that her parents say it was only to help her until you reached the end. Your argument would be that she is purposely unemployed and her parents are supplementing her lifestyle. Either way she is living an un sustainable lifestyle and you have finally figured it all out.
 
ive read the same one
the difference too was that the only childs was so obvious what was occuring
hers was well documented, well maintained records

on my end, her financial statement does not list nearly as much debt owed to parents
her affidavits do not mention that her parents are assisting and will get it back later on
it is a total lifestyle supplementation

but the bf buying all the groceries, thats an obvious reason to reduce the non-compensentory support

my bigger concern is that there were 20K in bank transfers that I cannot identify the source...the possibility is there is a different bank account that we do not know about or its money from her parent's company that she is just sending back to them...tax evasion

either way..there are a lot of questions
 
Been a long time since I read the case and review on this same item as it was ruled on by courts.

Discounted rent = income
Regular payments received from parents = income

Bulk "gift" from parent may or may not be income. The burden of proof showing it as a gift will fall upon her.
The taxman is likely interested too.
 
so part of disclosure order was to show a rental agreement when she was living at one of her parent's houses

they produced a piece of paper that was not even dated and looked totally bogus
however, it was indicated that rent was 3600 a month and she was there for about 14 months, so in that time period she needed to pay 50K to her step dad, reviewing her bank records, there was a lot of money he was sending her and it appears she only paid him net of 22k i believe.
so even though the rental agreement is bogus, he has stated the rental value of his property and she got it discounted...that becomes imputted income

there were some huge deposits, 5k, 6k, 8k, then a lot of small amounts...basically she is busted


heres the other question:
so when my support was adjusted it was determined to be a 50/50 ndi so kids had equal access to funds. in her affidavits, she indicated she was totally reliant on me for support..this is not the case
in addition in december of 2020, she received 2K of legit income from her parents factory that she did not disclose...my argument would have been why only 1 month, she could have been earning 2K every month

had i had this evidence in front of the judge at the time of the motion, she would have likely come to a different conclusion in terms of present amount and how far back retroactice she would have gone
 
I think all of this would be part of your cross examination. I'm not sure how you use her lies at a cc or tmc. You could make another offer and outline all of the things you have found and see if she is now willing to settle. Otherwise you will be pointing out all her lies and seeking significant costs in addition to what she owes.

Has her lawyer indicated any hope of discussing a settlement? I ask because my husband's ex finally let her lawyer she had on limited retainer approach hubs on settlement after she lost her motion for disclosure. Her lawyer was pretty pushy about discussing a settlement before their SC and kept asking for meetings. Might be an indication of how her new lawyer is leaning if he has broached that?
 
this new lawyer is not a family law lawyer, he is personal injury
basically we have to touch base soon and i think laying out the cards and how bad things will look will force a settlement
if you go to an SC, you can get orders on the basis that not acting now will create significant issues down the road and will create prejudice
and argue about how she lied..

bottom line is she has no money, close to insolvency and is not being reasonable, a judge will not let that go to a trial and she insists, I will get securities

she is unreasonable but hopefully she can see the light
but seriously...she has a new car but there are no car payments, where is it coming from?
 
You are all over the place, with a naive mindset.

Ex is entitled to spousal, equalization and child support.
Why do you think a judge would prevent her from going to trial? Why are you avoiding trial?

I don't see anything significant in your discovery.
 
1) im entitled to equalization...im owed 90K and there is money left in the house
2) I have overpaid significantly in spousal and child
3) she is willfully underemployed

these things simply do not vanish, especially given that when funds were released to cover my arrears her lawyer is on the record stating she would pay it back

100K-150K is a lot of additional funds. https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2007/2007onca304/2007onca304.html this is a key case and works both ways
as rocks said, this is augmenting lifestyle and taking care of the need, it would work to lower SS.
her rent was free, the case law is clear thats imputation

I do not want to go trial because I want my life back, but i am dealing with someone totally unreasonable and believes she should get all the money in the house and support for 15 years.
regarding anything significant in discovery, it seems that 2 others would disagree with you.

Another tidbit, theres money being transferred consistently from another bank that she has not disclosed and appears different from her parents e-transfer.
 
The disclosure gave you more questions to ask, more ammunition to use, but by no means any smoking gun of you paying too much. Ex is already imputed an income; presumably more than $2k/month, but you're so focused on a one time 2k income and a few hundred dollars on groceries... a car. These are minor things which go to the already imputed income. If ex was/is living with parents, it's understood her bills would be less but that doesn't automatically mean you pay less ss.

You're dealing with someone totally unreasonable and believes they should get all the money and support - while demanding all the money and support yourself.

You both need trial if you want your life back sooner.

If you have a lawyer, why are you trying to drive?!
 
so her living with boyfriend will decrease non compensatory support
i am trying to set up my case to get a better settlement

and regards my wishes for money...yeah i want what i am entitled to just like anyone else, i paid more than my obligation so why should i simply forgive 50K, i know i wont get 50K cash from it, but the giant list of adjustments I want will be utilized to shorten support big time. Typically when there are credits they are used to offset future support. So if i have essentially prepaid 2 years of support, that does not disappear. If it was opposite, they would reduce the EP payment to cover what I should have paid.


im not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence
 
what the disclosure points to is that she not entirely dependent on me for support where she claims she is
It would be argued to decrease her "means needs and circumstances". I know child is not touched unless imputation, but spousal drops considerably with imputation and demonstrating she has multiple areas of support\

either way, ill let you know how it goes
 
they are supporting her,
if an ex remarries,non compensatory support drops for sure
the above has no impact on compensatory support, but the fact that she was getting so much money and living rent free will impute income


the other thing to consider is that if I had all of this prior to support adjustment, it would have factored into the judge's decision.
for example, she claimed that she was not earning any income in 2020, I found income from her parents company

my honest hope is that the strength of my case will be so much that her 4th lawyer who is not a family lawyer will push for a settlement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top