SUMmate Quantum vs. Duration Analyser

Mark Harris

Pay Per Use, It's A No Brainer!

"No cost to the firm, unlimited licenses, access to all DIVORCEmate software modules, free updates, free new modules and free software support... Hold it! What am I missing?"

"Nothing! This is the Pay Per Use option in a nutshell!"

• The Pay Per Use cost may be billed as a disbursement to your client, actually costing the law firm nothing. When you "activate" a new PPU Client File, you have the option of being provided with a record of the activation including the cost, date, reference information and your client's name.
• Pay Per Use software includes all Tools One, Forms One and Precedents One products and modules including NEW software modules (Yes, SUMmate Quantum vs. Duration Analyser is FREE!).
• Selecting the Pay Per Use option means that you may install DIVORCEmate One on as many computers as you wish without registering the software; only the Client Files are "registered". This means unlimited licensed computers.
• All of your DIVORCEmate One software support is free.

Added Bonus Feature: We allow several complimentary uses of the PPU DIVORCEmate One software, before you must activate and pay the Pay Per Use fee. These complimentary uses mean that you can meet and advise a potential client during an initial consultation without incurring an immediate Pay Per Use fee.

Cost: The cost is as follows: $100 per new Client File + taxes (BC, ON); $50 per new Client File + taxes (other provinces).

Initial Deposit: The Initial Pay Per Use annual non-refundable deposit is $350 (BC, ON); $175 for all other provinces. This deposit is used to pay for your first 3 Client Files.

You may make a Pay Per Use deposits by credit card online, or by cheque. You may open a new Pay Per Use Client File, anytime, 24/7/365!

Back to top...

Switching from Annual Subscription -> Pay Per Use

The process is simple and only takes a few minutes.

First, we will give you a new customer number, which you input into your DIVORCEmate One software. From this point on, all of your existing Client Files will be activated, and only new Client Files will attract the Pay Per Use fee.

Note: If you have already paid your Annual Subscription for 2006/07, we will credit your Pay Per Use account on a pro-rata basis.

You must have access to the Internet (yes, dial-up is OK, but not optimal) and you must have an e-mail address. In almost all cases, no hardware or software upgrades will be necessary.

Please contact our Flloyd Morgan at 416 718-3461 x419 or fmorgan@divorcemate.com if you would like to switch from Annual Subscription to Pay Per Use.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate One - Registration / Updating Your Software

Start your DIVORCEmate One, and then click on "Setup".

DIVORCEmateLive, Registration Info...: Register your different DIVORCEmate One products - Tools One, Forms One and/or Precedents One as applicable.

DIVORCEmateLive, Software Updates: Get your new DIVORCEmate One software updates. Your software version number is also shown here. Internet connectivity is required. Be sure to update regularly.

Recent DIVORCEmate One Updates have included:

Universal Child Care Benefit; Canada Employment Tax Credit; Adjusted Income Tax Rates; Adjusted Non-refundable Tax Credits; Adjusted Canada Child Tax Benefit (elimination of the "under 7 supplement"); Adjusted provincial taxes per provincial budgets; Updated interest rates for PENSIONmate and LIFEmate; Updated Nova Scotia forms; A number of minor Forms One and Precedents One additions, fixes and enhancements.

Back to top...

IMPORTANT Pay Per Use Customers

A number of Pay Per Use law firms have not made their initial deposit to their Pay Per Use account.

Please note that the Initial Pay Per Use annual non-refundable deposit is $350 for BC and ON; $150 for all other provinces. This deposit is used to pay for your first three Client Files. If this applies to your firm, please make your deposit as soon as possible.

Back to top...

IMPORTANT "Annual Subscription" Customers

For 2007, Annual Subscriptions that expire and are not renewed within 60 days of the expiry will automatically be switched over to the Pay Per Use model.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate One Demos and Training
Featuring Tools One, including CHEQUEmate & SUMmate

DIVORCEmate will be in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland in late October. Ontario and B.C. training will take place during the months of October and November.

Tentative schedule (please mark your calendars):

Overview / Demonstrations / Training:

St. John's NL	Oct 23 10 am - noon or 3 - 5 pm	Fairmont Hotel
Halifax NS	Oct 24 4 - 6 pm	Lord Nelson
Charlottetown PE	Oct 26 noonish	Delta Prince Edward
Moncton NB	Oct 27 10 am - noon or 2 - 4 pm	Delta Beausejour
Fredericton NB	Oct 30 1 - 3 pm	TBA downtown
Saint John NB	Oct 31 10 am - noon	Delta Brunswick

Please email Mark Harris if you are interested in attending an overview / demonstration / training.

Training ONLY:

Ottawa ON	Nov 16 2 - 4:30 pm	TBA
Barrie ON	Nov 20 1 - 3:30 pm	TBA
Toronto ON	Nov 21 9 - 11:30 am or 12:30 - 3 pm	our office
Toronto ON	Nov 22 9 - 11:30 am or 12:30 - 3 pm	our office
London ON	Nov 27 11:30 am - 2:00 pm	TBA

Please see our website for dates, places, times and registration.

