|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 11:12:53 AM |
if he can't be responsible for his actions he should be neutered
... and, let's neuter all the irresponsible women who have sex and kids with losers, deadbeats, drug addicts, drunks, abusers and such...
... not to mention guys who spend all day playing video games.... 
 | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 12:12:55 PM |
Nope, I wouldn't. I would have the single bedroom apartment like my single friend, at about half the cost, which is what I said in my post.
KristinZ,
When I *last* checked, one bedroom apartments and condos not only have one bedroom, but they also have kitchens, living areas and washrooms too! Sometimes they even come with parking spots and storage lockers!
And the cost of a 1 bedroom apartment is NOT half the cost of a 2 bedroom apartment... I know because I checked. The only way you can cut the cost in half is if you go from a 2 bedroom in a nice area to a 1 bedroom in a not-so-nice area... which is not an apples to apples comparison.
And as long as you make disingenuous arguments like that, you're gonna get the condescending attitude.
If you don't understand that, you are definitely smoking something interesting... | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 12:39:02 PM | Within the same building, the difference in apartment rentals from a one to two bedroom is about $200-300.
Yes, the kids do have access to the whole house, but the "hard cost difference" between living on your own and living with your kid is about $300. One might choose a different neighborhood with kids, than you would alone, which could increase the absolute cost.
If one doesn't look at finances this way, I imagine it can make for quite a surprise when the child support stops.
I do disagree with zeke on the different "scales" of living. I can't imagine an executive father wanting his kid (let alone expecting) to live on a "Walmart" budget. Just because one can, doesn't mean one will. Two families cannot live at the same style as they did when they were one family (no matter how much the system tries to not have the kid's living standard be effected... that's the hard reality) but it also doesn't mean the kid goes from filet mignon to dented cans of tuna. This does mean that the custodial parent will benefit from child support to some degree... you can't separate out the kids and your ex completely. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 1:34:15 PM |
And the cost of a 1 bedroom apartment is NOT half the cost of a 2 bedroom apartment... I know because I checked. The only way you can cut the cost in half is if you go from a 2 bedroom in a nice area to a 1 bedroom in a not-so-nice area... which is not an apples to apples comparison.
I wasn't comparing me living in a one bedroom apartment versus me living in a two bedroom apartment in the exact same building with three boys. That would be stupid. I understand that your point of view and mine are different on the issues on this thread, and I agree to disagree. You certainly haven't convinced me of anything.
Zeke, the thing I dislike about your posts is not what you say (although I strongly disagree with most of what you say), but rather the condescending, patronizing, and disdainful way you say it. At first, I thought your attitude was directed at me, but then I looked back at some of your posts. Among other statements you have made:
You didn't by any chance see a pig fly earlier today did you?
Rude.
It is embarrassingly stupid of you not to realize that.
Holy chit. That's a bit harsh. Calling the person stupid because he did not agree with you.
Or was that just something you pulled out of your @ss?
Not proper debate protocol is it? Maybe try : I respectfully disagree.
I'm damn sure I scare the hell out of you with my questions that nail the WHOLE truth...
I didn't realize the point of the forum was to scare the hell out of people. I had the impression the goal was an exchange of ideas, preferably respectfully for those who can handle that.
I'm going to now explain to you how the universe works...
In the universe, there are stars. Going around the stars are planets.
Our star is The Sun.
Our planet is The Earth.
The Earth Revolves around the Sun.
This means that The Earth does not revolve around Your Head.
I suspect the reason for this is that the magnetic field within your head is insufficient for this to occur.
Are you friggin' serious? Now I know this was in response to a pretty chippy exchange between you and another poster, but,dude, come on. Ever try keeping yourself above the fray?
I have been able to disagree with other people in the forum before, even with people on this very thread, and none of them suggested that I was on drugs. You really need to learn to put your own opinion in perspective.
I disagree with you, so I am a substance abuser? Good comeback!
Now, go ahead and explain how your oh-so-correct-and-always-clever quotes were taken out of context. The problem for you is that those quotes are perfectly representative of what you are: rude, condescending, disdainful, and patronizing. Good luck with your fishing. Lots of women will totally dig that about you. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 1:41:47 PM | My ex supports his own household. He also contributes to my household, you know, the one where OUR CHILDREN live. I am left to pay for a ONLY A FRACTION of the costs of maintaining my own household. The FRACTION happens to be about EIGHT out of TEN, or eighty percent.
