Here's my two cents. Try to keep the matter to just the tax refund. You were due half of it, it was deposited in WHs account, he needs to pay you a specific amount, boom.

Even though WH countered with the tuition, the judge may not want to go there because one issue has nothing to do with the other issue.

By keeping it simple and straight forward, I think the judge will rule that WH give you the money and ask that you rework your support agreement later.

Good luck... and yes, watch Judge Judy. And the other advice about listening, not interrupting, having your paperwork, etc. is right on. Perhaps practice a "run through" by answering a Judge Judy-type opening question.... Ms. Tabby -- Explain why you are here today.....

'xactly!!

This is a meeting to discuss a BUSINESS FINANCIAL issue. No re-hashing of the D unless the Judge asks for details. Watch your body language and facial expressions - do your best not to snicker when you WxH reveals his idiocy to the judge.

Most of all? Remember to breathe.

Fighting, we never went to divorce court. We (meaning I) wrote up our own separation agreement. According to the Divorce Act Section 15.1, Subsection 7, CS can be different from the amount in the Federal Child Support Guidelines if both spouses agree (I'm reading this straight of my defense!). This was how we arrived at the $15,000 figure in the first place. It was already in his favour, both according to the total amount he would have to pay as well as it allowed him to pay one lump sum out of the equalization payment rather than be tied to a monthly amount.

Now given all that, there is some other background that may or may not affect this. DS is my son and WXH's step son. DS's bio dad abandoned him shortly after birth and has not been seen or heard from since. Actually, WXH could never legally adopt DS because we couldn't track XH down. WXH and I moved in together when DS was 2 and married when he was 5. WXH has been "DAD" for DS's whole life that he can recall. Canadian courts recognize this so WXH was still financially responsible for him until he finished school.

The other factor, DS got married one year after separation. At the time we signed the agreement, DS wasn't engaged or even dating her seriously (he dated her on and off through high school and beyond but there was no indication it would become serious). He didn't get engaged until December of that year. Had WXH been paying monthly payments, they would likely have stopped on the wedding day. I couldn't find anything in the Divorce Act that covered this particular scenario as he still had one year of school to complete. But it's certainly possible for WXH to raise this issue (though he didn't do so in his claim and I don't think you are allowed to introduce anything off the cuff when you get there). If he does, I will refer back to the statement that I accommodated him by allowing CS to be one lump sum rather than a monthly payment. One cannot have both. If you buy a TV for $1000 and the following year it is available for $500, you don't get to ask for your money back. An agreement is an agreement.

Finally, regarding changes in income, WXH has to be making more money than he did in 2007 which was $47,000. He showed up last night in a brand new SUV. Since he left he has bought a house, bought all new high end furniture (including a $9000 dining room table), redid the kitchen, bathroom and finished the basement, bought a gazebo, bought a $2000 washing machine (probably the dryer too) and now this SUV. This is what I know about. God only knows what else there is. OW makes minimum wage. She is still working the exact same job. WXH has possibly been promoted. Between the 2 of them, they received $17,000 equalization payments. In 2008, WXH told me his credit card was maxed out at $20,000. There is simply no way he'd be able to qualify for financing on a new car if he was still making the same amount of money. So yes, perhaps I can ask for financial statements. Then again, this delves more into the area of Family Law rather than Small Claims. I actually hope that if the judge isn't immediately on my side that (s)he rules that this case should be taken to Family Court. I can still request payment for my claim and I highly doubt WXH will bother to sue me over again in Family Court.

Again, I do appreciate the advise a lot.

Oh, yeah. Maybe TAKE NOTES as WxH is talking.

TOTALLY throws them off!! - no doodling, the judge might see that. Write legitimate info - even if it is just a word or two and even if you are not going to respond to it.

Makes them st-st-stutter because they are so worried about what YOU are writing.



Yes, I'm mean. But damn, I have a good time at it.

(and I only use my evil powers against waywards!)

Thanks for the well wishes wh, and especially this bit of advise:
One thing, WXH spelled my name wrong on his defense to my claim (one reason I think a paralegal did it). Should I point this out? I really want to but it probably won't accomplish anything so I probably shouldn't. But doesn't every BXH want to point out that their WXH is such a blooming idiot they can't even spell their XW's name correctly (and I have an uber-common name that is spelt exactly as it sounds).

I'd point it out "innocently" - you are just trying to make sure it is all legal and accurate, right? Just making sure that the court uses the correct spelling in the decision, right?

DITTO

This was actually the hard part in preparing the defense against his claims. The way I understand it is they view them as 2 separate claims, but they are taken and dealt with together. So for my defense, I had to counter point-by-point everything in his plaintiff's claim which was all about the tuition. His defense when point-by-point against my claim but the only thing he argued was that I hadn't shown him the letter from the CRA. He acknowledged that the money was deposited in his account and said the only reason he never gave it back was because I owed him the tuition money. However, he also acknowledged my statements that he said he would pay back in installments, as well as the excuses he made when he didn't. In other words, he practically admitted that he owed that money. I honestly don't see how any judge will see that he doesn't. So it will come down to his case in the end.

AWESOME IDEA!!!!! I'm going to start practicing my lines now!!! (ooohh this will be fun!)

((((Tabby))))),

I don't have anything to add, just wanted to give ya a supporting hug. I know you have been dealing with this stupid issue for some time. It will good to get it over with....

Hope you have as much fun with it as Fox did....

not2fun

Tabby,

If the there was a stipulation that the child support amount be set at a $15,000 lump sum payment and it is signed off by the court, I would think you are in pretty good shape.

Some suggestions:

Keep everything focused on the tax issue.

If your XH brings up the college payments, object! You are not there to litigate that issue. Your XH could have filed a countersuit or motion to bring that issue to the court

Bring your child support agreement.

Bring all documentation for the taxes. If in doubt, bring it!

My exWW has had several judges go Judge Judy on her because she is great at hurling accusations but not bringing any documentation.

>My exWW has had several judges go Judge Judy on her because she is great at hurling accusations but not bringing any documentation.

TJ


I would've paid cash money to have witnessed that.

End of TJ

Thanks PSU. The court already has the documentation and he DID file a countersuit so it will be all about the tuition. As I said, he's all but flat out admitted to the tax thing (acknowledged the money went to his account, acknowledged that he agreed to pay it back etc.).

The issue that worries me is the wording of the separation agreement. "One half or a sum of" What bonehead wrote that in there???? (yours truly I'm afraid)

FWIW, it is not signed off by the court. We have a do-it-yourself divorce system here. You write your own agreement, both spouses sign it in front of a witness and voila, you have a legal document division of property, dictating custody, financial support, and any other issue covered under a typical American divorce. When people go to divorce court here, what they are doing is fighting over the separation agreement. The actual divorce "paper" is something you walk into the courthouse and pay a fee for when you are ready to get remarried. It's no different or more complicated than getting a dog license when you get a dog.