Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Time to file motion?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by dad2bandm View Post
    My observation, is that the only person throwing around the term HC (high conflict) in this thread is you. I've lost count of how many times.
    And I will say that even though I have no young children so might not be especially helpful in that circumstance, I do have an HC tobex and applaud MS Mom for having the guts to actually tell it like it is in her situation.

    From reading her posts, I find SadandTired has been more reasonable than most in her dealings with her ex. Anyone who has a HC tobex/ex should not be afraid to tell it like it is.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by caranna View Post
      ...I do have an HC tobex and applaud MS Mom for having the guts to actually tell it like it is in her situation...
      As an aside;

      As someone attempting to read through this forum's threads, and trying to wade through the non-relevant info, to be able to attempt to provide some useful advice to posters real questions, I don't "applaud" anyone or find it helpful, when they often interject into other people's threads, with non-relevant "oh yes, I'm used to dealing with an HC ex also...".

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by caranna View Post
        ...
        From reading her posts, I find SadandTired has been more reasonable than most in her dealings with her ex. Anyone who has a HC tobex/ex should not be afraid to tell it like it is...
        Again, not even sure where that assessment comes from, or how it's relevant to this thread, of helpful to people looking for advice on "should I share the driving or not"?

        Honestly, the majority of threads I have seen started by the original poster SadandTired, have been "looking for general advice" threads, updates on her seperation agreement and then divorce, etc. Nothing jumps out at me, at her ex being "high conflict", in her "updates", except people implying it because negotiation was required, or the two didn't agree on some aspects of negotiation? That is pretty common, and doesn't mean "high conflict".

        If anything, one could make a jump, and spin this, as her being the high conflict person, with some of her questions asked, but why even apply the label?

        Comment


        • #64
          dad2bandm, I am not looking for your applause. Your comment about my "interjecting" and indeed MS Mom's comment about HC seems to have pushed your buttons. You laid yourself wide open with your remark "the only person throwing around the term HC". Whether or not you find my comments helpful is irrelevant.

          To try to control who should comment and what they should comment on is very controlling. Your replies seem indicate a fear of confident women. I've learned by experience that controlling people think that they are "always" right. So I will not further argue with you.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by caranna View Post
            ...Your comment about my "interjecting" and indeed MS Mom's comment about HC seems to have pushed your buttons...

            ...To try to control who should comment and what they should comment on is very controlling. Your replies seem indicate a fear of confident women...
            I would say, it's my responses that pushed yours, given you weren't even commenting on the thread topic, and still aren't?

            People search these forums, looking for useful and hopefully child-centred advice when kids are involved, so I try to comment to those, who don't offer that, as many do, so that people don't take those comments as something that should be considered at face value, or that everyone agrees with. Nobody is stopping you or "controlling" posts, but such posts are not helpful.

            If I'm trying to search on "should I share driving of kids, with this request?", and I come across this thread, if I take some of the poster's advice in this thread, I should consider such a request as;

            - that person being "high conflict", for even asking
            - "Negotiation is not acceptable", over a minor driving request, because I should wave an agreement in one's face
            - and if I'm a doctor making the request, I should be buying a new-car for the other parent, along with such a request, for even asking?

            And if I disagree with all of that, apparently, I fear "confident women"?

            Both good and bad advice was given to original poster, so hopefully, people can deduce which they should generally take.

            Comment


            • #66
              At the risk of spinning this out even longer, what struck me as problematic about the OP's ex is that he appeared to go from zero to 60, sending angry lawyer letters and making demands rather than framing the issue as a request from him to the OP, asking for assistance, indicating interest in compromising. This issue - cars and transporting kids - is something which could have been negotiated between reasonable individuals.

              To me, this kind of "nuclear option" behavior is a sign of an unreasonable individual. With these kinds of individuals, sometimes the best thing to do is to hold them to the letter of the law, not because you're fundamentally opposed to negotiation but because if they get the idea that threatening and posturing will get them results, they will do nothing but threaten and posture. Sometimes this means being a stickler on issues which seem trivial from the outside.

              I had to "train" my ex out of similar behavior by doing exactly what posters here are advising the OP to do - keep reiterating the contents of the separation agreement and ignore his threats to go to court over silly things. My ex changed tactics when his initial behavior didn't bring results and is generally easier to deal with now (with the odd flareup).

              Comment


              • #67
                Within the past hour I received notification that my ex is withdrawing his application to eliminate SS. My ex likes to take me to court "on a whim." SadandTired did express fear that her ex would pull the same stunts on her.

                It is very expensive and emotionally trying to go through this.

                While some may feel that the advice I offered is not good advice, I would only say that my advice is based on my personal experience of having to deal with a vexatious litigant. Does the OP have a similar ex? Only time will tell.