That's kinda why I was agreeing with you. You support 80%, he supports 120%... he 2 homes, you fraction of 1.
I have a big problem with people ranting about how NCP's are getting screwed over because that is their own personal experience.
So do you have a big problem with yourself ranting the way you did about your personal experience? Do you always get this angry at people who agree with you? | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 4:42:52 PM |
If one doesn't look at finances this way, I imagine it can make for quite a surprise when the child support stops.
Jeeze, i happen to think im going to be better off financially when the child support stops. The kids will then be self supporting. instead of buying food for three, i will only be buying for one, i will only be clothing one. No more extra for school supplies and trips. Or cellphones. I can move into a one bedroom all inclusive, No hydro, gas bills, water bills, hot water tank rentals, taxes, pool miantenance, or maintenance on a house.
not to mention the extra i pay for my daughters car insurance, so she can go to school.
My ex pays the grand total of $230 for each kid a month. Probably not going to miss that too much, seeing it doesnt even come close to what it costs me to keep them going.
i wont even start on the animals that he insisted we get for the kids, when we were together. Guess who foots the bill for the grooming, feeding, insulin that one requires, and the vet bills. Sometimes that old child support fairy just aint what its cracked up to be. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 5:04:24 PM | KristinZ,
You already know the context of those quotes... if you don't understand, then nothing anyone can say would make you understand.
When you make a ludicrous and one-sided statement NOT based on reality, that's what you're gonna get... and I don't care who, what gender or what status you are.
I have a problem with people who want equality, but only when it works to their advantage... which in effect is promoting Inequality while Advertising it as equality.
I am rude, condescending, disdainful AND patronizing to people who repeatedly demonstrate a willingness to promote inequality and say blatantly false things (like a 1 bedroom is "half" of the cost of a two bedroom place) and try to build their positions from those blatant falsehoods.
You want me to NOT be that way towards you?
Then stop spreading disinformation such as a 1 bedroom is "half the cost" of a two bedroom... and that's just the most recent example. And your statement about "allowing" the kids to go out of their rooms... an absolutely Ludicrous statement for the purposes of calculating the cost of that extra bedroom... and don't think I missed YOUR snide insinuation that I lock my kids in their rooms.
Making ludicrous statements will ALWAYS invite rude, condescending, disdainful AND patronizing responses as well.
If you don't like it and want it to stop, then cut the false statements, half truths and ludicrous statements.
I'm not here to make you love or even like me. I really don't care if you do.
I had the impression the goal was an exchange of ideas, preferably respectfully for those who can handle that.
Ha! That's a laugh given some Highly Misandrist and insulting views on this thread that posters such as myself are merely responding to.
I'm here to stand for a point of view... an absolutely necessary point of view lest I allow Misandrist attitudes to take over. The attitude I'm dishing out... the one you dislike... is the same attitude men have gotten for years... I don't feel bad at all that you and a few others are choking on it now that men such as me are dishing it right back and absolutely INSISTING on Equality such as in the areas of Accountability and Information Disclosure.
Suck it up... that's what men are always told to do...
In a truly Equal world, your gender won't save you from getting to suck it up too! | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 5:22:19 PM | I never thought my back would feel like it is going to give out on me, since I have always been physically fit. But my little guy who is 7 months(and in terms of his age group isn't little lol) is in the 95 percentile of his height and weight, and my back is 95 percent ready to give out I have a daughter that is 10yrs and she was much smaller as a baby then her brother is. Also her father and I shared alot of the holding and taking care of her. Although I know my son's father loves him, I am the one that is with him usually aroud the clock. I tuck him in 6 nights a week. I lug him into the store,schools, etc, anywhere I need to be he almost always goes. It isn't always easy raising children especially babies by yourself, but it is very rewarding.
I have learned some very big lessons from this. That I believe parenting is meant to be shared. How much I appreciate a truly dedicated father. I realize there are individuals that use cs in the wrong manner and some try to obtain it from bedding wealthy partners who happen to fall in a very high tax bracket. However imo the majority of folks use the child support specifically for the child and basic living expenses.
