Court File and Parties
Court File No.: FS-17-00318-00 Date: 2023-06-19
Superior Court of Justice – Ontario
B E T W E E N:
RANA MUHAMMAD FAROOQ, Applicant - and - FAIZA FAROOQ, Respondent
Counsel: Amal Nayyar, for the Applicant Supriya Joshi, for the Respondent
Heard: April 18, 2023
Reasons for Judgment
Fowler Byrne J.
[1] This matter was originally scheduled to be heard as an uncontested trial on April 5, 2023. The pleadings of the Respondent Mother had previously been struck due to non-compliance with court orders. To the parties’ credit, on that day they agreed to reinstate the Mother’s pleadings and then settled the issues of equalization, any financial adjustments, outstanding costs orders, spousal support, and the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home, on a final basis.
[2] As a result of this settlement, the remaining issues to be tried were retroactive and ongoing child support and section 7 expenses, including the parties’ contribution to the children’s RESPs. At the heart of these issues is each party’s claim that income should be imputed to the other. Both also seek their costs for the entire application.
[3] The parties agreed to proceed in a hybrid manner, wherein evidence in chief was presented in affidavit form and the parties were cross-examined in court under strict time limits. The parties were the only witnesses.
I. Background
[4] The Applicant Father and the Respondent Mother were married on October 31, 2004, and separated on February 26, 2017. There are three children of the marriage – K.F. who is now 16 years old, N.F., who is now 14 years old, and M.R., who will soon be turning 12 years.
[5] The following facts are admitted by the parties, as set out in a Statement of Agreed Facts.
[6] From the date of separation, namely February 26, 2017, until August 10, 2019, the children resided primarily with the Mother. The Father never paid any child support to the Mother during this time. From August 10, 2019 to present, the children have resided primarily with the Father. The Mother did not pay any child support to the Father until June 2021, at which time she started paying approximately $500 per month. From the date of separation, namely February 26, 2017, until April 2021, the Mother paid the sum of $365 each month towards the children’s RESPs. The Father has made no contributions to the RESP after separation. Finally, the parties are divorced and the Father has remarried in Pakistan. He has one additional child from his new marriage and he is in the process of sponsoring them to come to Canada.
II. Imputation of Income
[7] Each party has provided their incomes since before separation until 2022, in the case of the Mother, and until 2021, in the case of the Father.
[8] The Mother has been employed at Axium Plastics Inc. since separation. She claims that she fell in September 2021 and has been unable to work since then. It does not appear that she has sought any sort of social assistance; rather, it appears she has been relying on her brother to support her.
[9] In the case of the Father, his earnings were from his taxi and/or Uber business up until the pandemic. His total income is comprised of his gross revenue less his expenses. He has not produced any receipts to support those expenses, nor were they demanded of him by the Mother. In 2020 and 2021, the Father claims he only earned what he received as CERB benefits. He anticipates earning the same as a driver now as he did prior to the pandemic.
[10] According to the evidence provided, the Father’s declared income is as follows:
a) In 2016, the Father grossed $41,336 in sales, less $31,732 in expenses, for a net income of $9,604; b) In 2017, the Father grossed $39,098 in sales, less $27,322 in expenses, for a net income of $11,776; c) In 2018, the Father grossed $41,651 in sales, less 29,968 in expenses, for a net income of $11,683; d) In 2019, the Father declared $8,922 in income; no Statement of Business or Professional Activities was provided for this year; e) In 2020, the Father earned $25,081, in CERB benefits; f) In 2021, the Father earned $25,707 in CERB benefits; and g) No income information was provided for 2022.
[11] According to the evidence provided, the Mother’s declared income is as follows:
a) In 2016, the Mother declared $7,297 in employment income; b) In 2017, the Mother declared employment income of $30,027; c) In 2018, the Mother declared employment income of $38,237; d) In 2019, the Mother declared employment income of $38,168; e) In 2020, the Mother declared employment income of $39,152; f) In 2021, the Mother declared employment income of $24,080; g) In 2022, the Mother’s tax return shows that she declared no income at all; in her affidavit, she states that she earned $2,100, but in fact this is the total of her federal non-refundable tax credits; in her closing submissions she submits her income should be $10,000, based on her 2022 T4. A careful review of the evidentiary record shows no such T4 was submitted.
[12] Each party asks that this court impute income to the other party. Accordingly, it is necessary to decide if income should be imputed to either party, and then the appropriate arrears and ongoing support can be determined.
