Support payments - Part II (first thread is closed)

[Coach]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

Does that mean that groceries for the children need to be purchased separately from the parents? What about rent/mortgage payments? Does a proration need to happen so that these payments paid on separate accounts? This is all so unnecessary.

There are bad apples but I generally believe that most of the parents with custody of their children act in the best interest of the children. A far bigger problem, IMO, is deadbeat parents who refuse to give their children any support.

No not necessarily its just that obviously that money would be withdrawled with the purpose of buying groceries and that can be seen if there was any type of investigation into it. But if there's a $200 withdrawl from the account and then a few days later a $200 charge at a spa it would prompt some questions

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Dion

Post some pics of your dad as the hockey player

if you search lindsay carson on youtube there's some pretty good vids of some fights

[MelBridgeman]

So your pop's played for Keenan?

[Coach]

yeah. he told me Brad Marsh had to hold him back from chopping Keenan over the head with his stick. But he brought them to 2 cup finals so you can't really say too much bad about him

[Dion]

Originally Posted by MattyC

if you search lindsay carson on youtube there's some pretty good vids of some fights

I might have his hockey card in one of my collections

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Dion

I might have his hockey card in one of my collections

Does it look like this?

[Jetsfan]

Here is the link to the story from 1992. According to this ruling, you could be paying alimony to a former spouse for life! Effectively becoming a "wage slave."

http://archives.cbc.ca/society/family/clips/4661/

[Dion]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Does it look like this?

I'd have to check but I believe it does.

[malcolmk14]

My parents got married young - they were 21 and 19, and from small town Saskatchewan so this wasn't really out of the ordinary. My dad was finishing up law school, and my mom had to drop out a month into Grade 12 because I was born.

I was 2 when my Dad finished law school and we moved to Calgary, he got a job with a prominent legal firm here in the city. They were married for 12 years, and the whole time my Dad's opinion was that my mom shouldn't go back to school or work, that she should be at home with my younger sister and I. He didn't make a lot of money when he started out, but in the late 90's when he was made partner the money started rolling in so it was easy for him to tell my mom she didn't need to go back to school.

Around 1999 he filed for divorce, and said he didn't want custody. Kind of left my mom high and dry on an education and any work experience. She was entitled to half of his worth, but she turned it down because she was of the opinion that "he worked hard for his money, he deserves it". She got one year of spousal support to put herself through college, and child support for my sister and I until we were 18.

About three years into the child support payments, my dad took another position and almost tripled his salary; there was no change in the child support payments (not that they weren't already high, but this should be reflected in the payments somehow).

Every single penny of what he gave to my mom for us went towards making our lives easier and better. Now that my sister and I are not at home and support payments have stopped, my mom will probably have a very low standard of living until we have enough income to start to help her out. My mom has never done anything for herself, her entire adult life has been spent looking out for my sister and I.

My dad was always very good and timely in his support payments, and when there were extenuating circumstances he'd have no problem paying (sisters braces, my first couple years of university, various trips to Europe).

An example of both parents looking out for what is best for the kids.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Around 1999 he filed for divorce, and said he didn't want custody. Kind of left my mom high and dry on an education and any work experience. She was entitled to half of his worth, but she turned it down because she was of the opinion that "he worked hard for his money, he deserves it". She got one year of spousal support to put herself through college, and child support for my sister and I until we were 18.

She should have gotten some of it. She sacrificed a possible career to stay home and raise you kids properly all those years.

[Coach]

The only thing we can really determine from this thread is that there are many differing experiences. Just as many involving the woman taking advantage of the man as the man taking advantage of the woman

[malcolmk14]

Originally Posted by Dion

She should have gotten some of it. She sacrificed a possible career to stay home and raise you kids properly all those years.

Yeah - she regrets it now. At the time though, her primary focus was on saving the marriage, and she thought that taking the money would have definitely been the end of it. She was in a vulnerable state of mind, for sure.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by MattyC

if you search lindsay carson on youtube there's some pretty good vids of some fights

Must have been Movember.

[Drury18]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

Does that mean that groceries for the children need to be purchased separately from the parents? What about rent/mortgage payments? Does a proration need to happen so that these payments paid on separate accounts? This is all so unnecessary.

There are bad apples but I generally believe that most of the parents with custody of their children act in the best interest of the children. A far bigger problem, IMO, is deadbeat parents who refuse to give their children any support.

I agree. Micromanaging the money you give to the spouse is a step too far. Yes, there are a few bad apples who will spend the money on themselves and not the children but they will be found out eventually as usually they are the type to also beg for handouts of food and monetary assistance while they continue to splurge on themselves. Someone will catch on and they do get caught.

The bigger problem is deadbeats who either do not pay, or see the spouse making a fair wage and purposely refuse extra work or pay because they know they can pay much less since the Section 7 expenses are based on a wage comparision (i.e if Spouse 1 makes $50,000 and Spouse 2 makes 25,000 then Spouse 1 covers 75% of the expense and Spouse 2 covers 25%). My ex is currently doing this. Has been offered opportunities to the moon and refused them all because if he made more he would have to pay more.