As for my back, I'm praying he walks at 9 months | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 6:20:12 PM | within the same building, the difference in apartment rentals from a one to two bedroom is about $200-300.
Itsmargo (and everyone else who actually believes one extra bedroom costs an extra $200-$300/month),
I'm gonna say it again... this is wrong... boy is it ever wrong. And I know that because I'm actually browsing for condos/apartments right now.
Why? Because the plan my Ex and I have is for her to take over the house once she gets her career going... I prefer living in a condo and she prefers a house.
The truth is that you can get that extra bedroom for as little as an extra $50/month... and you'll definitely still be under $100/month extra when you factor in utilities. And some of these places include utilities.
Here's what I see:
Example #1...225 SHERWAY GARDEN RD NEW luxury condo building by Sherway Gardens:
1 bedroom/1 bath going for $1350/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8035458
1 bedroom/1 bath going for $1450/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=7948417
2 bedroom/1 bath going for $1520/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=7753364
2 bedroom/2 bath going for $1575/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8030945
Example #2: 2910 KEELE ST... older low rise building
1 bedroom/1bath: $850/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=7961727
2 bedroom/1bath: $900/month
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=7961949
Example #3: Yonge/Sheppard to Yonge/Finch (I used to work in the area)... area overloaded with new condos with many sold to investors for rental purposes... These are a TERRIBLE INVESTMENT right now due to a glut of supply... check this area for awesome deals in about 1 to 2 years once some of the sellers get desperate:
1 bedroom/1 bath: TONS OF THEM available for $1300 to $1800/month
2 bedroom/1 bath: TONS OF THEM available for $1500 to $2000/month
But why spend $2000/month on a 2 bedroom when you can get a THREE bedroom (also in a fairly new luxury condo) for $1800/month in the same area right here:
http://www.realtor.ca/propertyDetails.aspx?propertyId=8066842
Example #4: 1442 Lawrence Avenue West... older 1970s style highrise:
1bedroom/1bath: $775/month
http://www.hometrader.ca/AdDetail.aspx?srcID=5&frnID=4848189
2bedroom/1bath: $925/month
http://www.hometrader.ca/AdDetail.aspx?srcID=5&frnID=4848190
3bedroom/1bath:$1100/month
http://www.hometrader.ca/AdDetail.aspx?srcID=5&frnID=4848192
Bonus Example: 4 bedroom house by Lawrence and Royal York (Pretty good area... safe, if a little boring... should be good for families)
Only $1280/month... but add $300-400/month for utilities (which is what a house like that will cost for that based on my direct 1st hand experience). You'll also probably have to cut your own grass... I have an extra lawnmower if you need it...
So it's TWICE the cost of a 1 bedroom apt, but you get FOUR TIMES AS MANY BEDROOMS.
Soooo... Take a guess as to what I think about the claim that ONE extra bedroom costs an extra $200-300/month in the same building...
Well I'm gonna tell you anyway... HOGWASH!!!!
You haven't done your homework or you have ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE negotiating skills.
But feel free to actually try to prove me wrong... and you'll have to back up what you say with examples from REALITY. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 7:25:59 PM |
You haven't done your homework or you have ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE negotiating skills.
But feel free to actually try to prove me wrong... and you'll have to back up what you say with examples from REALITY.
Ah hell, zeke, I'm not going to bother. I went to viewit.ca and looked at buildings in the Yonge Eglinton and Yonge St Clair areas. They are hotter areas than the ones you are speaking of and would have a higher price differential... $200-300 per month. Of course one can shop around, of course one can find less expensive neighborhoods.
This thread was not living on a budget tho', was it. Hell, a 2 bedroom at the Manulife runs from 1800 to 2150 - and a two bedroom comes in at 2,800 - so that building would have a price differential of 1,000. More if we're talking a 3 bedroom at 5,000/month.
^^ It's all relative. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 8:43:07 PM | Zeke,
Honestly, I wonder with the clear distain you have for women why you are on a dating site...The tennor of your posts throughout the threads is...well...to be rude, condencending, and dismissive to women posters...and anyone who may agree with them...regardless of the merit of the view....
I could stoop down low and get dirty....but, "I" choose not to...so with one final bow, and encore, I bid you ado....and my advise is to any other posters with a different view is to leave this thread to Zeke...he's doin' fine all by himself...
jmo,
Irish | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 9:03:07 PM | ItsMargo,
The thing is that some buildings are set up for families and some aren't. And I know that Manulife building... I have a friend that lives nearby... That NOT a family-focused building.