                Admittedly I have never had to deal with co-parenting of minor children after a divorce, so yes, the advice I offer may indeed be construed as "poor advice" as a request for reliable transportation for driving children 50% of time may not sit well with many.
                Last edited by arabian; 11-29-2013, 12:28 PM.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by stripes View Post
                  At the risk of spinning this out even longer, what struck me as problematic about the OP's ex is that he appeared to go from zero to 60, sending angry lawyer letters and making demands rather than framing the issue as a request from him to the OP, asking for assistance, indicating interest in compromising. This issue - cars and transporting kids - is something which could have been negotiated between reasonable individuals...
                  I agree with this, in that yes, one would likely handle this different being if they were asked in a reasonable way first, or not, but I would still lean towards negotiating shared driving, since it is a minor issue. One should not make such a request via an angry lawyer letter, but one doesn't know. Generally, that is not how such requests are started. In any event, if it does go to court, I would not want to be the parent saying "I do not want to share driving".

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    It would stand to reason (although this is sheer speculation on my part) that the ex got the SUV BECAUSE he agreed to do the majority of the driving.

                    I think the OP just wanted to know the legalities insofar as the time limit, if there was one, on filing motion to change agreement.

                    Picking apart the intricacies of their separation agreement and making blanket judgement calls on the fairness of schlepping the kids around isn't really relevant.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      The implications in everyone's posts were that the OP was being "difficult" in her reluctance to deal with the travel issue. The implication was she was instigating conflict by not agreeing to her ex's whim of the week.

                      I think the OP needed to realize that saying NO, especially under the circumstances of just having reached an agreement, is not being difficult. Presumably he gave great thought to the agreement he spend tens of thousands of dollars on before he signed. Presumably he weighed all the pros and cons before he signed. It's been a mere 3 months since he signed. His demanding that she cave to this change is unreasonable all on it's own. The OP was asking just that, is it reasonable for him to request this change, a big change in her opinion, after only having reached an agreement a mere three months ago.

                      In the group's posts the OP was accused of being a multitude of things: lazy, not wanting drive in the winter, difficult in not compromising, unfair in the agreement she made, etc, etc, etc., when in reality, she has every right to refuse his demand. She isn't being unreasonable by expecting the agreement be respected.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by dad2bandm View Post
                        My observation, is that the only person throwing around the term HC (high conflict) in this thread is you. I've lost count of how many times.
                        Argumentative much?

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by dad2bandm View Post
                          I'm not sure how that is relevant at all, to this issue?

                          I don't understand how a request for the ex to buy a new car for other parent post divorce comes into play?

                          Seperation agreement should have accounted for split of vehicle/assets already in some fashion.

                          And my understanding of original poster's situation is that ex is/was a resident Dr. Student, making approximately about 70,000 a year. At least that was case just short while ago. With legal debt now. And presumably education debt. You word this like he's rich? Original poster had thread stating her legal debt. I would guess it's less than someone who does not qualify for legal aid which would be the ex.

                          Original poster is receiving child and spousal support apparently?

                          I'm not sure how one would present a "buy me a new car" case to a judge in this scenario?
                          I find it hysterical that you think opening the agreement to include a new car for the OP to be unreasonable, yet perfectly reasonable to open up the agreement to accommodate his driving request?

                          That's the part that spins my head. An agreement has been made, and unless there is a material change in circumstance she can tell her ex to stuff his driving request right up his ass....along with the god knows how much legal bill that the OP paid in order to get that agreement.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            S&T - He has to wait until there's a material change in circumstance, or when a term in the agreement has been reached, as far as I know. I'd be interested to know what he feels that change in circumstance is. The borrowed car is not yours.

                            If there is no real change, a judge would be annoyed.

                            We hammer out written agreements for a reason - so we don't have to spend time, money, and inner peace renegotiating and fighting every 3 months.

                            I say stand your ground on this one, as much as you can without affecting your child spending time with both of you. You just did up an agreement (agreement meaning both people agreed to the terms of the agreement), and he needs to know that you are not going to be his doormat and bend every time he changes his mind.

                            In future, when there actually has been a change in circumstance, be willing to renegotiate.

                            That's my opinion, anyway.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              what about the "spirit" of the agreement? He obviously thought (or maybe it was alluded to) that the purchase of a car would happen soon. Yes he should have put a time limit in the agreement for the OP to purchase a car and that was his mistake.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                My ex tried that angle ^ as well. He challenged what he referred to as "vague interpretation" of our divorce order. Another costly trip to meeting with judge for clarification of order. Judge was far from being impressed with my ex's lawyer. Judge stated that ex had benefit of being represented by experienced counsel. Motion, as usual, was denied.

                                Comment

                                Our Divorce Forums
                                Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                                Working...
                                X