Sisip Settlement for Child Support

Well actually Redfisher they can't touch it because it is a tax-free payment so therefore it does not offically exist.

We went to court to prove that our PA payments are not/not income with SISIP for our LTD

Given that Ex's can legally go to court and get settlement money, such as SISIP, leaving the Vet with little or none of it. Do you think that those under the NVC getting the proposed $70 000 lump sum would have to endure loosing it to the Ex?

Beware of the narcissistic ex is right !

Before I began I would say that not all ex partners are bad when it comes to dealing with support - mine was extremely bad and used the system to obtain over and above  the entitlement.

Strictly talking child support here measures that are put in place to address the so called dead beat dads is one sided, it without any doubt favors the recipient over the payee.
Like I have already stated in the past on this topic, I have no problem paying child support, as I would think most feel the same, the children have to be looked after by both the payee and the recipient.
Here's where the problem lies, there is no accountability on the part of the recipient, there is no accountability which can lead to the recipient saying or doing whatever they choose, they can say a child is attending secondary education, the payee cannot contact the institution to verify attendance as they will not give out that info regardless if the person is your child or not.
The recipient can dictate whatever they so choose, and if the payee does not agree, and does not pay, the recipient can pick up the phone and the system will garnish income from the payee, the payee has no say, it's a one sided circus that benefits the recipient with no accountability from the recipient as to where the support funds are going.
The system leaves no justice to the payee, the recipient knows this, and will take you for every penny they can, how much is actually going towards the children ? Well we don't know because there is no accountability from the recipient.

With respect to paying for lawyers, I would say this, I payed for the initial agreement which was not all that bad, once I had that agreement in my hands, I never spent one penny on any lawyer fees ever again.
I did everything on my own from there on, and to my surprise, the info that I have gathered was far more than any lawyer would find for me, it is my opinion that family lawyers know the basis of separation and it becomes a money grab for the lawyers that leads into a circus of back and forth confrontations that mostly leads to one thing, money into their pockets.
There are ways to deal with this without the high cost of lawyer fees.
One just simply could call your local family court, and they will direct you in how to go about this - I know this works as it has worked for me.

This whole issue of and ordeal of dealing with and ex partner who lies to benefit from receiving more and more money can be a killer on the payee, but what I will say is with respect to child support if the children do not become disable - your child support will one day end, and if you are not on the hook for spousal support, you will be finish with your ex, and when that day does arrive, you can look back at what lies your partner said to greed every penny from you and say to yourself - that is the last penny they will get from you.

Loggie, I only said to go after the ex, because if they knew that it wasn't a windfall for them, and that it had implications on the other supports that they had received, they may not force the issue. But as it is, if it continues to be free money for ex wives, these women will use the courts to screw over their exes, and the men have no legal protection from it.

Even though I haven't gone through it, I saw how screwed up the court system is, when my brother was divorced. His ex wife moved out, leaving him with a 4 year old child, and the mortgage and car payment. It almost cost him his career, because he couldn't go to sea. As it was, he had to sell his car, and the house was repossessed. The courts said that it was not considered child abandonment, because she left him with his father. But if a man moves out, and stopped all financial support to the family, it would be abandonment. So after living as a single woman for a year, she decided she wanted custody, and the courts gave it to her. She had a friend who was a lawyer, and did all her work for free, so she buried my brother in legal debt, to the point where he had to sign away his parental rights, or risk losing everything. She then moved to Newfoundland, and my brother was lucky to see his son once a year, and only if he paid for the plane ticket. It took him several years to dig himself out that hole, and is only now financially stable, after 20 years since she first moved out.

Here is the scoop. When we went to court, the courts in Alberta went in favor of the Vet. So his ex could not get any of the SISIP settlement. This was the basis of the argument of my defending myself in court. And the Alberta case set a precidence.
During the long protactred battle a case in Nova Scotia was settled in favor of the EX. The judge in my case took the position of the Nova Scotia case and I lost hands down.

Therefore if your ex is in Ontario or Nova Scotia you are f'd! If your ex is in Alberta you are saved!

What happened to me was that we recieved the SISIP settlement and my EX wanted her cut immediately. AS you know once we recieved the settlement CPPD, CF Pension, and Manulife all had to change the amount of money given to us every month. So our finances were in major flux.

I did not know exactly how I was to be affected so I asked her to wait until things were worked out. She did not care and wanted the money NOW. My lawyer offered her a settlement amount and my EX refused and took us to court. Then things went south big time.

My ex then proceeded to tell the judge that the last court settlement was not enough, that I was not paying the right amount of child support, that her and the kids were lacking.....blah blah blah.

