SPARC Forums

Main Forums => General Issues => Topic started by: awakenlynn on Jul 11, 2007, 08:27:42 PM

Title: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 11, 2007, 08:27:42 PM
Ex filed a petition to vacate a foreign order that she registered and to put in place the visitation that she wants.  We received those papers.

Ex then filed for a temporary hearing, which was sort of today.  Ex never filed a petition for a temp. hearing, nor did ex answer the interogettories they we sent.  We had no idea WHY we were going to court today.  Actually we didn't go, just attorney went.

The main reason our attorney informed us was for the temp hearing, was because even BEFORE visitation started, apparently we weren't allowing ex to stay in contact as much as she wanted with SD (she is 14).

(make sense?)

What ex WANTS is to impose her rules on us, which we won't allow.  We have 3 rules:
1, SD cell phone is off when we are home, we have a home landline and ex can call as often as she wants.
2, SD can take her phone with her if she goes out. (but she has to remember to keep it charged, on and take it with her)
3, SD has to let us know she is going to call her mom (this is only because the phone line is also the computer line and you can't do both at once.

If we are not home (which is often, for some reason ex thinks we spend our entire 8 weeks, sitting and twiddling our thumbs) and ex calls and leaves a message, we ALWAYS tell SD and SHE chooses if she wants to call back, sometimes she doesn't want to and we are not going to force her to.

Ex wants to know friends #'s so she can call there, she won't even do that for us!  If SD wants to speak with her mother, she can use her cell phone.
Ex wants MY family information because when it gets really hot (we don't have a/c) we spend the night there.  SD is welcome to call on her step-grandmother's phone and has done numerous times, and if SD wants she can use her cell phone, she just chooses not to.

So the 2 attorneys talked (basically our attorney, asking why he was even there) and they agreed to reschedule for it next week.  Ex talks with her daughter AT LEAST once a week if not twice, just like we do.
Ex says she is SD's mother and should be able to talk to her more.  (oh, the meaning of logic)

So we get the details down better with our attorney tomorrow along with 3 swimming lessons, golf lessons, work, running errands and trying to purchase a new, used car (ours was totalled last week in an accident hit and run, thankfully we weren't in it at the time!!!)  Where am I supposed to find more time?  I can't wait for school!!!!

Lynn
Title: RE: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 12, 2007, 11:28:05 AM
I would think about whether this is a battle you really want.

First, IMHO, both parents have a right to know where the children are all the time and to talk to them at any time (unless it becomes unreasonable). It would have to be a lot more than once a week to be unreasonable. If BM calls and SD isn't there, she has a right to know where she is. And I don't think it's the least bit unreasonable for her to be able to contact SD when you're at your family's house. You seem to want it both ways - use the cell phone when YOU want and use the land line when YOU want. I don't think that's fair.

As for cell phone vs. home line, what difference does it make? SD has a right to private conversations with her mother and if it's more convenient to use the cell phone, why make an issue of it?

I don't personally see anything that says they're asking all that much and suspect that the fight won't be worth it - especially when SD is at the age when she's starting to spread her wings preparing to fly away - and you risk her resenting your control on her communication with her mother.

Think really hard before getting into a legal battle over something that just doesn't matter all that much in the scheme of things. If BM starts talking to SD 2 hours a day, you have a different issue.
Title: I agree....
Post by: Genie on Jul 12, 2007, 07:16:35 PM
I know that if my D's were gone for 8 weeks, I would be talking to them more than 1 - 2 times a week.  In fact, it would be every day to every other day tops.  It is not b/c I would want to make X's life miserable - it would be b/c I would miss the girls and want to here about their days.  No be nosy, just talk about what they have been doing.  Shoot 8 weeks is a long time to be away when you are used to being with them almost every day.

As for phone calls, I agree it doesn't matter what phone she talks on.  Hey if she uses the cell then she is using their minutes and BM is paying for the call, not you. Don't know if it is a long distance call or not.

As for staying at your parent's house, I would insist I could contact on her cell phone when she is there.  I would also want to know the address.  Not being nosy but just b/c I have a right to know.  Just as X would have a right to know my parent's address if I was staying there.