A. Law
[13] Each party has the onus at trial to establish an evidentiary foundation for the imputation of income requested for the other party: Berta v. Berta, 2015 ONCA 918, at para. 63.
[14] Section 19 of the Federal Child Support Guidelines sets out the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to impute income to a party. The following subparagraphs are relevant in this case:
19 (1) The court may impute such amount of income to a spouse as it considers appropriate in the circumstances, which circumstances include the following:
(a) the spouse is intentionally under-employed or unemployed, other than where the under-employment or unemployment is required by the needs of a child of the marriage or any child under the age of majority or by the reasonable educational or health needs of the spouse;
(f) the spouse has failed to provide income information when under a legal obligation to do so;
(g) the spouse unreasonably deducts expenses from income;
19(2) For the purpose of paragraph (1)(g), the reasonableness of an expense deduction is not solely governed by whether the deduction is permitted under the Income Tax Act.
[15] The leading case in this area is Drygala v. Pauli, 61 O.R. (3d) 711 (C.A.), which was adopted again in Homsi v. Zaya, 2009 ONCA 322. In Drygala at para. 28, the court states:
Read in context and given its ordinary meaning, "intentionally" means a voluntary act. The parent required to pay is intentionally under-employed if that parent chooses to earn less than he or she is capable of earning. That parent is intentionally unemployed when he or she chooses not to work when capable of earning an income. The word "intentionally" makes it clear that the section does not apply to situations in which, through no fault or act of their own, spouses are laid off, terminated or given reduced hours of work.
[16] The court further states that imputing income is a method by which the court gives effect to the joint and ongoing obligation of parents to support their child. “In order to meet this legal obligation, a parent must earn what he or she is capable of earning”: Drygala, at para. 32.
[17] If the court does determine that someone is intentionally unemployed or underemployed, the court must then determine if it is required by virtue of their reasonable educational needs. If not, then I must determine what income is appropriate: Drygala, at para. 23.
[18] If I determine that income should be imputed, I cannot arbitrarily pick an amount. There must be a rational basis underlying the selection of any amount, and this exercise of my discretion must be grounded in the evidence. I must also consider what is reasonable in the circumstances. The factors to be considered are age, education, experience, skills and health of the parent, the availability of job opportunities, the number of hours that could be worked in light of the parent's overall obligations including educational demands and the hourly rate that the parent could reasonably be expected to obtain: Drygala, at para. 44-45.
B. Analysis – Father’s Income
[19] I find that the Father is intentionally underemployed.
[20] By his own admission, the Father only works 3 to 4 hours per day. He testified that he likes to make himself available to ensure the children are fed properly and to be available should the school call. It should be noted that when the Father commenced primary care of the children, they were 12, 10, and 8 years old. They are now 16, 14 and almost 12 years old. Such constant attention is not necessary when otherwise faced with living in such dire financial circumstances. In addition, I am not sure how he would not be available to contact the school, even while working, given that he is, in essence, self-employed.
[21] The Father also claims in his affidavit that his ability to work was negatively impacted in 2016 when he learned of the Mother’s extra-marital affair. He states he became “mentally disturbed, sick with high blood pressure, heart palpitations, anxiety and panic attacks.” He states it impacted his ability to earn income. In support of this diagnosis, the Father relies on hospital notes and medication that shows that from at least November 10, 2016, he has experienced panic attacks, heart palpitations and takes medication for depression or anxiety. He says he intends to continue as a taxi or Uber driver until he retires because it allows him to stop driving whenever he feels he is unable to.
[22] While I accept that the Father is taking these medications, I have no medical evidence that he is unable to work, or that he is unable to work at a job that requires full-time hours. He appears to be managing his condition with medication. Also, the Father has limited himself to an occupation that may be affected by panic attacks. He admittedly has not looked for any other job that may not be affected by a panic attack, such as in an office, a store, a restaurant or a factory. In addition, I can assume that his depression resulting from his separation has been ameliorated by his remarriage.
[23] I suspect a significant factor in the Father’s decision to stay in an occupation in which he dictates his hours is somewhat related to the fact that he spends at least four weeks or more each year in Pakistan where his new wife and child reside. I suspect a traditional employer would not be in favour of such lengthy absences. While I appreciate that the Father feels he needs to spend time with his new family, it cannot be at the expense of properly supporting all his children, both those with the Mother and with his new wife.