I have for the last five years retained my lawyer to send my EX a detailed letter stating exactly how much I made for the sole purpose of showing her I was not screwing her on Child Support. So every year she had difinitive proof of how much I made and using the Federal Child Support tables I provided her with the correct amount.

So not only was I paying her the correct amount I provided her proof of my income. She still did not beleive me. In fact she stated that I was underemployed, that PTSD did not exist, that I was using the system.....She wanted me to find a job so I could pay her more in child support.

Anyway she is a very skilled manipulator, narcassistic in my mind, and is a MCpl. She won and now I pay.

She now gets $2500 a month from me in Child Support and SISIP settlement. $500 a month from CPPD childrens amount, child tax credit and is making MCpl pay. She still complains she does not have enough to contribute to costs of access. I have been paying 100% of access since the divorce, of which she always changes the dates and flights at my cost. she also had me change the flights so the kids flew out of Ottawa which cost me an extra $400 bucks. I found out later she had me change this because she got a reduced flight deal from Ottawa so she could fly out and see her boyfriend when the kids were with me.

BEWARE the NARCASSISTIC EX!

Huge eye opener for me about this topic. Had no idea of the implications and flawed system that is in play here.

I am in the exact same situation as Redfisher and believe me when I say it SUCKS!
I have argued with my MP et al about allowing those of us who have to pay child support to be able to deduct it just like spousal support. Do NOT touch the ex's that way we don't piss them off but give us, the payer, the tax relief.
The other thing that you have to watch out for is our claw back payments were taxed and the ex, at least mine, is only looking at the net and not wanting to have to contribute her portion of the tax I paid.

Cuda, the only amount that should be included as income for 2013, should be the interest earned from the lawsuit. And IMO, this shouldn't be a lottery win for these ex wives. They should also have to claim this money, so that it creates an overpayment for such things such as the UCCB and GST rebate, for every year that they get money for. The situation that Redfisher finds himself in, where he is actually out of pocket by an additional $7000, because of the lawsuit, while his ex walks away with $33000, should never happen. Then they wonder why so many men, become so desperate, that they resort to violence against their exes. It's because of BS like this.

Holy sweet dying fuck! That is insane Redfisher!. Unfortunately it doesn't surprise me much. I was only given sisip for 2 years after release. Still happily married at time of release, and the divorce order is specific about no more owing her anything after the divorce for any reason whatsoever. I would think my situation should be more of a decision on whether or not the sisip settlement money is to be included as income for 2013 tax year. Courts usually use a 3 year income average to establish the number they can impute as a monthly income, and thusly, child support payments to be made. In other words, will the court consider this income from 2004-2005....or from 2013? Has there been any new developments wrt VAC pensions being used as income for CS? Mine always has been here in NS....jst curious to see if the trend has been changing elsewhere in light of the Sisip case and how the feds defined the disability pension during litigation.

Beware of Narcissistic Exes who will do anything to anyone including the kids to get what they feel entitled to. Lying and manipulating the court under oath is not a barrier to what she will do. So....

Well this is what happened to me. The SISIP lump sum was calculted as income and backdated for the years given to me. So, the Kingston court judge went back and recalculated child support for those years.
The short of the matter is this, I was paid approx net $40000 and I owe my ex $33000 in back child support. Plus I have to pay my Lawyer an extra $14000 on top of the $10000 I already paid her.

Long lesson short, My Ex lies to everyone but when in Family court she lies like an expert!

I paid child support in Ontario in the early 90's. Sisip is income and was deducted monthly for support payments. I had no retro active money, just a small monthly sisip income. I believe the courts will look at the ability to pay in the future, based on income, and proceed accordingly. I opened a trust fund, registered, for my children, and the courts look favourably on that. The desire to do something good in the best interest of the child/children, speaks volumes in the courts. Good luck.
Sap

If it is brought before the courts, the courts will look at the agreement rather verbal - or Legal.

As you know child support is based on a percentage of income earned, that said they (could) go back to when you first started paying child support and increase the amount based on that date, and the date your retro goes back to inline it with the date of which your retro goes back to.

You could argue that the initial amount of support agreed between both was satisfactory at the time and the retro was awarding after the agreement was made.

It's a matter of how far the ex wants to take it - and what the courts decide.

Hi guys. I am at wits end here. The long and short of this is that ex is trying to have my sisip settlement included as income for child support since it shows up (or is added into) Line 150 on the tax return. This settlement was backdated to 2004-05 when I released on 3B. I sunk it all onto the mortgage. Can she sink her teeth into this? I know I cant be the only person in this situation?