It goes both ways.  I'm sure there is more to it than just this but sometimes the battle just isn't worth it.  Let her use her cell and give her your parent's address.  
Title: But..............
Post by: Kitty C. on Jul 12, 2007, 08:40:51 PM
Maybe I'm reading this all wrong, but I see nowhere in the OP that they were keeping the SD from staying in contact with the BM.  It sounds like the SD has unlimited access to either the cell or landline, it's just a matter (in certain specific instances) of which one to use when.  The impression I'm getting from the OP is that the BM is insisting that the SD be available at ALL times, regardless of their plans.

And maybe it's just me, but IMO, one call a week seems plenty to stay in touch when your child is away, especially if they're older.  I would put DS on a plane and send him 1800 miles away every summer for 2 months, starting when he was 8 years old.  Yes, I missed him terribly... I bawled like a baby when his plane would take off.  But I also realized that his dad must have missed him so much more, since he only got to see DS 2 months out of the year.  So I didn't want to intrude on the little time they got to spend together.  And since they liked to go camping, I also knew there would be frequent times that I couldn't get a hold of them anyway.  So I figured leaving a message for DS to hear was the least I could do.  Whether he returned the call or not wasn't the important thing, but knowing I was staying in touch meant so much more to him.

Personally, I think the phone call rules the BM is demanding of the OP is way out of line.  It sounds like the BM is more concerned about HER control than of the time the SD gets to spend with her BF and family.  The whole thing reeks of the BM's selfishness and appears to have no concern for the SD at all.  And it appears that the SD is making up her own mind about how she wants to handle it, by her desire to either return the calls to BM or not.  So I think the bottom line is that this is an issue between the BM and the SD and the BF and family are caught up in it.  But then, that's JMO..............
Title: RE: But..............
Post by: dipper on Jul 12, 2007, 09:52:31 PM
I agree with Kitty.  If the mother can contact SD through her cell phone, I dont think she needs the grandparents info as well.  BM never gave us that and they lived with her parents!  If dh wanted to talk to ss, he was to call bm's cell.  I think the physical address of where the child is spending nights is enough.  I do not think they should have to provide this for sd's friends.   That sounds too controlling to me....the parent that has the child at the time needs to be trusted to make sound judgements about who the daughter is with.

Also, the few times my girls have spent a few days with their dad, I did not call because it is his time.  Did I miss them?  Of course, but that is about me and not them....and the other parent deserves time uninterrupted.  We all hear the stories of a parent USING the phone calls to cling to the child.  I dont see anything wrong with calling once a week, and this bm has every chance to call her daughter...its only that the daughter doesnt always want to call her  back.  And at her age, i wouldnt force her to do that either.  
Title: RE: But..............
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 12, 2007, 11:43:57 PM
Several things to consider:

1. The BM may be concerned that dad will be listening in (or even taping) on a separate line if she calls the home phone. Given the level of control that BOTH parents seem to be playing here, that seems like a reasonable concern to me.

2. While some of you may see it differently, I think that both parents have the right to know where the kid is and how to contact them at all times. I certainly keep my ex informed all the time.

3. Relying solely on a teenager's cell phone isn't the most reliable method. I suspect that our kids were typical and they either didn't have their phone with them or forgot to charge it or had it turned off half the time.

4. It DOES appear that dad is limiting daughter's access to BM. For example, if she's only allowed to use the land line and the land line is on the same line as the computer, she's prevented from calling her mother when someone is using the computer. Let's say Dad starts a long download - oops, daughter can't call her mom. OP is taking the position that once a week is enough - and I don't think it is.

For those reasons, I don't think BM's request is unreasonable and I don't think the judge will find it unreasonable, either. OP is likely to spend a lot of money and lose, anyway. But, of course, that's up to her.
Title: RE: But..............
Post by: Kitty C. on Jul 13, 2007, 10:04:57 AM
Mist,

The OP also stated that if the landline was being used for the computer, the cell phone could be used.  That's what I mean by unlimited access.  It really appears that the SD herself is choosing whether or not to speak to her mother.  Let's look at it this way:  if there are no issues between mother and daughter, then I would take a second look at what's going on in the BF's home.  But the 'rules' that the BM wants to impose smack heavily of her insisting on control of the situation.  

Again, I see nothing in the OP that tells me the BM can't call any time or the SD can't call her back at any time.  So if it's an issue with the BM, then the problem lies there as well.