But even staying along the Yonge Street Corridor... there have been so many condos built, you can absolutely get a very nice place for way less than $2800 if you're just a little flexible. Hell... you can rent many HOUSES in decent areas and still come in way under that after utilities.
Even around Yonge and Eglington I found waaaay better deals than two bedrooms for $2800.
If you need family-type space, you don't stay in a building that's built for the single lifestyle or you'll pay through the nose for the extra space... and same goes for ultra luxury buildings like the Palace Pier.
If you have kids, a family-oriented building is what is needed... or a house.
For example... 364 The East Mall (I used to own a unit in this complex)... you can buy a 3 bedroom stacked TOWNHOUSE with two floors inside, about 1400 sq ft and two bathrooms for $190,000... With $40,000 down, you're looking at $809.50 over 25 years at 4.25% fixed for 5 years at TD Bank... Add $600/month (works out to about 47 cents per sq ft) for the maintenance fees that include all utilities plus other perks like the Rogers Ultimate TV Pack (I personally was on the Board of Directors at the time when we negotiated that), add about $133/month property taxes... and you have a grand total of about $1500 to $1600... and you've got a LARGE 3 bedroom townhouse with a master bedroom big enough to fit a King Size bed in it and still have lots of space for other furniture... In a complex that is run well on top of that where it's only one short bus ride to Kipling Subway (or you can walk there in about 25 minutes... I know because I did it) and really easy access to the 427... and the place has a full rec centre and TWO swimming pools.
I lived there until the kids arrived on the scene and we decided we wanted (not needed) a yard.
And I know for a fact that this isn't the only family-oriented building you can find in the city.
It comes down to doing proper research and knowing how to negotiate.
And speaking of research...there's this place at Spadina/Bloor with 3br going for $1600 with some util included:
http://viewit.ca/vwExpandView.aspx?ViT=1803
And that place is about a 10-15 minute walk or a short subway ride from that Manulife building you mentioned.
Oh yeah... the detached house I live in here in Toronto in the west end near the lake... That costs less than $2000/month... everything in even property taxes. And I have a yard and a garage too.... mind you I had some equity built up from the previous place I lived.
I'm sorry... but the "$300/month for an extra room" idea just doesn't hold water. I know way too much about real estate and the real estate market as it is right now to let you or anyone else go unchallenged when making that monetary claim.
Anybody who's spending a lot more for an extra bedroom isn't making the best use of their money, no matter which way you slice it.
Spending an extra $300/month for that extra bedroom only demonstrates a lack of research and/or fiscal responsibility... which one of the points I'm making on this thread that has been repeatedly ignored for no other reason than... ummm... I don't know why... willful ignorance perhaps?
And that in turn PROVES the need to Audit where Child Support money goes... at least in some situations. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 9:04:59 PM | In Canada Pre-nups are only valid if both parties agree to it at the time of divorce. If she gets money hungry it ends up going to arbitration a lot of the time anyway I'm told.
So basically not worth the money it's printed on. He'd better make sure she's a hella classy woman and either won't want a divorce or wont' want to take him to the cleaners. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 9:19:16 PM | My ex pays the grand total of $230 for each kid a month. Probably not going to miss that too much, seeing it doesnt even come close to what it costs me to keep them going.
I'm expected to feed, clothe, and transport a child and an adult with about $230/month, and you're complaining that a multiple of that barely covers a portion for each? Reminds me of the conversation I had with a co-worker the other day when I said people always want money because they see the problems it solves... what they overlook are the problems it creates. As much as I'd like to believe I'd want to be in a situation like yours where I could simply scoff at the kind of money you think is meaningless, I'm kinda glad I'm not. That kind of money would make a huge difference, but it's becoming apparent that it wouldn't be the positive difference I once used to believe it would make. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/28/2009 9:40:00 PM | In Canada Pre-nups are only valid if both parties agree to it at the time of divorce. If she gets money hungry it ends up going to arbitration a lot of the time anyway I'm told.
So basically not worth the money it's printed on. He'd better make sure she's a hella classy woman and either won't want a divorce or wont' want to take him to the cleaners.