The sessions will cover the DIVORCEmate One interface and our Tools One software including CHEQUEmate and NEW SUMmate. The East will focus on our Tools One offerings and will include Forms One in Nova Scotia.

Training ONLY sessions are now 2 1/2 hours and the cost is $95/pp + GST.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate Staff Announcements

Michael Perlman who is responsible for accounting and administration, will add eastern Canada sales and marketing to his responsibilities.

Michael may be reached at 416 718-3461 ext 446, or email at mperlman@divorcemate.com.

(Congratulations to Michael and Tamara on their recent engagement; it took them a while but it is an excellent match.)

Steve Krieger, who is currently responsible for Sales and Marketing in B.C., will add Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta to his sales territory.

Steve may be reached at 604 222-3582, or email at skrieger@divorcemate.com.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate Job Opportunity

We are looking for a Bookkeeper/Administrator to handle all of our accounting duties including billing, receivables, payables, payroll, tax and other government remittances. Duties will also include administration of office, travel and training arrangements.

Knowledge of: QuickBooks Pro or similar accounting software is required; family law and Microsoft Office are helpful; a clear, knowledgeable and empathetic telephone manner is an asset.

We offer an excellent starting salary, bonus and benefits.

If you know anyone who is interested in working in a team-oriented, creative environment, and is bright and common-sensed, please have them send a resume to send.resume@rogers.com.

Back to top...

Did You Know...

• Canada Customs and Revenue Agency has finally changed its legal name to the Canada Revenue Agency after many months of waiting. We will update our software to reflect this change as necessary.
• DIVORCEmate will be presenting at the October 19th OBA Family Bar subsection meeting at 5:30 pm in Toronto. Mark Harris will present "60 DIVORCEmate One Tips in 60 Minutes".
• DIVORCEmate will be in Thunder Bay, Ontario for the Thunder Bay Law Association Winter CLE Program on October 19 and 20.
• DIVORCEmate is considering a "retroactive support calculator" to help you negotiate those retroactive support opportunities and a couple of "shared custody" add-ons to help you analyse all aspects of s.9 of the CSG. If you have any ideas regarding the design or operation of these new products, please contact Simon Knowles at sknowles@divorcemate.com.
• DIVORCEmate was in North Bay, Ontario at the Ontario Collaborative Law Federation 2006 Conference on September 21 and 22. The conference was hosted by the Nipissing Collaborative Family Lawyers.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate in Your Palm

Our Flloyd Morgan has created our first Palm OS application. We have a Palm based Child Support Guideline Table look up calculator ready for beta testing. If you use a Palm handheld device, Flloyd would like to speak to you. Please contact Flloyd at fmorgan@divorcemate.com.

Back to top...

What The Judiciary Is Saying...

"I have used the DivorceMate calculator to try and determine the net available income to each of the parties if spousal support were ordered." Morris v. Morris, 2006 CarswellBC 1686 (BCSC), Powers J.

"The respondent seeks a lump sum $100,000 for spousal support. The calculation that led to that was based on $5,500 per month for 12 years, "discounted" for tax purposes. There was no actual actuarial or accounting evidence led. Counsel did file both Supportmate and Chequemate calculations." Niemi v. Maier, 2006 CarswellOnt 4019 (OSCJ), Timms J.

NOTE: This is exactly what our new SUMmate - Quantum vs. Duration Analyser software will help to solve!

"Accordingly, I would ask each party to make written submissions on the issue of child support and s.7 expenses on a go forward basis so that I may make the appropriate order. I would ask both parties to use Divorcemate calculations in their submissions." Andrade v. Kennelly, 2006 CarswellOnt 3762 (OSCJ), Young J.

Back to top...

D.B.S. v. S.R.G.; L.J.W. v. T.A.R.; Henry v. Henry; Hiemstra v. Hiemstra, 2006 SCC 37
Retroactive Child Support Case Commentary
by S. Christine Montgomery, B.A., LL.B.

On July 31, 2006, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision, D.B.S. v. S.R.G.; L.J.W. v. T.A.R.; Henry v. Henry; Hiemstra v. Hiemstra, 2006 SCC 37, wherein the S.C.C. examined and clarified the law with respect to retroactive child support.

While the court divided 4-3 on some of the legal issues, the court was unanimous in its disposition of each of the appeals. In all cases, the court restored or upheld the order of the court at first instance. In two of the cases, retroactive child support was ordered; in the other two cases, it was not.

Essentially, the S.C.C. confirmed the court's power to order a "retroactive" child support award. The S.C.C. emphasized throughout the judgment that a "payor parent always has the obligation to pay - and the dependent child always has the right to receive - child support in an amount that is commensurate to his/her income" (para. 68). The corollary of this obligation is that "a [payor] parent will not have fulfilled his/her obligation to his/her children if (s)he does not increase child support payments when his/her income increases significantly" (para. 132).

In other words, there appears to be a positive duty on a payor parent to increase child support payments when his/her income increases significantly, failure to do so placing the payor at risk of a retroactive award.