And there were MANY days I did not know specifically where DS was in CA with his dad.  And it wasn't my business, either.  The time DS spent with his dad was their's alone and I had no business knowing everywhere they went every day.
Title: RE: But..............
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 13, 2007, 01:33:36 PM
>Mist,
>
>The OP also stated that if the landline was being used for the
>computer, the cell phone could be used.  That's what I mean by
>unlimited access.  It really appears that the SD herself is

No, it's not. Let's say BM wants to call SD. The line is busy. How does she know that the computer is in use, giving her 'permssion' to call the cell phone? That would work if SD is initiating the call, but not if BM initiates the call. All she knows is that the line is busy - not that the computer is in use.

>choosing whether or not to speak to her mother.  Let's look at

If that's the case, then dad is making an issue over nothing. But I don't think it's the case. The mother is spending money on an attorney and hearing because she doesn't get enough access.

>it this way:  if there are no issues between mother and
>daughter, then I would take a second look at what's going on
>in the BF's home.  But the 'rules' that the BM wants to impose
>smack heavily of her insisting on control of the situation.  

Sounds to me like dad is trying to control the situation, as well. That's quite clear from his nit-picky rules (you must use the landline, but if the computer is in use, you have to use the cell phone).

>
>Again, I see nothing in the OP that tells me the BM can't call
>any time or the SD can't call her back at any time.  So if
>it's an issue with the BM, then the problem lies there as
>well.

Other than, of course, the fact that the father is controlling the situation. How does the mother know the father is not recording or listening in on the conversation?

>
>And there were MANY days I did not know specifically where DS
>was in CA with his dad.  And it wasn't my business, either.
>The time DS spent with his dad was their's alone and I had no
>business knowing everywhere they went every day.

You're free to run your life however you want. But having joint custody, I need to be able to get in touch with my daughter any time I wish. While there will be circumstances where that's not possible, I would certainly strive to know where she was most of the time.

For example, the father says that they stay at his parent's house 'when it's hot' because they don't have A/C. In my part of the country, that could be 3-4 months at a time. I think it's completley unreasonable to not know where your child is- especially when it's a routine thing (and not just the occasional overnight vacation).
Title: RE: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 13, 2007, 04:38:07 PM
Well, first off ex's attorney got a temp hearing date, but never filed any papers for it.

Second, its not really our fight.  We have our rules.  We really think 14 is still too young to have a cell phone, she still isn't responsible with it.
Also the rule is when we are home, she uses the land phone-this way there is proof that ex is calling and that ex has all the contact she wants, otherwise she lies like she is in court and saying she can't contact SD and we don't give messages (which we give SD as soon as we get the message)
The second rule is that SD IS allowed to take her cell phone when she goes out, she just has to be responsible for it.  

Ex refuses to give us any information if SD is not home and when she goes to family or friends, if SD wants to take the cell she does. if she doesn't we don't make her.

We have the landline rule because we do have trouble with ex and she is the pressing the issue, not us.  She has been claiming since before the visitation started that she could not reach SD whenever she wanted instead of following the court order.
Title: RE: But..............
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 13, 2007, 05:09:05 PM
Because of work schedules, we are rarely on the computer during the day, but once in awhile, I do need to get on to pay bills, the ex is court ordered certain times when she can call, but chooses not to. We do not download things, and if we have to we wait until after kids are in bed.

If SD didn't have a cell phone, half the arguements wouldn't hold.  SD can reach her mother whenever she wants.  Ex is court ordered times and we give her MUCH more latitude than that.

Yes, we live in the midwest and there are days it is over 85.  Unfortunately we do not have the money to install or buy a/c's so we have to go to my parent's house.  and when we do, its only for a day herSD lets her mother know and if SD wants to take her cell phone to stay in touch she does.

I don't think we are controlling, we have 2 rules and we are considerate of SD and the phone.

Ex has court ordered call times, but she is still going to court because she doesn't get the 24/7 access that she wants.
Title: RE: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 13, 2007, 07:29:50 PM
>Well, first off ex's attorney got a temp hearing date, but
>never filed any papers for it.
>
>Second, its not really our fight.  We have our rules.  We
>really think 14 is still too young to have a cell phone, she
>still isn't responsible with it.
>Also the rule is when we are home, she uses the land
>phone-this way there is proof that ex is calling and that ex
>has all the contact she wants, otherwise she lies like she is
>in court and saying she can't contact SD and we don't give
>messages (which we give SD as soon as we get the message)
>The second rule is that SD IS allowed to take her cell phone
>when she goes out, she just has to be responsible for it.  
>
>Ex refuses to give us any information if SD is not home and
>when she goes to family or friends, if SD wants to take the
>cell she does. if she doesn't we don't make her.
>
>We have the landline rule because we do have trouble with ex
>and she is the pressing the issue, not us.  She has been
>claiming since before the visitation started that she could
>not reach SD whenever she wanted instead of following the
>court order.