[24] In determining an appropriate amount, I have considered that working only 3 to 4 hours per day, the Father earns gross income of approximately $38,000 to $40,000. If he increases his hours by an extra 3 per day, that would increase his gross yearly income to approximately $75,000. His rental and telephone expenses would not increase, which average about $20,000 and $580 respectively, but I would double his vehicle expenses, such as gas and repairs, which average about $7,500. Accordingly, I impute to him income of $40,000, but will grant him 6 months from the date of separation to get up to this amount of work each day. I note that this is without any analysis of his expenses, which the Mother did not undertake.
C. Analysis – Mother’s Income
[25] Until the Mother stopped working in September 2021, she was employed full-time. As a result, it could not be said that she was underemployed or unemployed. It is unreasonable to assume the Mother would work more than one full-time job.
[26] The Father challenges the Mother’s income since September 2021 on a number of bases. First, he believes she must have another source of income given that she is living with her brother, has minimal expenses, and has been able to purchase a new home. He maintains she must have more income or else she would not be able to qualify for a mortgage. Secondly, he is suspicious that the Mother fell and became unable to work soon after she was ordered to start paying child support.
[27] Finally, the Father makes the unique argument in his closing submissions that the Mother decided to forego child support when the children lived primarily with her due to the potential of being a positive influence for the children. He also argues that it would be unfair to have to pay child support for these prior years when he is the sole source of support for the children now. Finally, he states that it was unfair that she rented out the matrimonial home and kept the proceeds and the family car. He argues that she may keep what she retained in lieu of him having to pay child support for the period that the children lived with her.
[28] I will start with the Father’s last arguments and reject them outright. Child support is the right of the child. It is not for the parents to forego it or negotiate it away: Richardson v. Richardson, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 857. With respect to the rental income she received, the Mother was also solely responsible for paying the mortgage, taxes, and upkeep of the home when it was rented. The Father has not accounted for that. Finally, the parties have already settled all property issues. If he wanted credit for any potential benefit the wife received during this period, it should have been negotiated at this time as a post-separation adjustment.
[29] I concede that the Mother has not provided all financial disclosure that was ordered, and most of it was late. In particular, she has not provided her application which entitled her to a mortgage for approximately $440,000, and would disclose her income. I could draw an adverse inference against the Mother for this failure. Before I do so, I must look at the entirety of the evidence that I do have and determine if any such inference should be made.
[30] The evidence shows that the Mother purchased a pre-construction home in Welland, Ontario, in January 2020. At that time, she was working full-time. Also, by that time, she had received the sum of $150,000 from the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home. Accordingly, she used $50,000 of those proceeds to make the initial deposit on the Welland home.
[31] When it came time to close the purchase in December 2022, the Mother’s circumstances had changed. She had not been working since September 2021. She claims that this was due to a slip and fall, which is not entirely accurate. The medical notes, as described below, confirm she has not worked since September 2021, but it was related to falls associated with vertigo, and overall depression. The slip and fall did not take place until January 2022.
[32] Given that it was unlikely that she would qualify for a mortgage, she claims she sought the assistance of her brother. He deposited large sums of money into her account to assist her in qualifying for a mortgage. Between October and December 2022, the Mother swears that he deposited the sum of $4,375 on four occasions, and once the sum of $8,750, over a period of two months. He also provided a further sum of $110,000 on December 14, 2022, resulting in a balance in her account of approximately $228,000.
[33] The Mother’s evidence is somewhat conflicting. She claims she paid the sum of $98,757.68 for closing. In her affidavit sworn April 14, 2023, she states that this final payment was what was left from the proceeds of sale of the matrimonial home. On the other hand, she also swears that this money came from her brother. Perhaps her brother was holding onto her funds. It is not clear. I am also concerned that the Mother’s affidavits do not indicate that they were translated for her, yet she required a translator at the trial. This is either reflective of poor credibility on the part of the Mother or poor drafting on the part of the solicitor, or a combination of both; I cannot be sure. Therefore, it is difficult for me to ascertain if the affidavit evidence is reliable.
[34] In the end though, with what reliable evidence I do have, I must determine whether I can make a determination of the Mother’s true income, or if I can draw an adverse inference against her in light of the failure to provide some financial disclosure, as well as the contradictory nature of her affidavit evidence.
[35] The Mother claims that she has not worked since September 2021. The last clinical note and record she produced was from March 7, 2023. It shows that she continues to be followed for back pain. There is nothing in this note about her inability to work. She continues to take medication for pain, osteoarthritis and was prescribed medication for depression. The previous note from her doctor, dated December 5, 2022, also notes ongoing depression and musculoskeletal pain, but does not mention her inability to work. The last mention by the family doctor in his clinical notes of her inability to work was on September 19, 2022, where it states that the Mother reports that she is unable to work due to multiple health conditions, and that she wants to apply for disability. The doctor advised her to bring in the necessary forms. No medical disability forms were produced. I have no evidence of whether the Mother applied for disability benefits and whether she was accepted.
