# Former OM's gf calls wife two years later



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Short version of pertinent background: my wife has been in confirmed NC with the OM of an extended EA for about two years. (See...told you it was the short version.)

I'm currently out of town for work, and this morning, she texts me to let me know that the OM's gf called from his phone (his number deleted, so no name when it rang through, and she was expecting a call). His gf called because she thinks he's fooling around on her, and given history, my wife was her primary suspect. Wife spent 10-20 minutes telling her that they haven't been in contact for 2 years, and he probably is fooling around on the gf, just not with her. She wanted me to be aware, in the event I checked phone records.

Since I, on the other hand, still have his number in my phone, I'm sorely tempted to text him myself and "thank" him for continuing to interfere with our R through his continued inability to keep it in his pants. I know it's not the wisest idea, but is tempting.

Meanwhile, my wife has agreed that it's worth investing the $5 per line to enable us to block numbers, since it reappeared after so long. (And, yes...I'll be keeping an eye out for any new, out-of-the-blue numbers on the phone bill.)
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

Why not reach out to omgf and see what she has found out in case there's an off chance it is indeed your wife


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

Almostrecovered said:


> Why not reach out to omgf and see what she has found out in case there's an off chance it is indeed your wife


Good idea.

Isn't it horrible that we think this way now?


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Hope1964 said:


> Good idea.
> 
> Isn't it horrible that we think this way now?


Sad and pathetic, huh? 

If only we had this much aluminum foil wrapped on our antennae before all our sh!t happened to us.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Almostrecovered said:


> Why not reach out to omgf and see what she has found out in case there's an off chance it is indeed your wife


She contacted via his phone. Last I know, he moved to the other side of the state right before NC went into effect. So, I've no way of even knowing who she is, let alone contacting her.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

You could call his number and ask for her, from a pay phone or something. Would he know your voice?


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Oh, he most certainly would recognize my voice.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

Darn. OK then. Have a friend call him?

I'm just thinking out loud here.

Do you have any reason to think your wife might be telling you that he contacted her just to cover her ass?


----------



## GoodForNothing (Feb 25, 2013)

Grayson said:


> She contacted via his phone. Last I know, he moved to the other side of the state right before NC went into effect. So, I've no way of even knowing who she is, let alone contacting her.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


----------



## SaltInWound (Jan 2, 2013)

GoodForNothing said:


> I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


That is a frightening thought. In other words, there was no gf. Yikes.


----------



## GoodForNothing (Feb 25, 2013)

SaltInWound said:


> That is a frightening thought. In other words, there was no gf. Yikes.


I suggest it because I've dealt with some of these antics myself in the last year or so. I also only suggest it as a possibility, because I'd hate to add paranoia to an R process that is tough enough already without doubt being added by third parties like me.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

SaltInWound said:


> That is a frightening thought. In other words, there was no gf. Yikes.


I tried to come up with something reasonable as well, and couldn't.

I'd make the call...just to be safe.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

I'm wondering how the GF had OM's phone long enough to talk to your W on it for 10-20 minutes...

I don't want to make you suspicious, OP, but something doesn't sound right to me. If I wanted to phone a partner's ex, I'd get the number off his phone and call her from my own phone.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

GoodForNothing said:


> I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


I don't discount the possibility, but, based on two years of transparency and no transgressions, I don't think it's likely. But that's why I'll be keeping an eye out for frequent/long texts or calls from a new number. And, having been on the gf's side of things, I can understand calling from his phone...if something were going on, it would be a familiar number.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Cosmos said:


> I'm wondering how the GF had OM's phone long enough to talk to your W on it for 10-20 minutes...


Well, I'd have access to my wife's phone all night after she goes to sleep. Haven't had a chance to check the records, so not sure what time the call was, but am concluding that it was after I last talked to her last night.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Grayson said:


> Well, I'd have access to my wife's phone all night after she goes to sleep. Haven't had a chance to check the records, so not sure what time the call was, but am concluding that it was after I last talked to her last night.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


That would have to mean that the GF presumably phoned your W pretty late at night (for the OM to be asleep). Does your W usually accept late night phone calls from unknown numbers?

I'm not saying that things didn't happen exactly as your W told you, OP - just looking at this from all angles.


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

Cosmos said:


> That would have to mean that the GF presumably phoned your W pretty late at night (for the OM to be asleep). Does your W usually accept late night phone calls from unknown numbers?


He said she was expecting a call.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Cosmos said:


> That would have to mean that the GF presumably phoned your W pretty late at night (for the OM to be asleep). Does your W usually accept late night phone calls from unknown numbers?
> 
> I'm not saying that things didn't happen exactly as your W told you, OP - just looking at this from all angles.


Understood. She was expecting a call from an unknown number. Again, not sure how late it was at this juncture.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## dubsey (Feb 21, 2013)

GoodForNothing said:


> I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


OMGF was expecting to hear her answer "oh, hey sexy I was just thinkin about you" or something similar when the phone was answered.

Since (presumably) she didn't recognize the number, it'd only help verify they haven't been in contact to OMGF.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Grayson said:


> Understood. She was expecting a call from an unknown number. Again, not sure how late it was at this juncture.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


OK, that makes sense, OP. Sorry, I missed that point in your original post.

