Car that was gifted to my son in divorce settlement - who has keys in dispute

[aviator2012]

Dealing with her has been a nightmare - and you're right, this whole agreement was drawn up outside of
court, but then considered to be the final judgement. It should have been worded better - I just spoke to my
son and he's happy with me keeping the key - my ex does not like the fact I could have access to the garage controller
- she's such a sad case ! but good luck to her.

thanks all.

 

[LdiJ]

Dealing with her has been a nightmare - and you're right, this whole agreement was drawn up outside of
court, but then considered to be the final judgement. It should have been worded better - I just spoke to my
son and he's happy with me keeping the key - my ex does not like the fact I could have access to the garage controller
- she's such a sad case ! but good luck to her.

thanks all.

Would you be happy with your ex having access to YOUR garage controller? I doubt that anyone would be particularly happy about that.

 

[Zigner]

Honestly, I think OP has decided to draw a line in the sand, all else be danged.

 

[Just Blue]

Honestly, I think OP has decided to draw a line in the sand, all else be damned.

****************************.....

 

[justalayman]

Thanks - I told my ex to go make a set of keys, but more than likely
if my son asks for them, I will give him them and make a copy for myself.
Certainly if the car is titled to me , I should have a key.

then title the car to your son as the court order requires. It is not supposed to be your car. It is supposed to be your son's. It isn't your problem what the ex pays for insurance....


but who says she is required to pay insurance? Maintenance can be construed to mean costs to maintain which would include insurance. Additionally, if your son is old enough to drive, he can work towards paying for his own insurance. Regardless, the court requires the car be given to your son, which you have not done yet.

 

[LdiJ]

Honestly, I think OP has decided to draw a line in the sand, all else be danged.

That is crystal clear. He has not gifted the car to his son at all, and insists on having keys to it and mom's garage controller.

Now, I can understand the practicality of leaving the car in his name...insurance and all of that, but that is actually defrauding the insurance company because if the son was properly listed as the primary driver of the car, the insurance would be just as high as the son being the titled owner.

However I think he is just being stubborn and foolish about the keys and particularly the garage controller. He is opening himself up to serious potential problems by still having access to mom's home (via the garage controller). If that cannot be separated from the key, then its just plain dumb not to turn them over.

My ex had a key to my house, but we were great friends after our divorce and I wanted him to have the key (made life easier for me sometimes). However I had to talk him into taking it, because he recognized that it wasn't "normal".

 

[Zigner]

but who says she is required to pay insurance? Maintenance can be construed to mean costs to maintain which would include insurance.

I disagree. One can maintain a car that is not insured. Heck, some cars aren't even required to be insured (but, of course, that doesn't apply in this situation.)

Additionally, if your son is old enough to drive, he can work towards paying for his own insurance. Regardless, the court requires the car be given to your son, which you have not done yet.

Yes, absolutely.

 

[justalayman]

I disagree. One can maintain a car that is not insured. Heck, some cars aren't even required to be insured (but, of course, that doesn't apply in this situation.) Yes, absolutely.

the term maintenance can include items such as plates (registration) and insurance as well as the more common use of the term such as tires and oil changes. It isn't a matter of whether it can be maintained (as in the second explanation) without insurance on it. It is whether insurance is considered maintenance and if so, the answer is the OP is required to pay for it.

especially since OP is required to maintain registration, I would see insurance as part of that as insurance must be maintained in order for it to be legally registered.

regardless the OP has violated the terms of the order


and if I was the ex I would be hauling his ass back into court to address the access to her residence issue. OP sounds controlling and creepy.