[36] I have also reviewed a report from Dr. Muhanad Al-Husari, a pain specialist, to whom the Mother was referred. Dr. Al-Husari provided a report to the Mother’s family doctor in October 2022. In that report, he states that the Mother’s goals were to return to work and be able to do more around the house. The doctor made a number of recommendations to treat her chronic pain which included counselling for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, related to domestic violence.
[37] From this evidence, I conclude that the Mother is not presently working. If she received other funds, they were from outside sources, but not from employment. The Mother has provided evidence of receiving a total of $136,250 from her brother, of which she has repaid the sum of $110,000. Her brother has also been advancing her the sum of $3,000 per month to help pay the mortgage until which time the Welland home is rented. Accordingly, at most, I can conclude that the Mother’s family has advanced her approximately $40,000 since October 2022. The Mother has stated that she intends to repay this amount. Her return of $110,000 to date supports this position. As a loan from her family, I do not find that this could be considered income for the purposes of child support. I have no evidence that would support an inference that she is secretly working elsewhere. The medical evidence states otherwise.
[38] Finally, I must address if the Mother is intentionally unemployed, or is her unemployment the result of her health.
[39] In support of her position that she cannot work, the Mother has produced her clinical notes and records from August 2021 to March 2023.
[40] In September 2021, the Mother reports that she is suffering from dizziness, tinnitus and depressions. She reported on September 17, 2021 that she fell on two occasions, once from bed and once in a bathtub, due to vertigo or dizziness. Then on January 19, 2022, she slipped and fell on the ice. She attended the emergency room at Trillium Heath Partners on that day as a result. She then continued to see her doctor on a regular basis for low and mid-back pain associated with the fall. She continues to be followed for pain, depression and vertigo.
[41] During this time, the Mother’s doctor wrote a number of notes excusing her from work due to “medical reasons”, which notes commenced on September 8, 2021 and continued to March 2022. In the last note, dated March 30, 2022, her doctor advises that she should be given modified duties, and if they were not available, that she should be off work until April 22, 2022. There are no further medical notes excusing her from work.
[42] That being said, she appears to continue her treatment for back pain. She was referred to physiotherapy in July 2022. Those notes indicate that she was not working since her fall due to mid and lower back pain. She started acupuncture treatment. As indicated above, the Mother was referred to a pain clinic in the fall of 2022 where she noted that her goal was to return to work.
[43] Accordingly, while it appears clear that the Mother has not worked since September 2021, I have no evidence to support why she is not currently working, why she does not have a graduated return to work programme in place with her employer, or why she is not receiving disability benefits. Despite her ongoing difficulties, the Mother has an obligation to support her children. Having been off work for close to two years, she should have at least applied and qualified for some type of short term disability through her employer or the government. Otherwise, I would require clear medical evidence that she is completely unable to work and that there is no assistance available to her.
[44] The Father has requested that I impute an annual income to the Mother in the sum of $80,000. Unfortunately, the Father has failed to provide an evidentiary foundation for this sum. The Father relies on an online calculator that shows that only a person who earns $80,000 could afford to buy the house she did. This is not evidence, but only speculation which is not grounded in the facts of this case.
[45] Unfortunately, the Mother also has provided insufficient evidence to support her present inability to work, even on a part-time basis. I also have no evidence of what efforts she has made to obtain some type of disability benefit or social assistance. Her failure to provide this evidence cannot result in her having no obligation to support her children. The last note I have from the doctor dated March 2022, recommends modified duties, at three days per week, for 3 – 4 hours per shift. This is slightly less than one-half of her usual rate. Accordingly, from March 22, 2022, or April 1, 2022, at least $20,000 should be imputed to the Mother. With the help of her pain clinic, her hours should have increased, or else the Mother should have obtained some type of disability or social assistance.
[46] After a period of modified duties, the Mother should either be back to work or should apply for some sort of disability benefits. In setting the appropriate amount of disability benefits, I note that most short-term disability plans pay about 60% to 75% of your wage but are generally non-taxable if paid by the employer. Assuming the Mother would earn $40,000 if she returned to work (her average over the last several years) she would earn anywhere between $24,000 to $30,000 per year, non-taxable, if receiving disability benefits.