The S.C.C. went on to address a number of points and factors to consider in making a retroactive child support award, summarized as follows:

• The term "retroactive" is really a misnomer.
• A retroactive order is not exceptional, nor rare.
• A child support obligation in a court order is presumptively valid, but not absolute. However, as "the circumstances underlying the original award change, the value of that award in defining parents' obligations necessarily diminishes" (para. 74).
• A child support obligation in an agreement (not endorsed by the court) while not considered presumptively valid, will be given considerable weight provided, of course, it is reasonable. However, "where circumstances have changed (or were never as they first appeared) and the actual support obligations of the payor parent have not been met, courts may order a retroactive award" (para. 78).
• Where there is no existing payment of child support, it is "unreasonable for the non-custodial parent to believe (s)he was acquitting him/herself of his/her obligations towards his/her children" (para. 80), and the court may award retroactive child support.
• A child must be eligible for support at the time of the application.
• If the court is properly seized of a child support dispute between divorced parents, it can order retroactive support prior to the date of the application for divorce.
• "It will not always be appropriate for a retroactive award to be ordered ... where the child would get no discernible benefit from the award" (para. 95).
• A recipient parent's "[d]elay in seeking child support is not presumptively justifiable," (para. 101) unless there is a reasonable excuse (i.e. recipient's justifiable fear that the payor parent would react vindictively to the detriment of the family; recipient's lack of financial or emotional means to bring an application; or inadequate legal advice).
• In considering the propriety of a retroactive award, the court should consider whether the payor parent has engaged in blameworthy conduct, which is characterized expansively as any conduct "that privileges the payor parent's own interests over his/her children's right to an appropriate amount of support" (para. 106).
• Blameworthy behaviour on the part of a payor includes: hiding income; intimidating a recipient parent from pursuing child support; misleading a recipient parent into believing that appropriate child support is being paid. However, failing to increase child support automatically will not necessarily qualify as blameworthy; it will ultimately depend on the reasonableness of the payor's belief that his/her obligations were being met.
• A payor parent's conduct could militate against a retroactive award in some circumstances, such as where a parent has met an increased obligation indirectly.
• The child's present and past circumstances are relevant.
• The courts should broadly consider hardship occasioned by a retroactive award, particularly where the payor is blameless.
• Awards should be crafted in such a way as to minimize hardship.
• The actual quantum of the award should be determined in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines (if post May 1, 1997), including not only the Table amounts, but also the discretionary provisions. Blind adherence to the Table amounts is not recommended.
• The quantum of the award must fit the circumstances.
• A court should not make an order it considers unfair in the circumstances.

The major point of contention between the justices arose over the date of retroactivity. Justice Bastarache, for the majority, held that the date of retroactivity would be the date on which the topic was first broached by the recipient parent, limited to not more than three years before effective notice given (unless the payor engaged in blameworthy conduct). Justice Abella, writing for herself and two others, disagreed on this point, finding the date on which child support should have increased to be the appropriate date of retroactivity in all cases.

Ultimately, the issue of retroactive support remains subject to judicial discretion, based on a holistic approach and a detailed examination of the facts of each particular case.

From a practice perspective, a recipient would be well advised to formally request income information and increased child support information from a payor in writing on a regular basis, and to follow up on any such request. Similarly, a payor would be well advised to voluntarily increase support in accordance with the Child Support Guidelines (amended Tables, May 1, 2006) as his/her income increases, to avoid the risk of a retroactive award down the line.

You may download the unabridged commentary here.

You may also download the full text of the court's decision here.

Back to top...

DIVORCEmate Donates

We are once again pleased to announce the successful completion of another year of "Camp in the City". This camp is run by Gilda's Club of Greater Toronto and provides fun and education for children affected by cancer who are unable to attend summer camps outside of the city.

DIVORCEmate is a proud sponsor of Gilda's Club, Camp in the City.

Back to top...

National Family Law Conference, Kananaskis, Alberta, July 2006

If you were not there, you missed an excellent vacation, top-notch Kananaskis mountain golf and a superb conference.

Lawyers, judges and other family law professionals and their families came together at the beautiful Delta Kananaskis Rocky Mountain Resort to laugh and learn.

The conference covered a wide variety of family law topics, all presented by seasoned veterans of the matrimonial law (under)world!

We unveiled our newly minted DIVORCEmate booth, complete with lights, action and giveaways. Our top giveaway was a 19" Dell flat screen monitor (winner was a family lawyer with legal aid), followed by DIVORCEmate yo-yos, cotton sleeveless t-shirts, and our much sought-after canvas DIVORCEmate bags.

Of memorable note was the Alberta beef dinner and dance at the Boundary Dude Ranch, followed by the silky sounds of Lounge Lizard Bob turned wranglin' Cowboy Bob! Yeehaaaa!

The 2008 National Family Law Conference will return to the East coast of Canada, and is not to be missed!

Back to top...

The James G. McLeod Professorship In Family Law

The University of Western Ontario is honouring Jay's memory by establishing The James G. McLeod Professorship in Family Law. The creation of the McLeod Professorship will celebrate the life and career of Canada's greatest family law scholar and teacher. Please help honour Jay by giving generously.

Back to top...