I agree with using XXXX of the line of credit to pay off part of my credit card. I also agree to not use the line of credit without your prior agreement.
The line of credit is secured against the equity in our home.
I need more time to make any other financial decision regarding this. What timeframe were you hoping for a decision on this?
Flowmom
How about simply this and leave the emotions out. This is what you can commit to today. Please send more info. That's your reply.
If he can't get your name off without your permission, don't give him your permission this week. And don't tell him you're getting financial advice or who you're making an appt with to get it from. It's not his business anymore.
You can't hurry up the emotional absorption. It hits and then goes away. Then it comes back. Then it goes away. It's the mind's way of protecting you from info. you are not prepared to fully absorb.
Get legal advice.
Get some kind of accountability loop on the work procrastination from a friend, family member, or life coach.
I think your email is ok...not horrible, not great. I think the less expanation you give him upfront, the better. Ex:
Quote:
Hi Flowdad,
I agree with using XXXX of the line of credit to pay off part of my credit card. I also agree to not use the line of credit without your prior agreement.
The line of credit is secured against the equity in our home.
I am hesitant about giving up my access to a low interest rate line of credit and I would want financial advice before doing that. If it's important to you to change the line of credit access, within what time frame do you need an answer from me after I seek financial advice?This is something that I'd prefer to do in the medium term rather than the short term. In the short term I want to focus on moving forward with my career and life, helping S6 with his issues, and helping both children to cope with the emotional impact of this transition.
Try to share info on a "share only when asked" basis...
Last edited by newmama; 02/25/1009:53 PM.
me,34 exH,34 S,16 months S:3/31/09-left for OW started DBing 10/09 d final: sometime 10/10 current: http://www.divorcebusting.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2022856&page=1 met in 2004
I agree that you should skip anything about the children (which will just be taken as you laying a guilt-trip), your own areas of focus (stop telling him everything right now while he's not your H) and your plans to get legal advice.
My experience of an MLC man was that he was obsessed with what everybody else had and was earning (and blamed himself for failing) and saw his kids and W as a liability which had partly put him in that position. He was ADAMANT he'd try to hide money before he gave us anything. Post-MLC ... he's furious with anyone who rips off his family in that way. In other words, consult with a L, know your rights, but don't tip him off to that yet.
Cyrena said: My experience of an MLC man was that he was obsessed with what everybody else had and was earning (and blamed himself for failing) and saw his kids and W as a liability which had partly put him in that position. He was ADAMANT he'd try to hide money before he gave us anything. Post-MLC ... he's furious with anyone who rips off his family in that way. In other words, consult with a L, know your rights, but don't tip him off to that yet.
This seems a very wise warning about the grave flip-flopping.
I am very glad you plan to see an attny. You live in BC, correct? If that is correct your H may be way off base with his plan of not having to pay child support if the custody is split 50/50.
When determining support for "split custody" (this was defined as more than 40% of the time so the 50/50 split would fall under these parameters) the amount of child support payable is the difference between what each parent would have to pay the other for the support of the child(ren) while in their care.
I will use the numbers in the table provided by the court:
If your H (PERSON A) would owe you 1000.00 per child for support while the child(ren) are in your care and you (Person B) would owe your H 250.00 per child(ren) while the children are in his care the difference would be 750.00 and HE would be responsible for that sum to you and you would pay nothing to him. It is essentially the amount Person A pays - minus Person B's obligation = amount Person A pays.
In 2005 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on a case called Contino vs. Leonelli-Contino and that case changed everything in the courts. The ruling basically said the Guidelines table amounts must be respected as a whole and if the payer (your H) is to ask for a reduction from the table amounts the burden of proof falls on him if he meets the 40% shared custody time. There was also a case called Van Gool vs. Van Gool in 1998 where undue hardship was defined and it is not easy to claim (undue hardship or the proof of is required to ask for the reduction).
Also, your son's special needs may be a consideration when determining the amount and length of support as he may not be able to support himself once he becomes an adult.
And, child support is not a supplement for spousal support and that is a whole different table and one cannot determine the other.
There was page after page of particulars for child support so don't do anything until you talk to an attny. 50/50 (or more than 40%) does not necessarily give your H a free pass not to pay support.
The two cases I cited above were on every piece of information I read so clearly the court in Canada has decided no BS when it comes to people trying to find loopholes when it comes to children and their financial support!