Sheep -- Not sure where you're getting your info from, but that is just dead ass wrong. There is specific criteria that has to be followed for a prenup to be declared valid and legally standing BEFORE you marry, or DURING the marriage (but that doesn't happen often). When you're divorcing, an agreement is gonna do what? That whole line doesn't even make sense man.
The key is to make sure that both parties secure their own Lawyer, and don't share one. They have to retain independent legal counsel for it to be valid. That disqualifies "duress" immediately (which is any Lawyer's magic words). That is the biggest KEY factor. The next key factor is making sure that there's no mention at ALL about child support arrangements, else that document will be tossed out immediately. So provided that you keep within those 2 KEY factors, the rest is pretty basic. You can protect any asset or property, you can even write yourself out of alimony. Recently, Canada even made it possible to keep businesses out of divorce proceedings even if they weren't included in the prenup. I'm pretty sure I posted about that way back in this thread.
Anyways...a prenup is surely valid LONG before the divorce stage. So whoever fed you that crap needs to get some facts straight first. She or he can disagree all they want at the time of divorce...if both parties consented initially to sign it and each had independent legal counsel and child support wasn't part of it...the document will stand. I'm sure I posted that info earlier in this thread too. It's there somewhere, and a link or two as well.
Think about it...if both had to agree at the stage of divorce, you KNOW one party won't...so right there that's grounds for breach of "good faith" since both signed it as such in the beginning. The Courts take a dim view of that. Who'd be stupid enough to try that tactic? Unless they had a Lawyer who just graduated school in tow... | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 4:14:23 AM | Correction:
BDJ: You are right about the Duress part invalidating a pre-nup. But in the Family Law it is more to do with the time of the signing than the independant counsel issue.
The duress part is that HE/SHE must have a MINIMUM of 7 days to review the agreement. Therefore if you draft an agreement 7 days before the wedding and makes the wedding conditional on the agreement being signed, then that is duress. Providing it 8days before the wedding/marriage removes the duress aspect.
http://www.heydary.com/publications/prenuptial_agreement_lawyer.html
http://www.divorcemag.com/articles/Financial_Planning/agreement.html
Also mentioning CHILD SUPPORT does NOT invalidate the whole document.
Some interesting facts:
1. In UK, pre-nups are NOT legally binding. Hmm....Thats strange!
http://knowhow-now.com/index.php?page=article&article_id=176681
http://mylawyersblog.com/2008/04/04/pre-nuptial-agreements-on-the-up-say-divorce-lawyers/
2. In California (and most USA states) it is legally binding even if one party doesnt have a lawyer. They must put it in the agreement that they understand exactly what they are waiving their rights to.
http://www.divorce-lawyer-orange-county.com/defenses-to-a-prenuptial-agreement.html
3. In Ontario, the Matrimonial home CANNOT be included in a pre-nup. So, DON'T let him/her move in into your already acquired property. Get a new place altogether.. :)
Also post-nuptial agreement are just as valid as the pre-nuptial ones. But then again why sign the post-nuptial one when you are the "broke-a**" party and could get more without it.
4. In Ontario, common law spouses DO NOT have claims to the matrimonial home
https://www.bar-ex.com/barex/appmanager/bx/on;jsessionid=7mHLLKVZWM2GFTPmy6GBgg4RXP0YHpj7yvGSCrt2rrK6vZdHvfD0!41065555?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=newsResources_article&articleId=8284
| |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 6:12:28 AM |
But even staying along the Yonge Street Corridor... there have been so many condos built, you can absolutely get a very nice place for way less than $2800 if you're just a little flexible. Hell... you can rent many HOUSES in decent areas and still come in way under that after utilities.
sheesh zeke, I think you're missing my point. (not to split hairs here, but I never suggested the Yonge corridor was $2800) I'm not shopping for THE apartment some imaginary ex and children are going to live in.
People with different financial resources are going to select different housing that meets their needs. I do think the hard costs attributed to the kid ought to be viewed as the cost of the extra rooms... not half of the whole place. But I don't feel anyone in this thread can arbitrarily say that will be x amount of dollars. Nor do I think an ex can dictate where their ex should live.