Another point is, had it been the OM your W had been talking to, she would have deleted the record from her phone and certainly wouldn't have told you about it.


----------



## GoodForNothing (Feb 25, 2013)

dubsey said:


> OMGF was expecting to hear her answer "oh, hey sexy I was just thinkin about you" or something similar when the phone was answered.
> 
> Since (presumably) she didn't recognize the number, it'd only help verify they haven't been in contact to OMGF.


Sure, there are all kinds of possibilities. But I still thought it best to cover the bases just in case, no disrespect to OP or his wife intended.


----------



## Hope1964 (Sep 26, 2011)

Cosmos said:


> Another point is, had it been the OM your W had been talking to, she would have deleted the record from her phone and certainly wouldn't have told you about it.


That depends. If she thought he might find it somehow, she could be being proactive and heading him off.


----------



## dubsey (Feb 21, 2013)

Hope1964 said:


> That depends. If she thought he might find it somehow, she could be being proactive and heading him off.


could be, and I agree - In this instance, Trust - but verify.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

GoodForNothing said:


> I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


It absolutely makes sense that the gf called her, using OM's phone. If she suspected that they were in contact, then she would expect Grayson's wife to answer in a manner which reflected this... In other words, she expected the response that dubsey posted. And a 10-20 minute call could easily be the gf trying to trip Mrs. Grayson up. That Mrs. Grayson told Grayson about the call, and the length, and even suggested paying to get numbers blocked on the phones speaks volumes.


----------



## snap (Oct 3, 2011)

It could be the OMGF found a call history entry to an unknown number, called it, and your wife answered. That would explain her calling from his phone too.


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

This is one of a BS's greatest fears, that after years of no contact the OM/OW will reach out. Even if the FWS handles it correctly it brings up a bunch of old nasty ****! 

Since the OM has already proven to be a slime ball there would be reason for his new GF to be suspicious. And since your wife has been transparent if she wanted to reignite the relationship, odds are she'd be more crafty about it than using her own phone. My primary concern was that she took the call, caught up on life then had concerns that it might be discovered. Either way Grayson, investigate it until you are satisfied with the outcome and move on with your wife. Good luck.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Maricha75 said:


> It absolutely makes sense that the gf called her, using OM's phone. If she suspected that they were in contact, then she would expect Grayson's wife to answer in a manner which reflected this... In other words, she expected the response that dubsey posted. And a 10-20 minute call could easily be the gf trying to trip Mrs. Grayson up. That Mrs. Grayson told Grayson about the call, and the length, and even suggested paying to get numbers blocked on the phones speaks volumes.


Or it could be that Mrs. Grayson knows that Mr. Grayson checks the phone log and will find out she was on the phone for 20 minutes talking to OM. 

So she made up the story that the GF called to cover her tracks.

I am hoping that Mrs. Grayson telling her husband about the call is a good sign that she is committed to Grayson, but it could be her covering her tracks. 

As someone else said, trust but verify.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

SadSamIAm said:


> Or it could be that Mrs. Grayson knows that Mr. Grayson checks the phone log and will find out she was on the phone for 20 minutes talking to OM.
> 
> So she made up the story that the GF called to cover her tracks.
> 
> ...


I am aware that both are possibilities. I was addressing the "why would the gf call using his phone?"... that was why a gf would call.

I agree, trust but verify. Absolutely.


----------



## Count of Monte Cristo (Mar 21, 2012)

GoodForNothing said:


> I ask this respectfully, but is there any chance that the OM spoke with your wife on that call? I don't understand why a gf would call using his phone and so on. Just asking, don't mean to imply too much if I've missed something.


I suspect that she called from the OM's phone because she wanted to guage his wife's reaction when she picked up the phone.

For example, if the wife was cheating with OM again and the GF called she would've thought it was him and answered something like, 'Oh baby, I've been waiting for your call.'

Put yourself in the GF's shoes - right now she's in evidence gathering mode and what better way to do it than use the BF's phone to call an ex lover.

(Why she stays with the scumbag is a mystery to me.)


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

For certain, trust but verify is the name of the game here. And, she's known for two years now that any further transgressions are the deal-breaker to R.

So, I'm optimistic, but not blinded by that optimism.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Count of Monte Cristo said:


> I suspect that she called from the OM's phone because she wanted to guage his wife's reaction when she picked up the phone.
> 
> For example, if the wife was cheating with OM again and the GF called she would've thought it was him and answered something like, 'Oh baby, I've been waiting for your call.'
> 
> ...


According to his ex-wife when she first exposed the EA (long before I even knew what an EA was, and far longer before I stopped listening to her rationalizations for it), he's got quite a history of cheating and covering his tracks. If I had any means of contacting the gf, I would in a heartbeat, if for no other reason than to confirm the story.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

This could, of course, have been a stalker operation? Either the OM or a female friend of OM posing as his GF in order to stir some trouble?


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

That's possible too, MattMatt.

