✔ 最佳答案
1. Yes regardless. The issue is maintenance order is a form of court order.
Failure to comply can result contempt of the court.
2. In any cases, you can petition to the court for a review. The main issue is the chance of success.
In order to do so, you will have to file a originating summon with the same court issuing the order. Your cost depends on the case itself. At the least, you will be liable for the court fee. Then if you use a lawyer, then your legal fee. Last, if you lose, you may be liable for the Respondent's legal fee.
3. A lawyer is not required. But most people will hire one.
Learning cost means learning cost (don't think too complicated).
4. Nothing - as your ex-wife has the full custody, unless what she attempt to do impact your visitation rights, you basically have no right to challenge (or even say anything).
5. Legally, yes. Morally, no.
6. No - based on your information, the maintenance order imposed by the court does not seem to be an order for actual reimbursement.
7. No - it will based on the affordability of the payor.
Simply saying - bankruptcy alone is a compelling reason for the court to revisiting the issue. However, based on your approach (the way how you asked the questions), it does not look good at all (as you sound you are evading responsibilities).
So you should think again what you are about to do.
2014-08-26 15:01:18 補充：
I assume you are A's new wife.
1. Unfortunately, the ex-wife has the full custody. The father pretty much has no say unless a court order allows otherwise.
(In this case, A's sole responsibility is making payment.)
2014-08-26 15:04:20 補充：
2. 100% success for reducing maintanence. Due to bankruptcy, the court has no choice but to take consideration of debt repayment.
So the maintanence will be reduce. The issue is how much reduction.
2014-08-26 15:08:05 補充：
Less than 50% chance of success for the custody. Again - the bankruptcy is what makes this worse without a fight.
2014-08-26 15:09:11 補充：
3. Unfortunately - your understanding is correct perfectly.
Being poor is not a reason of stealing.
2014-08-26 15:13:00 補充：
Continued at here;
4. Yes - the martial status of the ex-wife is never relevant.
5. Yes - unless the court has ordered visitation rights.
6. Yes - as the legal guardian, the ex-wife has sole right to protect the child.
2014-08-26 16:00:18 補充：
Discuss with the Official Receiver before taking any actions (as the change can impact the repayment).
Other than that, you are good to go.
2014-08-27 11:21:26 補充：
1. No, unless the abuse of public housing is serious enough to result imprisonment.
The use of fake address is not a matter at all as the father basically consent everything. In other word, uncontested divorce.
2. No - it will make it worse about the father's impression to the court.
2014-08-27 11:22:29 補充：
In summary, in this case, if I was the father, I would attempt to lower the maintanence and request visitation rights first.
It takes times.