4. In Ontario, common law spouses DO NOT have claims to the matrimonial home
In BC it is... and in Ontario they can make a claim through a constructive trust... if they have done work on the home, or in some way made it more possible for the other to keep/pay for the home in question. I mention this just to emphasize that people need to become familiar with family law in their state/province/country before they enter into live-with relationships. | |
|
| |
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 8:12:13 AM | Ismargo,
People with different financial resources are going to select different housing that meets their needs.
Agreed. Which is why, in my examples I cited brand new condos, and some older and cheaper buildings... but the difference was still well under $200 and not anywhere near $300 for each additional room.
I do think the hard costs attributed to the kid ought to be viewed as the cost of the extra rooms... not half of the whole place.
Agreed. But that's not the argument being put forth by others on this thread.
But I don't feel anyone in this thread can arbitrarily say that will be x amount of dollars.
And there's the point of contention. Others made the claim that it costs $200-$300 extra for each room. This is not reality as I've observed it or experienced it.
Nor do I think an ex can dictate where their ex should live.
Agreed. But you'll also notice that my examples were not clustered in one area.
I didn't waste time with extremes at one end (the VERY affordable places you can get by Jane/Finch) or extremes at the other end (The Palace Pier) of what's available on the market. Nor did I bother comparing big penthouse units to small 1 bedroom units on the 2nd or 3rd floor.
I did an apples-to-apples comparison. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 9:35:29 AM | | I respectfully disagree with the poster(s) who somehow see family housing needs as an apples to apples situation. The costs associated with housing and supporting a family (mom and three teenagers in my case) are very, very different from the cost associated with providing for one person who lives alone. There is much to consider apart from the cost of "an extra bedroom". After all, no one would think it was very strange that a family of five people (like mine used to be) would like to have housing that met the needs of the family, within the budget, of course. When the family sadly becomes four people living together and one person living separate, the needs of the four are not that much less than the needs of the five (call it a five apples to four apples comparison, maybe). Just because the king has left the castle, doesn't mean that the little princes should move to the cottage, if it is all feasible for them to have something better. My ex still lives in our family home (all five bedrooms and three bathrooms of it). I think it is kind of a waste of money considering how seldom the kids even go there, but whatever; it's his money, and no longer my business. When we split, did I search for a home that was similar in all aspects, but had only one less bedroom (five apples to four apples)? Um, no. That wouldn't be reasonable because I couldn't afford something like that, even with the support that he faithfully pays. I have a modest semi with three bedroom and one bathroom in the same school district as my ex's home. We are happy here and it feels like home. We are talking about people's (parents' and children's) lives here, not apples. Hard numbers don't always tell the whole story. Just sayin'. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 9:42:34 AM | Something which I posted earlier in this thread about prenups and after reading some of the posts above I looked up again.
The divorce act of Canada specifically states that the rights of the child to child support cannot be negociated away in any way and the act supersedes all contracts and other legislation.
To answer the original posters question; the divorce act nulifies any contract as it supersedes the prenup. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 9:43:27 AM | sheesh zeke, I think you're missing my point. (not to split hairs here, but I never suggested the Yonge corridor was $2800) I'm not shopping for THE apartment some imaginary ex and children are going to live in.
People with different financial resources are going to select different housing that meets their needs. I do think the hard costs attributed to the kid ought to be viewed as the cost of the extra rooms... not half of the whole place. But I don't feel anyone in this thread can arbitrarily say that will be x amount of dollars. Nor do I think an ex can dictate where their ex should live.
Well said, Margo.
Notice that one poster was able to make a point without calling the other person stupid, or a substance abuser, or even of talking out of his ass? Well done. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 10:31:44 AM | Hard numbers don't always tell the whole story. Just sayin'..
KristinZ,
Yes... that's true... there is more to it than hard numbers. The 'hard numbers' approach is only useful for figuring out incremental costs.
Actual costs can vary hugely... simply being irrationally inflexible can cause one's costs to go way up. And someone who is flexible (which you apparently are... demonstrated by your willingness to consider a semi rather than insisting that you must have a detached house) can often find solutions to meet needs... sometimes even at a lower cost.
And other factors I personally considered was the feel of the area as well as proximity of the schools, libraries, etc... and I'm sure you considered it as well among other things.
And I think it's just silly for a person to live by themselves in a 5 bedroom house... that's a want, not a need. But hey, if he's got the money to burn, why not?