I have 100% physical and legal custody of our child as ordered by a court and I also pay 75% of all expenses (daycare, school, extra curricular activities) because his wage is a 1/3 of mine by his own choice. The amount I get per month from him for child support and Section 7 expenses combined doesn't even add up to half of what I pay for daycare.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by malcolmk14

Yeah - she regrets it now. At the time though, her primary focus was on saving the marriage, and she thought that taking the money would have definitely been the end of it. She was in a vulnerable state of mind, for sure.

I respect her for doing what she thought was best. Sometimes tough to know what to do in these situations. Preserving your sanity is a most from what sister told me from her divorce.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Then there needs to be a paper trail. Every dollar of CSP needs to be tracked by the mother, and be reviewed by the intermediate or father. If the father sees $400 spa days, he should have the right to refuse payment. It is not wrong for a family to go on vacation. Perhaps it needs to be discussed beforehand so that the father does not feel resentful (maybe 1 or 2 vacations a year would be appropriate, and even then, 50% of the funds should be coming from the mother, while the other half from CSP).

LOL, perhaps in a perfect world. We live in a world where a vast majority of people don't reconcile their bank statements every month, max out their credit cards and take out home equity loans to buy overpriced garbage.

1) I'd argue that 75% of people couldn't really be counted on to keep detailed enough records for an audit system to be effective.

2) Lawyers and accountants fees for administration of a paper trail scheme for every case of support payments would far exceed the amount of the actual payments if it were something that had to be done monthly for the duration of the payments.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by MattyC

if you search lindsay carson on youtube there's some pretty good vids of some fights

I'm lovin' the pornstar 'staches. Awesome pic!!

[JustAnotherGuy]

Originally Posted by Superflyer

This is something that I don't get, if it is a 50\50 custody why is there still payments? If it is 75\25 or so I can see it because one parent has the child\children more and needs more money but if it is even then they should cancel each other out.

I don't think of my daughter as an expense that I can split up 50/50 or 75/25 depending on the amount of time she is with me.

I put my 'child support' into the pool of money needed to raise my daughter. My ex doesn't make up excuses for me to pay more. I don't ask for money back when I buy things for my daughter.

To me that is how it should work.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

LOL, perhaps in a perfect world. We live in a world where a vast majority of people don't reconcile their bank statements every month, max out their credit cards and take out home equity loans to buy overpriced garbage.

1) I'd argue that 75% of people couldn't really be counted on to keep detailed enough records for an audit system to be effective.

2) Lawyers and accountants fees for administration of a paper trail scheme for every case of support payments would far exceed the amount of the actual payments if it were something that had to be done monthly for the duration of the payments.

I know it's not feasible, but I still see a problem there. It's like NHL reffing. It works 95% of the time, but in those 5% of cases, a computer or other equipment could've made the right call. However, while doing that is not feasible, it doesn't mean there isn't a problem there.

It's really not possible when the supposed neutral party favors the woman in the vast majority of cases. Trying to add another layer of neutrality would make the expenses insane as you said. However, through this thread we can see really it goes both ways. You have terrible mothers, and you have terrible fathers. You have separations which go amicably where the interests of the kid are served.

Another solution I was thinking was using that support payment bank account idea, and have "allowable expenses" that have been stated during the divorce hearing. Both parties can see the account, and if there's money being drawn for vacations or other not agreed upon expenses then the contract is void. However, I don't really like this solution either because it uses the extremely biased court system.

Basically the final solution? Don't get married. If you do, have an air tight pre-nup.

[ericschand]

Here's what I learned while going through all this. Hopefully this isn't fata'd
somewhere else in the thread:

1) Child support isn't a must do. If both parents make equal money, you can
and do have situations where neither will pay child support to the other by
agreement. It seems that agreements must be authorized by the court(s)
but I'm not sure on that.

2) The idea of child support is that the child will have the lifestyle or
arrangements equivalent to the higher earning parent. This assumes all the
monies go to the childs lifestyle only and not to trips and clothes for your
ex.

3) No receipts are required if the agreements are post-1996 (?) Before
then the receiver of payments had to post receipts.

4) In Alberta you generally defer to the Federal Child Support Guidelines.
Where can you find info on this? The Feds are happy to provide a helpful
webpage. It's at step 3 on the link, because that's of most interest in this
thread.

5) You can come to other arrangements within the structure. For example,
in a 50/50 split, you may decide to take the amount that you would pay,
say $600, subtract how much she would pay, say $400, and use the
difference as the payment, $200. There is an example in the webpage
above.

6) Income taxes must be filed, all calculations are done off of them.

7) Child support payments cannot be negotiated away. Alimony can,
but not child support. So, those of you saying have a pre-nup, you
can't pre-nup child support.

8) You never want to go to court and have it decide. Think of it this way,
the person making the decision (judge) doesn't know you, probably doesn't
want to know you. Doesn't care about you, probably doesn't want to. Same
for your ex. And all the dirt that you may or may not know you have in your
closet will assist in making the decision; and you are naive to think none of that
will be aired. Based on that, do you really want this stranger making decisions
for you? (This holds true for anything involving court.)

IANAL, but that's what I found out.

ers