Undue Hardship? Please help!

lemontree said:
Is there any point in which the courts will look at a family household income?
I am paying her, yet she lives in a nicer house, can afford more vacations and has a much higher standard of living etc.. My child obviously benefits from that as well which is great, however I would like to keep that money to spend on her while she is with me if its not needed at the other household.
Click to expand...

You and thousands of others are in this position. I too am the net payor of offset to my ex, who has remarried and has a much higher household income (and more lavish lifestyle) than I do. However, unless you're absolutely destitute and your ex is Bill Gates, there's not much you can do about it.

Under Section 9C of the FCSG, in shared parenting situations the amount of child support is supposed to be determined by "the conditions, means, needs and other circumstances of each spouse and of any child for whom support is sought", but in practice, you would be hard put to get anything other than offset if you took your current arrangement to court, and the cost of the court battle would be pretty daunting.
 
lemontree said:
Is there any point in which the courts will look at a family household income?
Click to expand...

Yes, if your ex tried to claim undue hardship their household income would be pulled into the equation.

The test for undue hardship is extremely hard qualify for as all expenses are scrutinized. It is hard for good reason, as if it was easy, the courts would be flooded with people who want to minimize c/s payments.

Aside from imputing an income to the ex I will suggest this - forget the fact that the ex may live in a nicer house then you or whatever difference in lifestyle there may be. It isn't healthy and generally only leads to resentment which carries over to other unrelated issues you may have. Just focus on the fact that you are happier without having to live with them.
 
You would have a much higher chance of getting an income imputed if someone else is supporting her while she is attending school.
 
The hard fact is by the time "this starts winding it's way through the Court" the maternity leave will be over.

I see a number of threads started by lemon I wonder if he's building a major case to stop his ex's lavish lifestlye
 
All I have to say about undue hardship and the claim that the OP is making is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcfkEA2INMw

I highly recommend OP that you watch the video, understand the relationship I am making to your handle (lemontree) on this site and the complaints that you are brining forward on a claim for undue hardship... and in other threads.

You need to realize (and fast), lemongrab, that you are not going to get any government cheese with your "wine"(ing)...

Good Luck!
Tayken
 
Last edited:
Not looking for cheese. Looking for something that's fair. If you knew half the situation you would understand why I'm asking for the advice I am. When you pump out $550 monthly to someone who doesn't use it on your child and is MUCH better off than you it can be quite discouraging, especially when things are tough for yourself at home. I'm not looking for ways to get out of my financial obligations towards my child, for I would NEVER have her missing any necessities, I am just looking for ways to ensure I am not getting ripped of by this crocked (in my opinion) system that allows these things to happen.
Thanks anyway.
 
Lemontree, you're doing the right thing for your child, and you need to focus on your own life not your ex's.

If you're having a hard time dealing with it emotionally, I would suggest counselling.
 
lemontree said:
Not looking for cheese. Looking for something that's fair. If you knew half the situation you would understand why I'm asking for the advice I am. When you pump out $550 monthly to someone who doesn't use it on your child and is MUCH better off than you it can be quite discouraging, especially when things are tough for yourself at home. I'm not looking for ways to get out of my financial obligations towards my child, for I would NEVER have her missing any necessities, I am just looking for ways to ensure I am not getting ripped of by this crocked (in my opinion) system that allows these things to happen.
Thanks anyway.
Click to expand...

Does the child have a roof over his head?
Does the child have clothes on his back?
Does the child get fed?
Does the child have toys?
Does the child have a bed?

This all costs money so how can you say it's not used on your child?

I get it as I'm a payer of almost the same amount in off-set but the money is going to your child no matter how you look at it. Just because the other person has money left over does NOT mean it's not being spent on the child.

I can understand your anger with the other person not working to their full potential. Getting them imputed with an appropriate income is the solution as mentioned already.
 
lemontree said:
Not looking for cheese. Looking for something that's fair. If you knew half the situation you would understand why I'm asking for the advice I am. When you pump out $550 monthly to someone who doesn't use it on your child and is MUCH better off than you it can be quite discouraging, especially when things are tough for yourself at home. I'm not looking for ways to get out of my financial obligations towards my child, for I would NEVER have her missing any necessities, I am just looking for ways to ensure I am not getting ripped of by this crocked (in my opinion) system that allows these things to happen.
Thanks anyway.
Click to expand...

You don't get it.

The money is there to provide for your child, and is totally independant of what your ex makes. You are looking to get out of your obligations. Plain and simple.

If you want to argue that your ex should bear more of the share of the extraordinary expenses, that is entirely fair. But unless you are paying more than the table rate for support, I find a hard time being sympathetic. Many of us have to downsize our lives, live more modestly, to provide for our kids in this situation.
 
According to your original post - the standards of living in the two homes are similar. You also state that her and the new spouse purchased a half-million dollar home and live lavishly.

If the standards of living are close - how is she "living well" and you are not?
 
Berner_Faith said:
Exactly...

I do find it funny that no one ever wants to pay more when their new spouse makes a good wage, but when a new spouse makes less and leaves them supporting the new family, they want to pay less.
Click to expand...

You can say the same thing about a person receiving SS, who now shacks up with a new BF/GF...what are the chances they will be willing to take a drop in SS?

However I am with you on the point you are making. It will be easier if people after having 1-2 kids, just stop and get themselves fixed...if they aren't in a position to provide the basic neccessities and then some for the ones they have already
 
blinkandimgone said:
I am confused about the OP in general.

In this thread, Lemontree claims specifies 'his' ex as "she" and in this thread:

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/50-50-custody-mobility-rights-12188/

Starts off by saying:

"My husband has a little boy aged 6..."

So....are you the ex husband or ex wife?
Click to expand...


Well, in the 21st century these are not necessarily inconsistent. Perhaps Lemontree is a dude currently in a same-sex marriage who used to bat for the other team? Or perhaps she's a former lesbian who has now found Mr Right? So many possibilities ...
 
I did consider that, and although not wanting to appear politically incorrect it doesn't *seem* that was the case but I can certainly be wrong!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top