Category: Enforcing Support

The Family Responsibility Office (FRO) is Ontario's government agency responsible for collecting and distributing child and spousal support payments. When a court issues a support order, the FRO acts as an intermediary, ensuring payments flow from the person paying support to the person receiving it. The FRO also has enforcement powers including wage garnishment, license suspension, and bank account seizure when payments are missed. While family lawyers help you obtain or modify support orders through the courts, the FRO handles the practical side of support enforcement. The FRO cannot change support amounts or resolve custody disputes. The FRO's role is purely administrative: collecting payments, tracking arrears, and enforcing court orders when someone fails to pay. Understanding how the FRO works is essential whether you're paying or receiving support. This guide explains the FRO's enforcement timeline, your options for withdrawal, and what to do if you receive an FRO notice. You'll learn which enforcement actions happen first, how quickly they escalate, and when legal intervention becomes necessary. Key Insights FRO enrollment is mandatory for most support orders issued after March 1, 1997, with limited exceptions for joint withdrawal agreements Enforcement escalates gradually starting with warnings and wage garnishment within 2-4 weeks before moving to license suspension...

The Family Responsibility Office, commonly referred to as the ‘FRO’, is a provincial agency that is authorized to enforce support payments from a payor (the person who is obligated to pay support) to the recipient (the person who is entitled to receive support). The Family Responsibility Office enforces both child support and spousal support. The Family Responsibility Office does not have the authority to deal with other types of orders, such as an order for an equalization payment. All support orders, whether temporary or final, that are made in Ontario are automatically registered for enforcement by the Family Responsibility Office. Parties may withdraw from this enforcement by the Family Responsibility Office, assuming that both spouses give their consent to do so. In addition, according to section 35 of the Family Law Act, any domestic contract dealing with support may also be filed with the Ontario Court of Justice to be enforced by the Family Responsibility Office. The Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act, 1996 empowers the Director of the Family Responsibility Office to collect on outstanding support orders. The Family Responsibility Office is able to sanction the payor if he or she does not pay the recipient. The Family Responsibility Office...

In a family law case, the parties may opt out of enforcement by the Family Responsibility Office (FRO) if each party consents to this and files a notice of withdrawal with the FRO. The notice must be signed by both parties. According to section 16 of the Family Responsibility and Support Arrears Enforcement Act, 1996, a recipient may subsequently choose to opt back into enforcement by the FRO. A recipient may unilaterally opt out of enforcement by the FRO if the payor is in default. A previous case held that arrears accumulated during the withdrawal period cannot be enforced after a recipient opts back in. However, this is no longer the case as this has been cured by an amendment to the legislation.

Whether or not the court order will be enforceable depends greatly on where exactly your former spouse has relocated. Different places around the world have different agreements with Canada, or no agreement at all, in terms of enforcing court orders. There are some jurisdictions that have, what is commonly referred to as, reciprocal enforcement agreements with Canada. For example, if your ex-spouse were to relocate to a jurisdiction within the United States, then the court order would be enforceable. In the event that your spouse is moving to an area that does not have reciprocal enforcement agreements with Canada, you ought to consider and discuss the following with your lawyer: Requesting lump sum support. Obtaining security in order to compensate you in the event that things such as support payments were unenforceable, or in the event that your ex-spouse is in contempt of the order. This property would be held “in trust," meaning that you would not freely have access to it. In the event that your ex-spouse does not provide the requisite support, that property will be available to you. For more information on the options available to you, to protect yourself, in the event that your ex-spouse is planning...

The Family Responsibility Office (often referred to as the ‘FRO’) is an agency that has the authority to enforce support payments from a payor to a recipient. In other words, when a spousal support order or child support order is filed with the FRO, the onus to collect and distribute the support is then shifted from the parties onto the FRO. The FRO does not deal with issues such as custody, access, and orders with respect to equalization payments. Instead, the goal of the FRO is to collect, distribute, and enforce both child and spousal support orders. The FRO may sanction the payor if he or she does not pay the person who is supposed to receive support. The powers that it may use in order to enforce support, include, but are not limited to: Taking the support payments directly from the payor’s employer; Suspending a payor’s driver’s license; Garnishing a payor’s bank accounts, investments accounts, RRSP’s, etc.; and, Suspending a payor’s passport. For more information on the FRO, contact Krol & Krol at 905.707.3370.

In the case of Ashak v. Ontario, the Court canvassed the issue as to whether the Family Responsibility Office (commonly referred to as the 'FRO') can be sued when they are negligent and/or act in a substandard manner. In the case of Ashak v. Ontario, the husband was ordered by the Ontario Courts to pay both child and spousal support to his former wife and children. Like many other spousal and child support orders, the wife filed the order with the FRO. Following the finalization of the divorce, the husband fled the country. He left to Iraq, a country upon which Canada had no reciprocal support enforcement agreement. This means that Iraq did not enforce orders made in Canada. The husband did not pay any support to his wife or children, and therefore his Canadian passport was suspended by the FRO. The husband then went to the FRO as he wanted his passport to be reinstated. The FRO advised the husband that they would only do so if he pays all of his support arrears or if he secures a variation of support (either court ordered or agreed upon by the parties). Subsequently, the husband went to the FRO claiming that...

On the issue of a reciprocating jurisdiction, there are only certain circumstances whereby a child support order from another country would be recognized as valid in Ontario. In order for Ontario to recognize orders from another country, the area from which the original child support order was made must participate in a “reciprocating jurisdiction” relationship with Ontario. A “reciprocating jurisdiction” relationship means that Ontario and the area in question have entered into a formal arrangement wherein they have agreed to enforce each other’s support orders. In the event that the country in question does in fact have a reciprocating jurisdiction relationship, then the order may be enforced in Ontario. If you wish to have Ontario recognize a foreign child support order as valid, you are required to register the documentation with the courts in Ontario. Once the documentation has been filed with the Ontario courts, you may move to have the child support order enforced in Ontario. In the event that you wish to have Ontario enforce child support payments, you may register the documentation with the Family Responsibility Office (FRO). To learn more about reciprocating jurisdictions, contact Toronto divorce lawyers at Krol & Krol at 905.707.3370.