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.

By the time I had conferenced with my attorney, got to the court building, the two attorneys meet and fail within 1-hour’s time (a record, based upon my instructions to D-Mac), conferencing with my attorney post-conference, and running some legal errands to save some money… I was ready to go to bed.  It was 1:00PM.

Some pre-notes for those of you with comments in the latest “You’ve Been Served” post…

• Aunty DUI failed to appear.  Dunno if there is anything we can do about it, but it will be interesting come hearing time.  So, whoever was on the “no-show” side of that bet - you win!
• I received no email, text, nor call from PEW or even Aunty DUI looking for an “appearance fee.”  If you were on the “contact” side of that bet - you lose!
• Aunty DUI was, of course, bullshitting.  Her car was there when I dropped the boys off at 5:30PM (after I took them to an orthodontist appointment that PEW was supposed to take them to, given only a few hours notice).  Her car was there when I drove by on my way to pick up my receipt-of-service from GSG at 9:30PM.
• You’ll recall back in the Conference/Hearing posts of May, they claimed that Aunty DUI was “moving out on June 1st.”  As predicted, since the hearing and order for support wasn’t addressed, she didn’t move out.  At today’s conference, they claimed that Aunty DUI is “moving out on July 1st.”  How ridiculous.  They really believe that after all these years and doing the “move-out/move-in” to dodge having her rent included in her income (can you say… HIDING INCOME?!?!?!) - that we’re going to allow that to take place a 4th time.  She’ll be out one way or the other, I guarantee you that.

Keeping a long story significantly shorter, because there is only so much detail I’m willing to divulge at this point - my main instruction to D-Mac was, “Please don’t prolong the agony when they call you two attorneys in.  Whether she is represented or not, the instant it becomes clear that they’re not willing to settle, STOP.  They’re not going to settle.” I think that they were in conference for approximately 47-minutes.

D-Mac had a lot to say about Bulldog, much of it the same as when I spoke about her earlier.  She was rude.  She interrupted incessantly.  She constantly referred to D-Mac as “counselor” rather than her first name, which she graciously offered at the outset with a handshake.  D-Mac’s main observation was that she was trying TOO hard to be aggressive and combative as if it were a front.  She added that during the very few times that she wasn’t talking or interrupting, she would be humming annoyingly and fidgeting and surmised that she is fronting insecurity and she’s not really comfortable acting like an asshole (expletive mine, not D-Mac’s, she doesn’t use vulgar language).

Bottom line?  Like the two high-priced attorneys who failed before her, Bulldog is asking for the world (and promising PEW a win) as well as attorneys fees.   Attorneys fees are something PEW has asked for with nearly every single petition since the inception of this mess and she hasn’t gotten 1-penny in any of those instances.  Let’s pray that this isn’t going to be her first time.

D-Mac tried, in good faith, to make a settlement.  Bulldog never had any intention of doing so.  Simply put, we were going to agree to the increase through an appropriate date and then revisit a change at that specified date to see if the child support order needed to be changed… with PEW paying me or, if I manage to find employment between now and then, at an appropriate level according to guidelines.

Bulldog refused.  End of discussion.

So now, with nothing to lose, we have three options/outcomes.

1. Best scenario.
2. Okay, but appropriate scenario.
3. Suckiest of the three scenarios.

For what I hope are obvious reason, I cannot discuss them in detail.  Suffices to say, “BEST” is minimal exposure.  “OKAY” is fair exposure for all parties.  “SUCK” is if the court decides to screw you over and benefit mommy to the maximum allowable “discretionary” extent.

The hearing is scheduled for August 7th, 2009.  See how painfully slow the process is for a person needing a downward modification for child support in an unexpected job loss situation?  And costly?

• I cost myself (potentially) dearly by filing for the modification immediately.  I should have simply waited until the severance/vacation had been exhausted (in terms of calendar)… 13-weeks later.
• The hard lesson learned?  Next time, I pay D-Mac for a consultation and advice, a mistake I simply shouldn’t have made.  A few hundred dollars in consultation back in March would have saved our household potentially a few thousand.  Now, between legal fees and possible exposure, this mess will cost us no less than $5,000 because my choice to do the “right thing” was not really the right thing.  $5,000 that I don’t have and our household desperately needs.
• I will be asking for reimbursement of legal fees and am unlikely to get it.  Grounds?  We made a good faith effort to settle the matter today and Bulldog chose to litigate.  We ran the 3 conceivable scenarios, 2 of which substantially benefit the PEW.  We offered one of those scenarios.  They said no.

DW always refers to just how stupid the PEW and her family are.  She’s finally gotten around to stopping herself from saying “…and you married her!” Of course, I still hear that, but we’re well over that.

Let’s take a look at a few stupid things:

1. Dodging the rental income.  PEW is stupid.  In an effort to dodge reporting that income for the CS calculation, she is willing to sacrifice $600/month to save what will amount to an impact of approximately $25.  Not the brightest bulb in the box.
2. In doing #1, she is subjecting herself (however hard as it may seem to believe) to potential sanctions, not only from this court, but from the IRS.  If she claims that Psycho-SIL has moved out (again) and she moves back in, I will immediately file a contempt-of-court motion.  Not the brightest bulb in the box.
3. Assuming it’s costing her at least as much as me to pursue litigation and knowing what my worst-case exposure number is, she will pay somewhere north of $5,000 and will obtain about what we offered (the REAL number, not a lesser number, this is a guideline figure) of about $2,000.  Net gain:  -$3,000.  That’s NEGATIVE $3,000.  Not the brightest bulb in the box.

But, if you’ve read the painstaking detail I’ve provided, you already know that this is the same modus operandi she has used in nearly every single financial issue that has come up in our battle.  She has consistently spent more in legal fees than she has received in reward and she is doing it again.  She’s fucking insane.

One final exchange between D-Mac and I:

D-Mac: Bulldog has obviously bought every single story that PEW has told her.  That much is clear.

Mister-M: I know.  Like the two attorneys who failed to come through for her and then realized what a monster she was before quitting or being fired.

D-Mac: Very true.  And sad.

Mister-M: And costly.

D-Mac: Yes.

Mister-M: Well, at least with attorney2, I won’t forget that knowing glance and nod he gave to me before exiting the courtroom that last day we saw him on the custody matter.  He knew he got sandbagged by  her lies.

D-Mac: OH, YES!  I saw that!  I remember that.

Mister-M: Good, it helps me to know I wasn’t hallucinating after his efforts to question me.

Small consolation.