About to walk away from settlement talks - a vent.

[lockedout]

For the past year, I've been trying to settle out the divorce with my soon BPD ex. I've made major financial sacrifices in order to try to buy her out on the house and I've offered way more than I should have for a property I sold that I'd owned on my own long before meeting her. I also made significant compromises in time sharing (what we call custody in FL) and child support. I asked for some compromises on money. She did it, but cam back looking for 5 other things in place of them, even more unreasonable that what I was asking for her to give in on.

I finally laid down the law and made it known that she either accepts what I've offered or I walk away from everything. This would include me no longer paying my half on the mortgage (been doing it for almost 2 years while she lives in it). I'll also go for the time sharing I want. She's all set to walk away from a large sum of money instead of showing some leniency. I've made it very clear that everything will be off the table and she will only end up with a huge legal bill.

This has been hard for me. I have started seeing a therapist who said that it may be time to walk away. My mental health has deteriorated over the months in dealing with this and it has contributed to problems at work. I need to be mentally stable for my son. It goes completely against my core beliefs to let the house foreclose, but at least I'll be able to survive again financially. I'll simply have to go on the defensive from this point on and make her do all the work and spend every last dime I would have given her; money she probably doesn't have. I already told her that I'll give it to charity before she sees a dime of it. The best part is that I still have most of my money.

I'm just trying to be at peace with this. I'm angry at myself in a way for not having done this a year ago. I should have known that if she couldn't compromise in marriage, why should I have thought she would turn over a new leaf to get through the divorce?

[ForeverDad]

I finally laid down the law and made it known that she either accepts what I've offered or I walk away from everything... .I've made it very clear that everything will be off the table and she will only end up with a huge legal bill.

It sounds counter-intuitive, but in our sort of high conflict cases a firm boundary is the best way to (maybe) reach an equitable outcome.

I already told her that I'll give it to charity before she sees a dime of it.

Be very careful this is not said where it can be raised as an issue in court.  You may be rightly frustrated but a judge may instead see it as made by a mean, angry and vindictive man.  Be fully aware that although courts claim to be gender-neutral, effectively women often get default and unwritten preferences.  You don't want to give the court any excuse to view her as a victim.

I'm just trying to be at peace with this. I'm angry at myself in a way for not having done this a year ago. I should have known that if she couldn't compromise in marriage, why should I have thought she would turn over a new leaf to get through the divorce?

But you had to try.  It's who you are, who we are.  Sadly, we can't risk being overly reasonable or overly whatever, it can be too easily used against us to sabotage ourselves.

We've concluded that the best way to blend mediation and court is to keep court moving along the various steps and stages, otherwise mediation is toothless, unlikely to impel her to really negotiate in a meaningful way and encourage delays.  For example, while the case was on hold for a year with no results to justify it, she's had free rent the past year, so in her perception there was no incentive to negotiate.

[Boss302]

For the past year, I've been trying to settle out the divorce with my soon BPD ex. I've made major financial sacrifices in order to try to buy her out on the house and I've offered way more than I should have for a property I sold that I'd owned on my own long before meeting her. I also made significant compromises in time sharing (what we call custody in FL) and child support. I asked for some compromises on money. She did it, but cam back looking for 5 other things in place of them, even more unreasonable that what I was asking for her to give in on.

I finally laid down the law and made it known that she either accepts what I've offered or I walk away from everything. This would include me no longer paying my half on the mortgage (been doing it for almost 2 years while she lives in it). I'll also go for the time sharing I want. She's all set to walk away from a large sum of money instead of showing some leniency. I've made it very clear that everything will be off the table and she will only end up with a huge legal bill.

This has been hard for me. I have started seeing a therapist who said that it may be time to walk away. My mental health has deteriorated over the months in dealing with this and it has contributed to problems at work. I need to be mentally stable for my son. It goes completely against my core beliefs to let the house foreclose, but at least I'll be able to survive again financially. I'll simply have to go on the defensive from this point on and make her do all the work and spend every last dime I would have given her; money she probably doesn't have. I already told her that I'll give it to charity before she sees a dime of it. The best part is that I still have most of my money.

