EQUALIZATION QUESTION HELP

[forumlaw]

Hi
Canada
I am currently going thru a separation and we are in the equalization process. He makes much more than I do and has assets in this equalization I am ending up owing him money because he is claiming deductions on our first marital home. I am sooo confused and feel that i am being scammed.
Here are the deductions:
vested Military Pension that was cashed in during the marriage to purchase our family vehicle mainly for me his wife.

Another deduction is 8,000 that he claims he had sitting in his savings account before he married me after we married we purchased items for our house and our upcoming child.

20,0000 on a deposit of our first marital home that came from his account prior to marriage

Can these all be legitimate deductions?? He does have receipts for them but does that make it legal to use.
They were all put towards the marital home or into the marriage. Also he is on title of our marital home and on the mortage who's half does this go on his or mine? My lawyer placed it on mine and on another equalization she placed it on both of our sides. I plan on purchasing the home.
Please help before I seek another opinion which would completly drain me financially and emotionally.
Thanks for your time.

Your lawyer needs to sit down with you and review the entire plan in detail. You cannot be overriding those actions with input from folks that have no idea what is on your sheet. In this case I would really recommend you work closely with the lawyer. If the lawyer has not done this all before then they need to bring on another finish up your sheets.

That military pension issue e.g. is a loser--he normally cannot do that. The court will see that too however.

[forumlaw]

My lawyer is telling me that his deductions are legitimate. He has provided the evidence of them. I am sooo confused how can he get this money back if it was spent in the marriage??? Then if this is so most of the stuff we purchased was household items why is he entitled to half of this as well then?

Should I be seeking a second opinion ? We have yet another case conference next weeek and do not want to go because nothing gets resolved. All I want to know is if their is a first marital home and then he sells that one and we get another in the family law act on marital propperty here in Canada the loophole states that he is entitled to these deductions, he knew exactly what he was doing and now I am in the hole what do I do ? Just go with my lawyers advice and take their word or take it to the judge who might just look at him and say good thinking.. I do have a son with him and want to remain in the home to keep my son consisitant. He makes a very good income has assets and has completely walked out of this with NO lossess if at all gains. I am in the hole why doesn't the judge look at this and just grant me the home with no buyout? How does the court work with this?
Thanks for your help.

What a strange law. It pretty much infers that people can make the decision to get married and combine living expenses, but if the marriage should not work out, they're entitled to their money back? Judge Judy would have a field day with this ridiculous conception.

I would definitely speak with another attorney. This man spent money on his marriage and just because it didn't work out, he gets to be made MORE than WHOLE again? I don't think so. Consult a more competent attorney. People know going in that money will be spent. Getting one's money back, especially considering the depreciation laws, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why is he entitled to $20,000 when that amount has depreciated over time?

This is why I say marriage begins in a church, it should end in a church. Otherwise, all marriages should be performed in court, by a judge. People need to be well aware of what they are getting into the the marriage/divorce laws in their country/state before entering into such s crazy contract.

[forumlaw]

I agree totally, he basically gets a refund on the marriage and puts me in the hole. I have a court hearing next week and if nothing gets resolved then it goes to trial should I seek another opinion and how would this look upon me in court?? My lawyer is a family law lawyer and is agreeing to these ridiculous deductions I forgot about the depreciation thanks.

I agree--get a second opinion. Perhaps hook in with the lawyers on the home page of this site and see if they can also email you their thoughts.

Yes. Get another attorney. Your current attorney should be working for you. Not the opposition. Agreeing with everything the other side presents is a way bottom feeder types of attorneys make easy money. Fire this clown immediately and get a better attorney.

It will not affect you for the trial and who cares how it makes you look? This is YOUR fight, not anybody else's and you have to look out for your own best interest.

Yes, bring up depreciation and then start going over all of your financial contributions to the marriage and bring all of them up. Right down to who bought the toilet paper. If he can play this ridiculous game and be taken seriously, then you can too.

I would insist on a trial, as your attorney is doing nothing for you. It has no bearing in court how many attorneys you hire or fire. Judges realize that some lawyers are incompetent. This is why most appeals are successful. Sloppy representation.

[forumlaw]

I have a continuation case conference next week and then it goes to trial if nothing is settled. I have spoken to another attorney and she said that Yes if their are 2 marital homes and the first is now not then whatever he brougt into it he gets back. iF proceeds from his own home before marriage were brought over to the 1st marital home then he gets that back. We no longer live in that home we live in another that is the LOOP its right in the canadian divorce act under property, to cover those with the assets, i think and feel i am getting burned, will a judge accept his deductions he has the evidence I asked for it, and he did get it. I came into the marriage with nothing but my vehicle. He is the one with the really high income and has assets I cannot touch. How does this idiot get out of a marriage better than what he came in with? Its that loophole my lawyer is saying had we remianed in the first marital home he would have gotten nothing back. This ass knew exactly what he was doing and I feel my lawyer should be using that tactic, but a judge can say to him good thinking.. What do I do???

It should never be that a person gets out of something with MORE than what they came in with. The whole point of court is to be made whole again. Not more than whole. Get a different attorney.

Canadian laws in this regard are very outdated.