[47] Accordingly, I am not imputing any income to the Mother from September 8, 2021 to March 30, 2022, in light of the medical evidence provided. Thereafter, I am imputing income to the Mother of $20,000 per year from March 2022 until the end of September 2022, being the equivalent of modified duties. In September, 2022, the medical notes then indicate that the Mother wanted to apply for disability. Accordingly, from October 2022, I will impute a disability level income to her of $27,000, a reasonable amount that she should be able to obtain from a short term disability plan. Assuming a tax free payment, this will be grossed up to $30,582, imposing a monthly obligation of $632 per month.
D. Arrears and Ongoing Child Support
[48] Now that the parties’ income have been ascertained, I must determine what amounts are owed by each. The Father owes child support from the date of separation, February 26, 2017, until August 10, 2019, which I will round to 29 months. As indicated, it is fair to give the Father a period of six months in which to ramp up his hours. So, for the first 6 months, I will use his declared income of $11,776 which does not require him to pay any child support.
[49] Thereafter, given that I have imputed income to the Father in the sum of $40,000, he owes $764 per month from September 1, 2017 until the end of November 2017, and thereafter, when the Guideline amounts changed, he owes $805 per month. Accordingly, the total child support arrears owed to the Mother is $18,392.
[50] As for the Mother, she will owe child support in accordance with her employment income from August 10, 2019 to September 8, 2021. In 2019, she earned $38,168, making her child support obligations $773 per month. In 2020, she earned $39,152, which made her child support obligations $790 per month. In 2020, the Father was in Pakistan for 2 months. While the Mother is not seeking child support for herself for this time, she seeks relief from her obligations for this period. This is not a reasonable request. While the Father is not providing day to day support for the children during this time, he is still maintaining their home and providing their food. The actual expense of supporting his children in Canada has not decreased in any way.
[51] In 2021, the Mother earned $24,080, but this was only until she stopped working in September 2021, or 8 months. If she had not stopped, she would have earned approximately, $36,120. Accordingly, her child support obligations up to September 2021 are $739 per month. Again, I would not relieve the Mother of her child support obligations when the Father was in Pakistan.
[52] Accordingly, from August 2019 to the end of August 2021, the Mother’s total child support obligation was $19,257.
[53] From September 1, 2021 until March 30, 2022, in light of the medical evidence provided, I am not inclined to impute any income to her. Nevertheless, from April 1, 2022 until September 30, 2022, I am imputing the annual income to her $20,000, which makes her monthly child support obligations $360. Thereafter, I am imputing a non-taxable income to her of $27,000, or grossed up to $30,582, which makes her monthly child support obligations $632 per month. Accordingly, from September 1, 2021 to March 30, 2023, her total arrears are $5,952.
[54] The Mother has provided evidence that she has been paying the sum of $500 per month from approximately July 1, 2021 up to and including March 1, 2023. I have reviewed the evidence provided and find that the total sum received, up to the end of March 30, 2023 is $10,000.
[55] Accordingly, I find that the Mother’s total arrears owing for child support, less what has been paid, as of March 30, 2023, is $15,209. Her ongoing obligations continue at $632 per month.
[56] Attached as Schedule “A” are the applicable calculations and a DivorceMate calculation showing the gross-up for current child support obligations.
III. Section 7 Expenses
[57] There are two section 7 expenses at issue. The Father seeks a contribution to childcare expenses, and the Mother seeks a contribution to the children’s Registered Educational Savings Plan (“RESP”).
A. Child Care Expenses
[58] The Father seeks the Mother’s proportionate contribution to his childcare costs while in India. He claimed that because the Mother would not watch the children, he hired his landlord to watch over the children for a period of six weeks when he travelled to Pakistan to spend time with his new wife and child. The Father claims the sum of $3,000. He has provided no evidence of that expense, nor has the landlord provided any evidence.
[59] Setting aside my observation that neither parent showed any responsibility towards these children at that time, I am not prepared to order that the Mother pay any amount. The Father has simply failed to prove this expense. There must be receipts or evidence from the landlord that these costs were incurred and the reason why they were incurred.
B. RESP Contributions
[60] Both parties are the joint registered owners of a RESP for the two eldest children. With respect to K.F., the parties agreed to pay $96.26 per month from December 15, 2008, to November 25, 2025. For N.F., the parties agreed to pay $157 per month from December 28, 2011, to December 31, 2029.
[61] The parties agree that the monthly required payment was paid from their joint account until the date of separation, and thereafter, it was paid solely by the Mother.