I'm just trying to be at peace with this. I'm angry at myself in a way for not having done this a year ago. I should have known that if she couldn't compromise in marriage, why should I have thought she would turn over a new leaf to get through the divorce?

You're not alone here. My BPDx and I were required to "mediate" up front, which we did (and I spent a lot of money to do it, and for my attorney to attend). We reached an "agreement," which we both signed. And the next day, her attorney was asking to redo pieces of it. It ended up taking two months (and THOUSANDS of dollars in back and forth between her idiot lawyer and mine) to get the agreement into the form of court orders, and when it went in, it was the same agreement we signed. Months and thousands of dollars, right down the drain.

Years later, when the divorce dragged itself into the courtroom for the final hearing, the judge basically made us agree to mediate further disputes. I told him all about the first attempt at "mediation". He didn't seem impressed. So it ended up in our papers. And guess what BPDx's first demand was? That she be allowed to take the kids to a midnight showing of "The Hobbit" - on a school night, when she had them two days later all weekend. I told her no. She demanded mediation. Like we have to pay $200 an hour for some retired judge to decide THIS kind of irrelevant garbage?

I point this out for a reason: you cannot mediate unless both parties bargain in good faith, and that can't happen if one party is disordered and has no boundaries. There's a reason why North Korea still has nukes, you know. 

It might be time to make a stand on this and let the judge decide. Document your attempts at mediation and coming to an amicable agreement, and present them to the court.

On another note, I wouldn't let that house go in foreclosure if it all possible. It will hurt your credit (you definitely won't get a mortgage for another 10 years - I'm a mortgage underwriter, and you can bank on that), and if there is any equity, it will likely dissolve in the foreclosure. Perhaps you don't care about the equity, but BPDx does, and if you lose the property due to refusal to pay the mortgage, then she can make a case that you screwed her out of money that she was entitled to. You don't want that. Be sure to check with an attorney if this is what you plan on doing (I'd recommend against it).

ForeverDad is absolutely right - don't appear to be an angry man to the court, child custody evaluators, or anyone else involved in the case. I did, and it was a HUGE mistake. You have every right to be angry, but let it out where it won't hurt your case.

Hang in there.

[david]

I paid the mortgage for 3 years trying to get xBPDw to agree to let me buy her out. I finally realized that wasn't happening. I went to the bank and explained my situation. I gave the bank ex's phone number and told them to call her. Apparently they did and realized I was being honest. I stopped paying the mortgage. It took 5 months before I could get the house listed. It sold quickly because of the price. That was in 2010. Ex wanted over 100,000 more for the property but the agent convinced her that wasn't happening. We did have a decent amount of equity so that was one thing in my favor. The equity went into an escrow account until equitable distribution. She dragged that out several months but wanted her money. I stood my ground and wound up with a 70/30 split. My credit score was lower but not as bad as I thought it would be. I purchased a property in Feb to flip and had no problems. It should be sold in a few months with a profit.

I kept the bank informed the entire time with our house and I think that helped a lot.

When I stopped trying to "negotiate" a "fair" settlement and looked at things strictly as a business transaction and nothing more things began getting done and in my favor. Every roadblock ex put up I found a reasonable (in the courts view) solution that she was not able to refuse in front of the courts. During equitable distribution her atty took her out of the room and explained that it was in her best interest to settle now or risk getting less in front of a judge. My atty and I knew I left more on the table but it was worth not being married.

[lockedout]

I'm pretty much backed into a wall. I can't keep paying my half on the mortgage AND rent. I have to cut my losses. And while I don't have to appear "angry" in court, I certainly don't have to make anything easier on her. I payed my half for nearly two years in good faith that we would reach a settlement. I offered a fair settlement, higher child support, and a parenting plan that favored her. She continued to spit in my eye and demand more. I've also made the consequences of her not accepting my offer (everything I can reasonably afford) very clear to her. When she doesn't see that money in her account the next morning, she shouldn't be surprised.  She still has a choice.