This is my last comment.

I would urge you to get some advice from a neutral third party. Frankly, I don't know about Ex, but IMHO, you're being extremely controlling.

For example, "14 is too young for a cell phone" is ridiculous. While YOU may not wish your daughter to have a cell phone at 14, it is not unusual to see 8 or 10 year olds with cell phones. I don't know about other schools, but at my daughter's school, it looks like 90+% of 14 year olds have cell phones.

As for the rest, just what rational reason is there for forbidding the use of a cell phone at home if you're not trying to control it. "I don't like it" or "she should do what I want" isn't a rational reason. Just what LOGICAL, RATIONAL reason do you have? On the other side, there's a very clear, logical, rational reason - she may be concerned about you recording conversations - which is harder to do with a cell phone, at least without the SD seeing it.

Seems to me that you're making a battle where none needs to exist. If you set a rule that cell phone use was not allowed after 9 pm (or whatever) or only 1 hour per day or whatever (both of these can be enforced simply by looking at the bills), that might be reasonable. But it sure looks to me like you're making arbitrary, emotion-based rules that have no logical basis and are instigating trouble.

As I said, that's my last comment on this thread.
Title: RE: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: Jade on Jul 13, 2007, 09:25:29 PM
>Well, first off ex's attorney got a temp hearing date, but
>never filed any papers for it.
>
>Second, its not really our fight.  We have our rules.  We
>really think 14 is still too young to have a cell phone, she
>still isn't responsible with it.
>Also the rule is when we are home, she uses the land
>phone-this way there is proof that ex is calling and that ex
>has all the contact she wants, otherwise she lies like she is
>in court and saying she can't contact SD and we don't give
>messages (which we give SD as soon as we get the message)
>The second rule is that SD IS allowed to take her cell phone
>when she goes out, she just has to be responsible for it.  


The above argument isn't going to fly with a judge.  BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact.  A cell phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.  



>
>Ex refuses to give us any information if SD is not home and
>when she goes to family or friends, if SD wants to take the
>cell she does. if she doesn't we don't make her.
>
>We have the landline rule because we do have trouble with ex
>and she is the pressing the issue, not us.  She has been
>claiming since before the visitation started that she could
>not reach SD whenever she wanted instead of following the
>court order.


The ex's child should be able to call her mother using her cell or the landline.  The ex's child has a right to speak to her mother anytime she wants to.

Your attempt to control that is only going to backfire in court.  

Title: RE: But..............
Post by: Jade on Jul 13, 2007, 09:29:20 PM
>I agree with Kitty.  If the mother can contact SD through her
>cell phone, I dont think she needs the grandparents info as
>well.  

The father requires the child to turn the cell phone off and uses the landline for both personal calls and the computer.  

Clearly, the mother can't contact her daughter via the cell phone if the father has made the child turn the cell phone off.

Title: RE: Sort of had a hearing
Post by: lucky on Jul 14, 2007, 08:17:12 AM
If you have a court order stating times that she can call, follow it to the letter from now on and if you end up in court tell the judge that you allowed unlimited access because you felt that was right, but because BM couldn't get hold of SD everytime she called, BM began to harrass you so you decided to stick to the court order.

We had the issue that BM was calling 20+ times per day at any time, she'd call a midnight and bitch because we wouldn't let her talk to the kids!  On a worknight to boot.  We ended up getting a court order allowing her to call between 8am and 8pm, two calls initiated by her per day (including those resulting in voice mails) with a maximum of one hour per call.  Kids calling to her were unlimited.  She learned not to leave a voice mail - we had caller ID and told the kids (assuming they hadn't already checked it) when she called.  Am I controlling?  Probably.  BUT, this is my home, I have the right to control it and she has NO right to disrupt our lives.

BTW, I agree with the 14 yo having a cell phone.  Our kids aren't allowed to have one and when BM got OSD a cell, we took it away and told BM that if it came into our house again, it would be destroyed.  Didn't see it again after that.

Was destroying it legal?  No, but our point was made and I was willing to deal with the legal consequences of my actions as BM makes absolutely NO RULES about our home and how it is run.

