The Psycho Ex Wife

Have your own psycho ex? Get a FREE Report on "Why Co-Parenting Doesn't Work", or learn how to win child custody with a custody coach.

A while back I wrote about the strange things the Psycho Ex-Wife had put into the equitable distribution agreement, one of them was that I would give her a 90-day warranty for any repairs outside of usual wear-and-tear.  Then I posted how signing up for that warranty would come back and bite me in the ass.

Well, it would appear that PEW wanted an extended warranty and that extension would cover things that were routine in nature.

LM,

did you get a copy of this [Auto Shop's] bill yet? THe total for breaks and rotors was $383.00. Are we going to have an issue about this? Something else is wrong with it too, but since the 90 days is over I guess you won’t be responsible for that. The rotors were warped when you gave the car to me and that is in the comment section of the bill you have for the intake manifold. So when can I expect that money?

I make settlement on the house May 18th. I can’t afford to wait the usual months and months for you to respond to things.

~PEW

Uhhhh… no.  Firstly, I had just put new brakes and rotors on that car a year ago.  6-months after that when we swapped vehicles per her decision, I specifically handed her the receipt because there was a LIFETIME WARRANTY on the brakes and a LIMITED WARRANTY on the rotors.  My guess is that either knucklehead lost the receipt or… she simply forgot she had it right there in the glove compartment and paid the full freight for a complete brake job on a set that was a year old.  Not my problem.  Further, as brakes are outside of the scope of our agreement, even if the 90-days hadn’t expired, I wasn’t going to be paying for the repair anyway.

Still, like the clever little shyster she thinks she is, she figures by mentioning something about it being noticed within the pseudo-warranty period would make me liable for the costs.

I totally ignored the email from April 14th, 2005.  On April 17th… she also notifies me that she purchased a home and is moving in a month’s time…

LM,

I am moving the weekend of May 21st. If we follow the every other weekend schedule the way it is, you will have the boys that weekend. That works out very well because I’d prefer that they not be here while all that is going on. Please confirm.

As of today, I have not received the money for the brakes. I have sent a copy of the receipt with a letter to [your attorney] requesting a response so that I know whether I need to file something with the courts. (Since you did not respond to my email)

Also, I wanted to let you know that I cannot afford to meet you half way due to the fact that the support order has not been settled. It cost at least $20.00 in gas for me to get out there and back and the turnpike is $5.00 each way. That’s $60.00/month that I do not have right now. Additionally the “check engine light” is back on in the [car] and I’m waiting for a call back from [auto shop's] letting me know what the additional repair charges are going to be on that. (Obviously you won’t be paying that since the 90 days is over) But I wouldn’t want the car to break down on the way out while I’m driving the boys out to meet you.

~PEW

Excuses, excuses.  It’s the PEW backing out of an agreement again!  So much for her concerns about the children’s safety driving with me all that time when we head out to her weekend getaway… she needs to save 20-bucks!

Finally, after a short discussion with my attorney, I reply…

PEW,

If you read the agreement, the warranty (which was put in place for any breakdowns - not for general maintenance) - expired. I will not be paying for your car repairs, particularly since those brakes and rotors were brand new in March of 2004, they were checked during my oil change by Meineke prior to our swap in December of 2004. Further, I don’t know what the warranty was on the rotors, but the brakes have a lifetime warranty if you look at the receipt that I personally handed you (for the brakes and rotors replacement). You might want to take that receipt to Meineke and have them replace the brakes.

~LM

Well, then the lies and embellishments and threats and guilt-tripping and scare-tactics and revisionist history begin in earnest… I mean, she piles it all into a single, short email reply.

LM,

The rotors were warped when I took the car in January. If I had the money at the time I would have replaced them then. It’s not general maintenance, it was a defect that the car had when you transferred it to me. Also, the car’s engine light is on and in addition to the $1000 I just spent to have it “maintained” and repaired, I’m going to have to drop it off again.

I’ll go up to the courthouse today and put in a request for a hearing on that. By then I should know what this most recent engine problem is. I’ll tell you what though, it’s not going to look good for you, the guy who leaves his kids, takes the good car, moves in with his girlfriend of 4 months….but that’s not my problem.

~PEW

Uh-huh.

1. This girl never did a shred of maintenance on any car in her entire life.  Yet, she “knew” in January that brake rotors were warped.  She wouldn’t know a brake rotor if one came up and bit her on her ample ass.  (Lie)
2. Brake wear isn’t general maintenance, it’s a “defect.”  (Embellishment)
3. The $1,000 “she” just spent to have the intake manifold repaired was paid for by me.  (Revisionist history)
4. The car’s engine light is on.  (I speculate that’s a lie.)
5. She’ll request a hearing on that.  Of course, it wouldn’t be the first time she would spend more money on legal fees than the money she hoped to get in return for the litigation.  (Threat)
6. It’s not going to look good for me.  (Scare tactic)
7. I took the good car.  She truly believes that despite choosing the car over the mini-van of her own accord.  It’s DOCUMENTED in the agreement HER attorney modified.  She wanted the $5,000 cash that came with the car. (Revisionist history)
8. I left the kids.  (Guilt-tripping)
9. I moved in with DW after 4-months.  (Revisionist history)

Not bad!  A few months later, she would still bring it up under the guise of hashing it out in court, but she eventually gave it up, because she just wasn’t going to win that debate.