This is more Boss32's department, but I can still try to avoid foreclosure. I could do deed-in-lieu or negotiate a short sale. There is some equity so the bank would get MOST of their money back. I can also propose that money that is now being held in escrow from the other property be used to pay the mortgage until the house sells. The problem I have is that "NO" is her answer to everything. No matter what I say, the answer is "NO" (or "MORE". There's no working with that, even if it does lead to foreclosure. I have already offered her half the equity based on the highest appraisal and she still demanded more. I got her to come down a little, but she demanded two more expensive things in exchange. There's no winning.

As far as the legal end goes, we're not filed yet and the local court district does require mediation anyway. But nothing requires me to accept the appalling terms she is going for. In the end, I may lose but so will she. I honestly think she wants the settlement to fail so she can paint herself as the victim. My stress level has been through the roof and I need to be there for my son. I may have to rent for the next ten years, but my credit will recover. The quality time I've lost already won't be recovered.

[Boss302]

This is more Boss32's department, but I can still try to avoid foreclosure. I could do deed-in-lieu or negotiate a short sale. There is some equity so the bank would get MOST of their money back. I can also propose that money that is now being held in escrow from the other property be used to pay the mortgage until the house sells. The problem I have is that "NO" is her answer to everything. No matter what I say, the answer is "NO" (or "MORE". There's no working with that, even if it does lead to foreclosure. I have already offered her half the equity based on the highest appraisal and she still demanded more. I got her to come down a little, but she demanded two more expensive things in exchange.

FYI, a "deed-in-lieu" is looked at the same as a foreclosure from a mortgage approval standpoint. A short sale is looked at less harshly, but it still affects your ability to get future financing. In either case, a foreclosure or short sale involves possible cancellation of debt, and that has tax implications (irs.gov/uac/Home-Foreclosure-and-Debt-Cancellation). If, say, the amount of cancelled debt is $50,000, then the mortgage company will send you a 1099 at the end of the year with that amount as taxable income. I believe this to be case by case, but it's certainly possible. My divorce involved a cancelled car loan, and that ended up as about $11,000 in taxable income for me. I'm by no means a tax professional, so be sure to consult one if you go down this road.

As an alternative, would it be possible to file an emergency motion with the court to address this so you can get the house off your books? I'd say that's your best case scenario. Clearly this is a critical financial issue for you, so perhaps you could ask the court to address it now and create an order that governs the sale of the home, division of proceeds (or who's responsible for any shortfall if the house is under water), etc. I think that's a better idea than letting the property go - I can foresee all kinds of legal, financial and tax implications for that.

[ForeverDad]

It is best to start the court case ASAP.  Yes, the court is likely to order mediation.  Be sure the court is aware that you've already been in mediation for a year with no success.  Whether that meets the court's criteria or not, well, that's up to the court to decide.  It may turn out that this past year in mediation was a complete waste of time and money.  Either way, it's time to stop the financial bleeding, the delay has only hurt you and enabled her.  Time to get domestic court involved.  Yes, your court's rulings can't be guaranteed in advance, but it's sure better than leaving the ex in de facto control.  It's time to have the court step up and assume the Authority.  The odds are that even if you don't like the court's rulings, they are almost surely going to be better, perhaps significantly better, than any concessions you might be able to wheedle from the ex.

Are you able to keep the custody issues separate from the financial issues?  It would be relatively straightforward for the court to rule on the standard financial issues.

Since your finances are stretched, you can likely file right from the start what needs to happen quickly, that the property in question has to be sold promptly.  Be aware ex will try to delay it, delays will only favor her.  Your job is to keep the case moving forward.  Be aware that you may have to ask the court for her to move out before the house can be cleaned, prepped, listed, shown and sold.  Be aware that court will give her a lot of time to move, so don't delay getting this all started.