[em]Lucky

Lead your life so you wouldn't be ashamed to sell the family parrot to the town gossip.
- Will Rogers[em]
Title: Not necessarily...............
Post by: Kitty C. on Jul 14, 2007, 12:33:46 PM
'BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact. A cell phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.'

Better check your plan first.  The only way I can get that kind of service is to pay extra for it.  We have to pay extra on DH's because his is considered a work phone and gets reimbursed for it.  But I don't have it on my plan because I felt it was money better spent to have unlimited national coverage.

'The ex's child should be able to call her mother using her cell or the landline. The ex's child has a right to speak to her mother anytime she wants to.'

She DOES............she just chooses NOT to at times.  Let me ask again......why isn't the BM questioning the SD as to why SD isn't calling her back?  Or should the BF be FORCING the SD to call the BM back?

I agree with lucky.................if there's a court order that SPECIFIES when the BM can call (and she's abusing the privilege of the unlimited access that the BF allows beyond the CO) then better to stick to the CO until it's ironed out in court.
Title: My only issue would be how to call her if I was BM.....
Post by: Genie on Jul 14, 2007, 05:15:52 PM
and this may be the root of it all here...

She can't use the cell phone if she is home but she can use it if she goes out.  So how does BM know if she is home or not?  Try calling landline, get machine then call cell phone?  That is inconvenient.

You stated when at your parents, SD can use their phone to call BM if wants.  Again, why can't she use the cell phone?  

What I woudl feel like in this instance is that I am damned if I do and damed if I don't.  I would never know what phone to call her on because I would never know if she was home or not or at your parent's house or not.  It would be quite frustrating.

Rules are good and necessary when you have children and SKs that come to visit.  It is the only way to keep everyone on the same page and in order.  However, I wouldn't want to be subjected to those rules as a parent.  If I want to call my children at a decent hour (I would go by times that were too late and early to call unless emergency. That is not unreasonable), I shouldn't have to make several calls just to figure out how to get ahold of her.  

I know that many NCPs complain that they can't get ahold of children or don't get calls back when at the CP's house and how it isn't right and the CP should make the children available to talk and call back the NCP.  Isn't this the same thing but in reverse?
Title: Ok this makes more sense now.....
Post by: Genie on Jul 14, 2007, 05:25:29 PM
I have more facts so I can post better.  Sorry about anything I said.

If there are times that she is supposed to call, then no matter what, SD should be available.  If you aren't home then, SD should call her BM at that time.  I think this would alleviate some of her hard feelings about the whole thing.

I would be very interested in hearing the outcome of all of this. Please keep us posted on what happens.

Question - when SD is at BM's house, is the court order reversed and DH has specified times he can call?  Is SD available to talk when he calls? Can he call her on her cell?  Does SD call back if the call is missed? Does BM "make" SD call DH back?

Answers to those questions could forsee the outcome of all this. If SD is the same with BF as with BM then that shows that it is not your doing, it is a 14 yr old being a teenager.  
Title: Hey - by the way...
Post by: Genie on Jul 14, 2007, 05:29:02 PM
what part of IL are you in?  I am in IL too.  Dupage county in Northern IL.  I definitely know what you mean about the hot days.  Those 90's last weekend were a killer!!!

I went without air conditioner for many years too or didn't use it b/c I couldn't afford the high electric bills at the time. Fans were my best friend but didn't do quite the job.  And when the SKs were over and it was hot, all they did was complain.  Totally understand you going to your parent's house for some relief.

Hope you guys are having a good Summer despite BM's actions.
Title: RE: My only issue would be how to call her if I was BM.....
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 14, 2007, 06:36:32 PM
>and this may be the root of it all here...
>
>She can't use the cell phone if she is home but she can use it
>if she goes out.  So how does BM know if she is home or not?
>Try calling landline, get machine then call cell phone?  That
>is inconvenient.

Excellent point.
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: Jade on Jul 15, 2007, 08:18:24 PM
>'BTW, there is proof with a cell phone of contact. A cell
>phone lists BOTH outgoing and incoming calls.'
>
>Better check your plan first.  The only way I can get that
>kind of service is to pay extra for it.  We have to pay extra
>on DH's because his is considered a work phone and gets
>reimbursed for it.  But I don't have it on my plan because I
>felt it was money better spent to have unlimited national
>coverage.
>

Not all cellphone companies charge for incoming calls as well as outgoing calls?  Do you know which one this is so that I can look into it?