Just as long he keeps up his end of the deal.
BUT... it does come into play when one side starts crying about how hard they have it... that's when you've got to do some digging... In the case of Vanguy... sorry... I think he's getting scammed.
In your case, IF your Ex cried poor while living by himself in a 5 br house, I'd take your side.
Based on what you described, if your Ex started crying poor to you, I'd be right there questioning the wisdom of his life choices.
His money in that situation DOES become your business if he can't hold up his end of the deal... and in my view, it should work the other way around too.
If everyone is keeping up their end of the bargain, there's no need to put things under a microscope. But... not everyone is responsible or rational... and neither gender has a monopoly on that.
As I said... accountability cuts both ways.
But apparently, some on this thread have a problem with true equality...
Sidenote: Notice how I'm not being sarcastic and rude to you in this post and I gave you credit for saying something reasonable? That's because you weren't repeating any falsehoods or disinformation in your last post. My rude and condescending attitude only comes out when I see stuff like that. I give credit where credit is due... and I slam where slamming is due. | |
|
| Prenuptial Agreements and Maximum Child Support payment!
Posted: 3/29/2009 1:21:42 PM | Just a few comments regarding some of the recent posts.
Firstly, let's not forget that that CS isn't supposed to pay for the costs associated with raising the children. It is supposed to pay for a *share* of it. Kristen, I have no idea what your ex makes. If it's say $100,000, then you are entitled to $1,825 a month. Add in your own $1,825 a month and that is $3,650 in money to go towards supporting the children. If a 1 bedroom place is $1,100 a month, you could take $2,000 from the $3,650 and be in a $3,100 a month place, with $1,650 left for groceries, etc.. For expenses that fall out of the scope of the child support payments, you need to ask for more, either directly or through the courts.
Sure that might not be enough, but if that's the case you need to also go after spousal support / alimony. It is your ex's obligation to keep you (and by proxy the kids) in the lifestyle with which you became accustomed to in the marriage. Now if your lifestyle is improved outside of the marriage (and by proxy the kids), that isn't up to your ex to pay (sorry, don't mean that to be rude).
There are all different situations, all different circumstances. You may fall into one those Kristen, who knows. Maybe your ex provided your children with everything they wanted, but kept you living in poverty. I guess in some cases he can argue against paying spousal support, and you end up having to provide your children with a lower standard of living as a result. You have to admit though that this would be an unusual circumstance. Typically the entire family lives a certain lifestyle, not just some members of that family.
There is no one rule that can adequately cover all circumstances. What exists now is at least better than nothing.
On the one hand I would like to see some type of accountability, but on the other hand I can understand why people don't want it. For me personally in my situation? I could care less. I pay both child support and spousal support. Who cares if the child support money is paying for my ex's Vegas trips or if my spousal support is buying new shoes for her kid. I completely agree that once it leaves my bank account it's no longer up to me what is done with it. Again, to reiterate, I don't want to know. I'd never even look as I don't care, and maybe I don't care because it's not my child. But in order to ensure the well being of the child, I can see there being some type of accountability - but not necessarily to the ex / NCP / whatever you want to call it. It should be an accountability to the court system and the state / province that put the order in place in the first place. After all, if they demand that an NCP pay $31,000 a month to support a child, shouldn't it be there job to ensure that the CP isn't breaking the law and using the money for purposes that fall outside of the court order? In many ways I think so, but then I suddenly thought of something; who audits the families that are still together happily married that they are actually spending enough money on their children? If it doesn't exist for whole families, why should it exist for broken families?
Again, I can certainly see both sides of the argument.
And to those that think I'm being taken advantage of, I appreciate your concern, but I'd rather not re-open anything as it could go both ways. Sure I could come out ahead, but there's an equal or greater chance that I could come out behind. My ex is no longer living in the lifestyle that was provided in our marriage. There is a distinct risk that her spousal support award could go up to bring her closer to that level. And yes I was a little snippy earlier with regards to wanting my own children some day. Some days I get a little cranky about it since it's the one thing that I want more than anything in life, but am realizing I'll never have. We all make our choices in life and I'm living with and accepting of those choices. It doesn't mean you can't lament what you'll never have. | |
|
|
| Page 28 of 32
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 |
|
Home
login 
