A year having passed, and no longer a "newcomer," I've moved to a different neighborhood.
It's all over but the shouting now. And there's going to be a lot of shouting. A year ago the idea was a "mediated divorce" -- after all, the only thing we "really" disagreed about was the duration and amount of alimony from WAW to SP. Now there's not an iota of agreement on anything.
Just before Thanksgiving '09, STBXMRSSP's lawyer sent a request to The Mouthpiece that "our side" make a settlement offer ASAP, because STBXW wanted to tie it all up by January 1. And so we did.
3 days ago we received a reply. "Rejected." Now that's expected -- it's a negotiating ploy, so presumably there's some middle ground to work towards.
Which would be the case with a normal human being. And which, therefore, is not the case with STBXMRSSP.
Along with the reply was a counter-proposal. I've had to educate The Mouthpiece a bit on STBXMRSSP and her wiley ways. In this "proposal," she proposes to cheat me out of my interest in the house by setting up the language in such a way that she has the right to refuse any offer while I have only the right to accept any offer, including any offer to buy out my interest in the house.
Wiley ways. STBX has alluded repeatedly over the year to the idea of her father buying out my interest in this house. It's always pitched in this sort-of off-handed way -- "Hey, here's a thought...."
So what she's trying to do is construct the settlement so that her father makes the first bid on the house -- at assessed (not market) value (which is very likely to be an inequality assessed < market) -- which I am obligated to take, whereas if another buyer made a bid she has the right to refuse it.
The "proposal" also includes a preposterous laundry list of debts I "owe" her, such as half of her student loans (even though at law there's no basis for claiming community obligations after the fact). This, too, is wiley, because she has long complained -- among the litany of complaints about SP Himself -- that she has to split her retirement fund with me (and she always deposited the maximum annual contribution to it).
Well what a coincidence! The "debts" I "owe" her miraculously sum up to the amount she'd have to pay me from her retirement plan, isn't that weird? So, hey, you know, golly-gosh gee-whillikers -- why don't we just call it even? She's "willing" to "overlook" my "debts" in exchange for having all of her money to herself.
But the best part is in the alimony computation. Somehow they've concocted a rationale whereby I actually earn 35% more money than I seem to collect in paychecks, based on some phantom payroll I "could" expect to receive in the future (strangely they left out the magickal pony) -- which means I really don't need any alimony at all and, since she's been paying me temporary alimony for the past year, I "owe" her that money back!
So there she's been, asking my help, begging me to intervene when she can't manage The Boy, expecting me to be "flexible" when she has to do this or that, soft-talking and nearly sweet-nothing-whispering from time-to-time -- and all the while (because there's no way they constructed this in an afternoon) she's working this ridiculous notion that she can have it all, screw SP, and devil take the hindmost.
As that eminent philosopher, Carl Spackler, put it: "Okay, I guess we're playing for keeps now. I guess the playing around is pretty much over, huh?"
Started off amicable on her part, she says. Once her attorney saw the assets involved via 'discovery', it became a war of attrition. That's where it is now. Scorched earth litigation, as you say.
I'm not surprised. They just want 'out' initially, they say. They want it to be amicable, they say. Then it becomes what it does. I'm familiar with the reference to the Tet Offensive too...and that's a good description of what it is. Destroy.
I'm sorry you find yourself here. I thought for a while there you were gonna be able to pull it out. You're not alone dude!
"Always go straight forward, and if you meet the devil, cut him in two and go between the pieces." - William Sturgis, clipper ship captain, 1830's.
She seems to be at ease with the difference. The mom needs help and the dad responds. The former 'oops I'm banging Italy' emotional confidant feels down in the dumps and the betrayed spouse rescues.
Maintain your boundaries. She is not your friend or your wife. She does not have your best interests at heart. She pulls your strings like a marionette.
Informing your lawyer of her machinations is a good thing.. with said wileyness aided by her lawyer.
The best revenge, if you feel the need for that word, is a life well lived.
Ain't that the truth? I was on the blower today with some family members who absolutely broke down hearing the stuff that's being "proposed."
Even now I can't get my head around it -- that she could know that this execrable screed her lawyer sent purports to show that I "owe" her, who earns 5X more than I do, over a year's pre-tax salary as of right now, and that my "debt" increases every day (with interest), yet could still have the unmitigated gall to demand practically in the next breath that I be "flexible" and accept her idea of hiring an overnight babysitter to watch the kids (in lieu of her own custody) on a weekend that I'm out of town, so that she can go to European Capital ("it's the only week I can get away, and I want to be there with 'friends' Saturday night").
I've asked it before, and I'll ask it again -- who the hell do these people become? Were they always there, lurking, or is it something about signing the Walkaway Oath of Office that requires they turn into such Compleat A**holes?
Well well well. Living well indeed. That is the best revenge.
Though I seem to recall my old platoon sergeant also saying something about judiciously utilized high explosives....
It sounds like you have right of first refusal when it comes to custody of your children when your divorcing spouse will be away. However, that's about it. Her time with the kids is her time with the kids however she wants to spend it.. with or without them. Tough noogies. It doesn't seem fair.. and it isn't.. but it is what it is.
She was probably whacked out by your initial financial settlement and zinged back an equally disturbing reply. But.. that's why God created lawyers who know how to wrangle the financials and make it work. The initial shock is the worst. Step away.. realize it's a bunch of hooey and a button pusher.
It's pretty silly.. let's say in regard to bonuses. They can't be counted because the amount varies. Projecting your 'potential' earnings is playing with a crystal ball that's really a kickball. Once the earnings occur, then she can haul your patookie back to court if she so chooses. I know my former spouse is infuriated that he pays me the equitable (not equal) amount of alimony allowed by the state. It's all percentages.
Her proposal reeks of her greatest fear.. having to pay alimony. Her weakness is your strength.. or at least I've heard that.
And nothing is official until the settlement is signed and finished off by the judge.
That's right. My X asked for full custody of the kids, he who was barely around them the prior 16 years, requested to pay no alimony and no child support although I've been a stay-at-home mom for the past 10 years and wasn't working at the time. We haven't gotten to the final paperwork yet, but I would be surprised (and appeal) if that actually happened. I don't know about being a$$es, although I know many that are, but I think the main problem is how self-centered they've become. They see us as the only obstacle to their complete happiness and perfect life.....
My God, SP, I hope you stick it to her, but good. Get every single thing that you are legally entitled to. Then, turn your back on her forever.
I don't know why, especially after reading here for so long, but the abject cruelty and selfishness of these WAW's still stuns me. Lame-@ss "women." I am, once again, embarrassed to be of the female persuasion.
A lot of this has to do with the attorneys. In my W's case, we sat down a month ago and talked about an agreement -- even though I don't want this. She agreed to joint physical custody and I'd still give her child support, just at a lot lower level. She just needed to figure out something on the house.
Two weeks ago I get a petition -- hasn't been filed yet -- and she's seeking sole custody and the full child support.
Turns out her lawyer got to her.
I've tried to tell her that the lawyer has to do what she says, but she's got the lawyer and her bevy of divorced coworkers advising her to get every dime even though she makes $10k more a year than me.
I got a letter from my L saying her L is going to send him her "wish list."
And we'll go from there. At least I know I can handle money and I'll be OK. W never thinks more than a day ahead and if she made double what she does today she'd still be broke.
She had to borrow from her mom just for the retainer.
Me: 47, Ds 17-13, D final 6-11 http://tinyurl.com/yk4e2tz http://tiny.cc/thread2 http://tinyurl.com/ydtphqu http://tinyurl.com/thread4 http://tinyurl.com/3sm78k6 http://tinyurl.com/thread6