While I don't use all of my minutes (which are unlimited on nights and week-ends), both incoming and outgoing calls count towards the minutes on my plan.  

And if I go over, I have to pay for the extra minutes.  Even on the incoming calls.  
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: Kitty C. on Jul 16, 2007, 09:32:50 AM
Not quite what I meant........

Most cell companies will not automatically give you a print-out of all incoming and outgoing calls unless you specifically request it and most will make you pay extra for it.  We get a print-out of all of DH's calls becuase his is a work phone, but we don't on mine and DS's because I'd rather pay for unlimited national.  So all we get is how many minutes we've used during that billing period.

I am assuming that if you want a print-out of a bill for a specific month, the cell co. may charge a fee for that, as well.  Check your local provider.
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 16, 2007, 12:28:09 PM
>Not quite what I meant........
>
>Most cell companies will not automatically give you a
>print-out of all incoming and outgoing calls unless you
>specifically request it and most will make you pay extra for
>it.  We get a print-out of all of DH's calls becuase his is a
>work phone, but we don't on mine and DS's because I'd rather
>pay for unlimited national.  So all we get is how many minutes
>we've used during that billing period.
>
>I am assuming that if you want a print-out of a bill for a
>specific month, the cell co. may charge a fee for that, as
>well.  Check your local provider.

We use Cingular - and you can go online to get a list if incoming and outgoing calls at no charge.
Title: RE: Ok this makes more sense now.....
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 16, 2007, 07:12:06 PM
Yes, the court order says that the party that does not have the SD can call NO LESS than Wed's between 7-8pm.  Both sides are usually lenient about when the other calls since both families lives are so busy.  We usually call 2-3 times a week since we only get SD 10 weeks a year and out of leaving messages, we get to speak to SD maybe 1 time a week.  SD is rarely "available" to talk, her cell phone or charger gets "lost" or she doesn't get the messages.  When we try ex's phone we never get a response unless SD answers.  SD rarely keeps her phone on her.  She's 14 and we understand most of that age.  SD sometimes calls back and ex frowns on it when SD wants to, ex makes life very uncomfortable and talks bad about dad to SD.

We let SD know when mom calls and SD calls back when she wants, this is the only time she gets to be a kid, mom makes her take care of her brother and sister (has since they were both infants).
Title: RE: Hey - by the way...
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 16, 2007, 07:16:55 PM
Thanks, our case was in Macon county, but we actually live in IA, we have to go to my parents house really for health reasons, my husband loves this heat!!! I can't wait til winter lol.  I had heat stroke so the heat makes me physically ill and my daughter who is 4 was a premie, so some heat still makes her sick too.

Even with the heat, we are doing everything we can to have a blast having our family complete for a few weeks!
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 16, 2007, 07:30:24 PM
We used to have Verizon and any incoming cell phone calls, came in as incoming and listed our city and ex has the same service.  There was NO WAY to tell when the other party called because we didn't have proof, so we got the house phone.  

Verizon didn't offer any way to get the cell phones to to list on the plans.
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: Jade on Jul 16, 2007, 08:42:30 PM
>We used to have Verizon and any incoming cell phone calls,
>came in as incoming and listed our city and ex has the same
>service.  There was NO WAY to tell when the other party called
>because we didn't have proof, so we got the house phone.  
>
>Verizon didn't offer any way to get the cell phones to to list
>on the plans.


I have Verizon and I get the phone numbers without paying for it.  It must be the plan that you got or the area.  
Title: RE: Not necessarily...............
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 17, 2007, 05:01:59 AM
>We used to have Verizon and any incoming cell phone calls,
>came in as incoming and listed our city and ex has the same
>service.  There was NO WAY to tell when the other party called
>because we didn't have proof, so we got the house phone.  
>
>Verizon didn't offer any way to get the cell phones to to list
>on the plans.

You must live in a strange area. I get all the incoming and outgoing phone numbers on the cell phone but NOT on the house phone.
Title: Had the hearing...LOL
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 18, 2007, 06:59:53 PM
Ok, the hearing was today, and neither side really "won"

Boy, ex THREW A FIT thought.  She kept making wild accusations between the 2 attorneys and it finally went to court.

Ex wanted unlimited weekly contact.  Now remember, there already is an order in effect that states "no LESS than every Wed, between 7 and 8 pm.