[lockedout]

I'm not going to get into the court system until all efforts have been exhausted to settle out. Luckily, we both have attorneys who are much more moderate then we are; I could tell hers was pretty worked over during a meeting; I think she ran him down as much as I did. My attorney thought my e-mail to her outlining what may happen was threatening but I told him that I wasn't about to sugar coat what would happen if she continued to be greedy and unreasonable. She won't be able to say she wasn't warned. And why wouldn't I go for 50/50 time sharing if I had to go to court? Or at least something better.

As far as the foreclosure goes, I thought if this gem this morning: there is nothing preventing me from moving back into the house. This would not only avoid (at least delay) foreclosure by taking my rent off the books, but the mere threat of me moving in regardless of what's agreed to or not may be enough to motivate her to be fair. I would think that in the court system, doing something that is my legal right to do is would be looked upon more favorably than being the affecting cause of a default on the loan. All I know is that taking the high road with her just acts as an invitation to bulldoze me. It's time for that to stop.

[ForeverDad]

As far as the foreclosure goes, I thought if this gem this morning: there is nothing preventing me from moving back into the house. This would not only avoid (at least delay) foreclosure by taking my rent off the books, but the mere threat of me moving in regardless of what's agreed to or not may be enough to motivate her to be fair. I would think that in the court system, doing something that is my legal right to do is would be looked upon more favorably than being the affecting cause of a default on the loan. All I know is that taking the high road with her just acts as an invitation to bulldoze me. It's time for that to stop.

Moving back into the house could give her another motivation... .to make allegations of DV or child abuse in order to get an order forcing you out, hiring a criminal attorney, facing a criminal case/conviction/record, additional delays in the divorce, etc.  Ponder that risk.

I'm not saying she would go that far but pwBPD typically have no compunction about doing just that, especially if it's already known to have been contemplated or threatened.

In my case, my ex and I were religious volunteers together for some 8 years.  Later when we had a child, she chose our son to be the Golden Child and I was blacklisted, she did make allegations of every sort of child abuse.  Yes, even that.  She had contemplated it and threatened it.  And after we separated she made many allegations to the local children's hospital, in child therapy, to CPS, etc.  When I took our son on a vacation she even tried to get an Amber Alert declared.  Nothing is too low or too whatever.

[lockedout]

For now, I'm just talking about the threat. Actually doing it could be a different story.

[livednlearned]

Some states would look at your situation and declare that you have "abandoned the marital home." Check with your lawyer to see if that applies to your state.

In my state, mediation is required, but parties can waive it. Or, if you have to go through mediation, you can show up the day of, say two sentences, then walk out when she doesn't agree to your terms. It might be more of a formality where you are than anything real.

If your L thinks you are writing threatening emails, pay attention and don't do it anymore. For any reason. Lawyers don't usually toss around the word "threat" lightly.

Most pwBPD don't give a * about consequences. The only time I saw my ex flinch at a consequence was when the bailiff walked over to cuff him in the court room. And many pwBPD are expert at making threats. For them, it's about controlling people. Your threats may just be perceived as the same thing. 

[FamilyLaw]

May I make a general suggestion, from my perspective as a family law attorney and settlement judge?

Never trade off parenting time against financial considerations.  Keep custody/legal decision making authority/parenting time as a completely separate issue, based only the abilities of each parent to participate and take care of the kids.  Even though we all know that parenting time affects child support, pretend that it doesn't. (Except if you are going to agree to pay more/accept less child support than would be otherwise required given how much parenting time you have.)

Financial issues should only be traded off against other financial interests.  I know that when I have someone come to me and say that they are willing to give on a parenting time issue in order to get what they want on a financial issue, my first thought is that they care more about the money than the kids.  And why would I give someone consideration on a kid issue if I have the impression that what that parent really cares about is the money?

