Treadstone Associates
Case File № 727 · Separation & Divorce

Collected by the province, not by hope

a Trois-Rivières file's support income proven a different way

A first lender demanded the same private bank-statement deposit history used everywhere else in Canada to document a Quebec parent's child support -- not realizing Revenu Quebec's own mandatory collection program already produces a stronger, institution-issued record. The purchase qualified insured at 38.5% GDS once the right document replaced the wrong one.

QuebecInsured · PurchaseFiled August 9, 20265 min read
$750/mo

child support collected from the payor and remitted directly by Revenu Québec's own mandatory collection program

38.5%

GDS once the right document -- Revenu Québec's own remittance history -- replaced the private bank-statement request

$1,286

Quebec's welcome tax on the purchase

Anonymized illustration. The borrowers, dollar figures, and rates in this file are an illustrative composite — no real client is identifiable, and any rate shown is illustrative, not a quote. The rules are real: every regulatory figure is cited to its source in the Sources section, and the math computes exactly as shown.

№ 01

The client

A separated parent in Trois-Rivières bought a $160,000 home at 15% down, on $2,600/month of their own income plus $750/month in child support.

Purchase price

$160,000, Trois-Rivières

15% down, insured

Own salaried income

$2,600/month

Child support

$750/month

Collected and remitted by Revenu Québec's own program

№ 02

The problem

The child support is collected from the payor and remitted directly by Revenu Québec's own mandatory support-payment collection program -- a genuinely Quebec-specific, government-administered mechanism -- but a first lender, unfamiliar with it, demanded the same private bank-statement deposit history and payor confirmation letter used to document support elsewhere in Canada.

Two different kinds of proof

  • Elsewhere in Canada, support is typically documented with a running bank-statement deposit history plus the payor's own confirmation letter
  • In Quebec, court-ordered support is collected and remitted by Revenu Québec's Programme de perception des pensions alimentaires by default, not paid privately spouse-to-spouse
  • Revenu Québec's own remittance-history statement documents the payments directly, from the collecting institution itself -- a different, and stronger, kind of proof

The ratios were never the issue on this file. The form of the proof was.

№ 03

The numbers

Once the right document replaced the wrong request, the purchase's own numbers were straightforward.

The insured purchaseAmount
Purchase price$160,000
Down payment (15%)−$24,000
CMHC premium (2.80% at 80.01-85% LTV)+$3,808
Total insured mortgage$139,808
Ratio check at the qualifying rateFigure
Payment at the qualifying rate (7.00%), 25 years$979/mo
Combined income (employment + child support)$3,350/mo
GDS (payment + $220 tax + $90 heat) ÷ income38.5%

38.5% clears comfortably inside CMHC's 39% GDS maximum, once Revenu Québec's own remittance-history statement did what the bank-statement request never could -- document the support payments directly, from the institution actually collecting them.

№ 04

The solution

A courtier hypothécaire licensed under Quebec's Act respecting the distribution of financial products and services recognized that Quebec's own collection program produces its own, stronger form of proof.

First, confirmed the support was being collected through Revenu Québec's Programme de perception des pensions alimentaires, rather than paid privately.

Second, obtained Revenu Québec's own remittance-history statement for the support payments -- an institution-issued record, not a private arrangement's bank deposits.

Third, submitted that statement in place of the private bank-statement documentation the first lender had originally requested, resolving the file without changing a single ratio.

Revenu Québec's remittance-history statement for the support payments
Separation agreement or support order confirming the collection program applies
Employment income confirmation
Standard insured-purchase documentation
Quebec welcome tax payable at closing
№ 05

The outcome

The purchase funded insured at 5.00% and 38.5% GDS, with Quebec's welcome tax on the $160,000 purchase coming to $1,286.

38.5% clears comfortably inside CMHC's 39% GDS maximum on this insured file.

№ 06

What to take from this file

  • 01Quebec's mandatory support-payment collection program is a genuinely different mechanism from a private, spouse-to-spouse support arrangement elsewhere in Canada.
  • 02Revenu Québec's own remittance-history statement is a stronger form of proof than a private bank-statement deposit history. Ask for it by name.
  • 03A first lender's unfamiliarity with a provincial mechanism is a documentation problem, not a ratio problem. Diagnose which one is actually stalling the file.
  • 04This is distinct from dividing a pension or asset at separation. The question here is which document proves ongoing support income, nothing about equalization.

Sources

Every regulatory figure in this file traces to one of these primary sources. Client details and anything that varies by lender are illustrative, as flagged below.

Illustrative in this file — lender-specific, not rules:

  • 5.00% contract rate — rates move daily; not a quote.

Authority & provenance

How this case file was built

We publish the origin, the verification method and the reviewer for every case file, so you can judge how far to trust it before you rely on it with a client.

Where it comes from

Derived from files handled by Treadstone’s fulfillment desk and from scenarios contributed by partner brokerages. Names, employers, exact amounts and dates are changed so no client or file is identifiable.

Provenance: Composite — a pattern seen repeatedly on fulfilled files, not a single transaction.

What is verified

Every regulatory figure traces to a primary source listed above and was checked against it on the date shown. The arithmetic is recomputed by machine on every rebuild.

Anything that varies by lender is labelled illustrative rather than stated as a rule.

Who reviewed it

Reviewed for Canadian regulatory accuracy before publication, and re-checked whenever a cited rule changes.

Reviewed by: Nicholas Parson, Treadstone Associates — reviews every case file before publication.

First published 9 August 2026Rules last verified 9 August 2026Next scheduled review 9 February 2027

This case file is professional reference material for licensed mortgage professionals. It is not advice to a borrower, and it is not a lender commitment. Insurer rules, qualifying rates and provincial taxes change — confirm the current position with the insurer, regulator or lender before you rely on any figure here in a live file.

Treadstone fulfillment

Files like this are daily work for our desk.

Document collection, ratio math under multiple treatments, lender placement notes, and submission-ready packaging — for Canadian mortgage brokers who would rather be in front of clients.