Ex was saying that she wanted day time hours, so my husband could not "monitor" calls.  That is what really made us furious and laugh at the same time.  SD goes to her room or the upstairs bathroom when she calls her mother or when her mother calls her!  She is totally ALONE and there is no way to monitor the calls even if we wanted to.  EX said that my husband makes SD sit right next to him or stands over his shoulder, what a laugh!  That is what ex does.  SD has already said that she knows dad doesn't do that and offered to call her mom and tell her so.  I said no, we didn't want to put her in the middle with her mom.  I may ask her to write it down later, and that will be the last of it.

Sooo, what ex got: (Now remember there is only 1 WEEK left of the visit).  Ex is allowed to call 3X's this week between 10-10:45am cell phone to cell phone. All we have to do is ASK that SD keep the phone charged and available, (which we do anyways)  All we asked SD was that if her mom called, to let us know so we can keep a record of the contact, since we lost the records that we would have gotten from the home phone.  We are not required to make SD have it, carry it, keep it on or take it with her, all that is up to SD.  We let her know what the judge said (ex had already told her that she was taking us to court) and she started laughting, beccause she has no idea where the charger is and being a teenage girl's room, we could look for 2 years and still not find everything hiding there!

I can't beleive they all spent 8 HOURS in the courthouse and court because ex threw a fit over calling the house phone for one week.  She is going to have a harder time reaching her daughter now, than she had before!!  We are going to keep our part of the order the same, "NO LESS than Wed, between 7-8pm" because then we can call whenever we want still.

We are going to ask though that parts of the order become receiprocal.  We are required to let ex know when SD goes out of town and give a place where to reach SD along with a contact number, we are going to ask that ex do the same.  

Well, that is how this one ended.  We have a full hearing sometime later in the year.
Title: RE: Had the hearing...LOL
Post by: dipper on Jul 18, 2007, 09:29:17 PM
Glad that things went okay.  Crazy what some people will drag into court.  As for her accusing your husband of doing what she does (listening in), I guess she just expects everyone to behave as badly as she does....

Well, if she cant talk to her daughter now, that's her own problem.....
Title: monitoring phone calls
Post by: MixedBag on Jul 19, 2007, 05:51:10 AM
you say that "She is totally ALONE and there is no way to monitor the calls even if we wanted to."  

From your home phone, you could record all conversations -- which is what my EX#2 and Camilla do quite often.

From the cell phone, this is true.

Personally, it's been hard to keep everything straight as to when you've been allowing daughter to have cell phone and I've read discussions from many parents on how a cell phone's presence is feared or not welcomed, or whatever.

My SS brought one once too and we were not too happy.  But in the end, by letting him have it, the "fun" of having one wore off quickly.  And this additional intrusion into our home was never felt.  EX never called it and always used the house phone.  All phone calls from her were immediately turned over to the kids with politeness from whomever answered the phone.

Now when the phone rang 20 times in 20 minutes, they'd get unplugged for a while (a few hours) and I think that's a different story.  We had our cell phones to call each other during those times -- and if someone REALLY needed us, they had our cell numbers too.

Title: RE: monitoring phone calls
Post by: awakenlynn on Jul 20, 2007, 08:36:42 PM
We would never have considered monitoring SD's calls.  And yes, the cell phone wore off quite fast.  She loses the charger constantly and if that isn't lost the phone is.  It is really hard when she is with her mother, since there is no land line to get ahold of the SD, and mom won't answer her cell phone if she knows it's my husband calling.

As to when the ex calls my husband, our attorney told us to tape those.  We are looking around for what might work for us and have already checked the laws in the 2 states-both are one party states, thankfully!  IL where the case used to be, was a 2-party state.

So we deal with ex (sort of- SD won't turn on cell phone, so ex is having to call after the court ordered hours on the house phone) for the next week.

Thanks,
Lynn
Title: RE: Had the hearing...LOL
Post by: mistoffolees on Jul 20, 2007, 09:01:40 PM
>Ex was saying that she wanted day time hours, so my husband
>could not "monitor" calls.

Which was exactly my point. Seems to me that ex has a right to have her calls private. The fact that you STATE that you would never consider monitoring calls is not sufficient protection of her right to privacy.

As for "I can't believe they all spent 8 hours in the court house", keep in mind that it takes two to have a fight. You're just as responsible for all the expense and hassle as ex is.

Seems to me like you're spending a lot of time and money over insisting on your ability to control the situation.