[62] Despite whom contributed to the joint account prior to separation, I agree with the Father’s submission that these funds came from a joint account, and thus should be attributed to them both. Accordingly, the Mother’s contributions should only be equalized after separation. The Mother agrees that following separation, she paid the total sum of $11,594 towards the RESP. It also appears that following separation, the Mother took a number of withdrawals from the joint account, which total $720.10, which is agreed should be deducted. Accordingly, the net amount to be divided by the parties is $10,874, making the Father’s required contribution the sum of $5,437.
[63] Going forward, given that the investments are jointly owned, they should be jointly contributed to and maintained. Accordingly, each party shall be responsible for one-half of the necessary monthly deposit each month. If they are in arrears, both parties should make up any shortfall equally.
[64] The Mother seeks an order that she be solely responsible for the RESP going forward. I see no reason to do so. If she wishes to start saving for the children’s education on her own, she can contribute separately to another RESP or other savings vehicle in her name alone, perhaps for the third child. In the meantime, the parties shall keep the current RESPs up to date. When the time comes for the children to use these investments, and if the parties both continue to contribute equally, the RESPs will first be used towards any post-secondary education expenses. Any shortfall after the RESPs are paid out in full shall be a section 7 expense for the parties to pay proportionate to their income.
IV. Conclusion
[65] For the foregoing reasons, I made the following final orders:
a) The Father’s child support arrears for the period of March 2017 to and including July 2019 are fixed at $18,392; b) The Mother’s child support arrears for the period of August 2019 to and including March 2023 are fixed at $15,209; c) The Father shall pay to the Mother the sum of $3,183 in complete satisfaction of both parties’ child support arrears up to and including March 30, 2023; d) The Mother shall pay child support to the Father for the children K.F., N.F. and M.R. in the amount of $632 per month, in accordance with the Tables under the Child Support Guidelines based on the Mother’s annual imputed income of $30,582, commencing April 1, 2023, continuing on the first day of each month that follows; e) The Father shall pay to the Mother the sum of $5,437 in order to equalize the parties’ contribution to the RESPs; f) Commencing immediately, each party shall contribute equally to the existing RESPs until which time their contractual obligation expires (for K.F., up to and including November 25, 2025, and for N.F. up to and including November 25, 2029); g) Other than the RESP contributions, based on the 2022 annual income of the Mother of $30,582, and the 2022 annual income of the Father of $40,000, the Mother shall pay 43% of the special or extraordinary expenses under section 7 and the Father shall pay 57% of the special or extraordinary expenses under section 7. All section 7 expenses must be agreed to in advance, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld; and h) The parties are urged to resolve the issue of costs as between themselves; if they are unable, both parties shall serve and file their Costs Outlines, any Offers to Settle, and their written costs submissions, limited to four pages, single sided and double spaced, on or before July 7, 2023; any responding written submissions, with the same size restrictions, shall be served and filed no later than July 28, 2023.
Fowler Byrne J.
Released: June 19, 2023
Schedule “A”
Father's Child Support Obligations:
| Year | Monthly $ | No. of Mos. | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| March to Aug, 2017 | $0.00 | 6 | $0.00 |
| Sept. to Nov. 2017 | $764.00 | 3 | $2,292.00 |
| Dec. 2017 | $805.00 | 1 | $805.00 |
| 2018 | $805.00 | 12 | $9,660.00 |
| Jan. to July 2019 | $805.00 | 7 | $5,635.00 |
| 29 | $18,392.00 |
Mother's Child Support Obligations:
| Year | Monthly $ | No. of Mos. | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug. to Dec. 2019 | $773.00 | 5 | $3,865.00 |
| 2020 | $790.00 | 12 | $9,480.00 |
| Jan. to Aug.2021 | $739.00 | 8 | $5,912.00 |
| 25 | $19,257.00 |
| Year | Monthly $ | No. of Mos. | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sept. to Dec. 2021 | $0.00 | 4 | $0.00 |
| Jan. to March 2022 | $0.00 | 3 | $0.00 |
| April to Sept. 2022 | $360.00 | 6 | $2,160.00 |
| Oct. to Dec. 2022 | $632.00 | 3 | $1,896.00 |
| Jan. to March 2023 | $632.00 | 3 | $1,896.00 |
| 19 | $5,952.00 |
| $19,257.00 | |
| $5,952.00 | |
| received | -$10,000.00 |
| TOTAL: | $15,209.00 |
Father's Arrears: $18,392.00 Mother's Arrears: -$15,209.00 Offset: $3,183.00