We respond to BM's pack of lies

[snowrose]

BM handed DH her response papers for our child support case just before court starts, when she was supposed to give them by Tues at the latest.  So the judge asks if DH will accept the papers since they're late.  DH says he accepts the papers but not the information in them.  Judge says okay, he just cancelled a settlement conference for Nov 5th so we can have that date - and DH can file his objections to the contents then on a new Settlement Conference form.  So, I'm already done with that and here's what our response is:

Response:

Regarding the change in the original order for access, the custodial Respondent, DH, has requested that he be given a valid phone number and address for the non-custodial applicant at all times.  This request is made for two reasons.  1) Due to the Applicant's history of moving residence every 6 to 11 months.  And 2) Because the Applicant has attempted to hide her whereabouts from the Respondent previously, at the insistence of her partner BM's BF.  In the last two moves, even the Applicant's adult sons have not been informed of the Applicant's address.  It is not in the best interests of the child for the custodial Respondent, DH, to not know where the child is being taken.  Among other things, the non-custodial Applicant does not have legal jurisdiction over the child and cannot consent to treatment of the child should a medical problem arise.  The Respondent, DH, has full care and control of the child, with the Applicant, BM, only being allowed information.

Regarding BM's Financial Statement, BM states she has been unemployed since 2004.  However, per BM's multiple statements to me as well as statements from my daughter as to her mother's work schedule, at the time of filing BM had worked a total of 20 uninterrupted months in 2 couples jobs with her partner, BM's BF.  The situation with them has changed, however. 

In August or September of this year BM received a settlement in a 4-year-long injury lawsuit.  At that time, she and her partner bought a condominium [COLOR=#NaNNaNNaN](Yes, folks, they were able to buy their new place and put down a hefty downpayment, apparently![/COLOR]), bought a truck and numerous other expensive items - [COLOR=#NaNNaNNaN]and then they both quit their jobs.  [/COLOR]
When asked, BM has simply stated that she's spent almost all of her settlement and that she is on Disability.  If Disability has been informed of the lawsuit settlement, they would still allow BM to have a settlement of up to $100,000 and allow her to collect a pension.  Collecting Disability need not equal being destitute. 

Beyond that, BM's Disability is not the only income that she and her partner have received during 2009.  Both were, to my knowledge, employed by Local Condominiums up until September 2009 - but BM notes income from only Sept 2009 to Oct 2009 - only one month - completely ignoring income from the rest of the year.  She only lists income from after she and her partner quit their jobs in September 2009.

There are other inconsistencies in BM's paperwork.  She lists now owning a condominium at 385 XXX in Our Town, supposedly worth $80,000.  A scan of housing listings for her area show a condo for sale at 365 XXX for $199,900; and again at 365 XXX another condo recently sold for $181,900.  Being only one unit away, these condos would have comparable pricing to BM's condo.

BM states she owns a 1998 Buick Century and a 2001 Dodge Dakota Sport, but she states the value of both vehicles as $800.  However, when she purchased the Buick Century in the spring of 2009, at that time she stated to me that car alone had cost her $800.  There is no listing for the value of 2001 Dodge Dakota Sport in her paperwork.  A scan of current sales listings shows that a Dodge Dakota Sport may sell at anywhere from $3,500 to $10,900.

BM states she has only one bank account with approx $800 in it.  However, on the next page she lists an overdraft at an OtherBank otherwise not listed in the paperwork.

BM lists debts for two leased vehicles - but she lists no monthly payments for these debts.  And since she owns a car and a truck outright and has no other vehicles in her possession, why would she have debts for two leased vehicles?

Request for Document Disclosure:

As there appears to be significant hidden income and assets, I am requesting an order for document disclosure. 

I would like copies of the following paperwork:

- I request statements from the last 6 months for any and ALL bank accounts, savings accounts, and other investments tied to BM's SS number: X.  This is to include the account where the original lawsuit settlement funds were placed.

- I request the full printed paperwork of BM's income tax for 2008.  In previous dealings I have been told before by lawyers that a Direction to Canada Revenue Agency form can easily be ignored by the agency and I will not waste the court's time waiting to see if the information will or will not be sent.  BM can request a copy from the company that filed for her or directly from Canada Revenue herself, to ensure the court receives the information.

- I request copies of all sales paperwork for the condominium BM has purchased, showing the purchase price, the down payment made, and the mortgage amount.

- I request a copy of the agreement between BM/BM's BF and Local Condominiums showing the salary they made as a couple and the value of the apartment they received in lieu of payment.  (It is stated this way as this was a couple's position and it is unknown how the agreement would list the names.)

- I request a copy of BM/BM's BF's last 6 months worth of paystubs.  (It is stated in this way as this position was a couple's position and it is unknown how the paystub would list the names.)

- I request a statement or letter directly from Disability showing the amount that BM receives or has received from them each month for the last year.

- I request a letter from Disability stating whether BM is still eligible to collect Disability, given her recent injury lawsuit settlement.  (That means she'll have to admit to Disability that she got a settlement. )

Our offer to settle:

It appears that given BM's recent lawsuit settlement she will no longer make any effort to be employed.  (Maybe I should drop that line, as it might just anger BM and evoke a negative reaction.)  Therefore, BM is to agree to allow the court to impute an annual income to her of $35,600 per year, until SD9 reaches 18 years of age.   

The value of the child support will vary as the Guideline tables are updated but will remain at the income level of $35,600 per year.

This value is reached by adding a 40 hour work week at minimum wage, plus half the monthly value of the free use of the apartments BM received in lieu of income in her two previous jobs at $500 per month, plus the $800 per month Disability pension that BM claims. 

At current table amounts this would yield a child support payment of $330 per month.

[ocean]

Since the next date is a settlement conference and not a trial, I guess you can ask for those items at the bottom so a real number can be addressed.

Did BM put down the whole mortgage amount? (since she lives with someone that should be split as well as utilities...)

Some of the top stuff maybe you should wait on until trial...otherwise you will be giving BM all that you know. Some of it you cant prove and that will be an issue. Can you get the condo place to state she used to be an employee...even if they say it to you (then supenea them that day to testify for how long she worked for them, showing the W2 they gave her)

What disability is she on? Does she have paystubs for the amount? If it is federal, the kids can get money directly for SSDI.
I dont know how much the settlement money she got will play except to prove that she is not on welfare and poor. It is not a divorce so that money is not up for grabs just to say she has money to pay for child support.

If you have the money pay someone (a PI or even a friend) to follow her..and find out where "home" is...

[snowrose]

The Settlement Conference brief asks for all pertinent facts that need to be considered in the case, that's why all that information is in there.

The brief also asks for any document disclosure that needs to be done, which is why the request for those documents is in there.

What we're trying to do is pressure her to accept our settlement offer.  We know that she can't stand up under scrutiny in a trial - and so does she.

[CuriousMom]

I agree with Ocean - I don't think I'd disclose some things in case you need to go to trial.  I'm in the same boat, we saved a lot of the detailed information for this reason.  Our conference was only scheduled for an hour and we didn't have time to even dig into details.

I would make your facts as a high-level statement and remove the specific details.