[livednlearned]

May I make a general suggestion, from my perspective as a family law attorney and settlement judge?

Never trade off parenting time against financial considerations.  Keep custody/legal decision making authority/parenting time as a completely separate issue, based only the abilities of each parent to participate and take care of the kids.  Even though we all know that parenting time affects child support, pretend that it doesn't. (Except if you are going to agree to pay more/accept less child support than would be otherwise required given how much parenting time you have.)

Financial issues should only be traded off against other financial interests.  I know that when I have someone come to me and say that they are willing to give on a parenting time issue in order to get what they want on a financial issue, my first thought is that they care more about the money than the kids.  And why would I give someone consideration on a kid issue if I have the impression that what that parent really cares about is the money?

Aren't you ethically bound as an attorney to not mix the two?

[FamilyLaw]

Aren't you ethically bound as an attorney to not mix the two?

I think so.  But not everyone agrees that when you are representing a parent you also have a duty to consider the best interests of the child.  But, personally, I couldn't work as a family law attorney if I had just advocate my client's perspective without also considering the kids.  Which may not make me the best advocate for my client, but I hope is morally the right thing to do.

[ForeverDad]

Yes, you will likely find a range of ethics among lawyers, hopefully mostly on the good side, they are working for their clients but still there are limits.  A lawyer would probably be sure to phrase offers in such a way that it couldn't be proven to be a blatant time for money tradeoff.  It's all in the art of negotiation and phrasing and lawyers have plenty of buzz words to describe something in whatever way needed.

I wonder if in such situations where the client is hellbent on selfish interest to the exclusion of the children's interests then one or both lawyers can recommend that the court assign the children their own lawyer, a Guardian ad Litem (GAL).

Early in my case I asked about using a GAL and my lawyer said it would be a waste of money.  After the divorce ended in Shared Parenting and the conflict continued as before, I went back to court, sought custody and obtained a Change of Circumstances ruling.  My lawyer then asked for a GAL after all.

[Nope]

My DH's ex found herself a really nasty peice of work for a lawyer. She is a criminal law attorney who does family law on the side. The woman made it clear from the get go that she could not care less if the kids died in her client's care so long as her client got everything she wanted. She gave no thought to how unreasonable or petty or how much of a blatent liar her client was, she just jumped in with both feet pushing what her client wanted to sell as hard as she could.

Of course, she tried the custody case like it was a criminal case. Thinking that all she had to do was create a tiny seed of c doubt that the emotional abuse, neglect and endangerment, and blocking access had occured in the face of binders of evidence and witness testimony. That didn't work out so well for her or her client, thankfully.

[lockedout]

Just an update in case anyone's interested. Divorce is settled out and final, better or  for worse. The refinance is also almost done, just a few more loopholes. She's still angry and resentful, but there's nothing I can do about it. She has been very inflexible as far as the parenting schedule goes, so instead of fighting with her, I just told her I'm documenting it all and if she's not going to be flexible, I can always petition the court for something better later. I just don't feel like getting down into her distorted world any more. I referred a girl I just went on a date with to this site, so I wanted to get an idea where to tell her to look. Funny how we become experts on this stuff.

[whirlpoollife]

The refinance is almost done... .who will be in the house?

[lockedout]

Me!

[livednlearned]

How is she being inflexible with the parenting schedule?

[lockedout]

It has to be exactly as written, no changes. I worked Christmas and I got him the day before Christmas Eve until the morning of Christmas Eve and because it wasn't originally an overnight, I had to give up one elsewhere. I'm just not fighting with her right now. I'm hoping she'll lighten up over time and when it suits her.

[david]

My ex left in 2007. She still likes to fight. I choose not to fight and that even triggers her. It's been said on this site many times, "Negative engagement is still engagement."

I am much better at knowing when to say no and when to just let it go. It's all about learning what your boundaries are.