I'm taking deep breaths to keep from following my instinct to text the scumbag. Because I know that instinct isn't helpful.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

It occurs to me, another reason not to text the scumbag is that, if the gf is in info gathering mode, I don't want to give him a heads up that she's on to him. I want her to be able to find as much evidence as possible.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## F-102 (Sep 15, 2010)

The OMGF is probably calling every "suspicious" number as of now.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

I imagine so, F-102. What just struck me and really gets to me now is that this means he's somehow, somewhere held onto her number for TWO YEARS after being told to stop contact. (No instances of his number in our phone records for that entire time). And that makes me want to lash out at him again, despite wanting to give him role to hang himself.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## workindad (May 7, 2011)

OP, do you travel a lot? Just trying to gauge the odds of a random call hitting when you are not home. I know it can happen- just thinking about it.

Might be time to put a VAR in her car for a while just to double check??

From your story though, it does sound like what she described.

Good luck
wd


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

workindad said:


> OP, do you travel a lot? Just trying to gauge the odds of a random call hitting when you are not home. I know it can happen- just thinking about it.
> 
> Might be time to put a VAR in her car for a while just to double check??
> 
> ...


A lot? Not really. Three work trips a year that I can rely on being tapped for. Beyond that, it's hit and miss.

Right now (being out of town aside), a VAR would do very little good as we're down to one working vehicle. Given our work schedules we're pretty much together in the car most of the time or I have it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## lordmayhem (Feb 7, 2011)

Would it be more of a hassle to have her pay the fee to change her number than to pay $5 per month to block him? Because he can always call from a different phone number. After 12 months, that's $60.

Good for your fWW on being transparent.


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

Grayson said:


> I imagine so, F-102. What just struck me and really gets to me now is that this means he's somehow, somewhere held onto her number for TWO YEARS after being told to stop contact. (No instances of his number in our phone records for that entire time). And that makes me want to lash out at him again, despite wanting to give him role to hang himself.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Was thinking the same thing. That this guy would STILL have the phone number in his phone after 2 years is odd.


----------



## mupostori (May 20, 2012)

this is question of trust ,If it has been restored yo will not pay $5 but if not you will pay 

At this moment how much % do you trust ur wife


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

lordmayhem said:


> Would it be more of a hassle to have her pay the fee to change her number than to pay $5 per month to block him? Because he can always call from a different phone number. After 12 months, that's $60.
> 
> Good for your fWW on being transparent.


It would be a major hassle for her side business, as her cell number is used for it (another reason she isn't surprised by the occasional unknown number). She had, at one time, considered switching to a pre-paid phone for the side business, but 1) talked to me first, to see if I'd mind (I wouldn't so long as I have the same access to it as her main phone), and 2) decided she didn't want to mess with having to get her cards, contact info stamp, etc all changed. One thing that I might check into is whether or not the blocking service (since it's essentially advertised as parental controls) can provide a report of blocked numbers that attempt to contact, and if there's an attempted contact, then say to hell with it and change the number.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Hardtohandle said:


> Was thinking the same thing. That this guy would STILL have the phone number in his phone after 2 years is odd.


Not odd at all, given his history and personality type. He chased after her for years, developing into the EA. over the course of time, he'd occasionally disappear for an extended period, then come drifting back. (Naturally, wish I knew then what I know now and nipped it in the bud.) So, him holding onto it is surprising but not, if you know what I mean.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

mupostori said:


> this is question of trust ,If it has been restored yo will not pay $5 but if not you will pay
> 
> At this moment how much % do you trust ur wife


I don't follow your logic. If she's regained my trust, I won't take measures to prevent his presence from intruding into my life and causing me to trigger? If she's regained my trust, I should want him (or his gf) to be able to pop up every couple of years to remind me of one of the roughest times of my life?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## manticore (Sep 3, 2013)

Hi Grayson, sorry, but I am a Little confused here, did your wife had multiple affairs?, because from what I read in your posts the one refering to a PA with the cooworker was older in comparison from the one talking about an EA.




Grayson said:


> Short version of pertinent background: my wife has been in confirmed NC with the OM of an extended EA for about two years. (See...told you it was the short version.)
> 
> I'm currently out of town for work, and this morning, she texts me to let me know that the OM's gf called from his phone (his number deleted, so no name when it rang through, and she was expecting a call). His gf called because she thinks he's fooling around on her, and given history, my wife was her primary suspect. Wife spent 10-20 minutes telling her that they haven't been in contact for 2 years, and he probably is fooling around on the gf, just not with her. She wanted me to be aware, in the event I checked phone records.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_





Grayson said:


> Not odd at all, given his history and personality type. He chased after her for years, developing into the EA. over the course of time, he'd occasionally disappear for an extended period, then come drifting back. (Naturally, wish I knew then what I know now and nipped it in the bud.) So, him holding onto it is surprising but not, if you know what I mean.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_





Grayson said:


> Short version: they both started training at work on the same day. He had no car, so she started giving him rides home, left appropriate boundaries in the dust, and a few weeks later, he was doing her in a park.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Nucking Futs (Apr 8, 2013)

dgykduyqing said:


> I'm currently out of town for work,


Good to know. Oh, by the way, ZOMBIE THREAD!


----------



## manticore (Sep 3, 2013)

well it does not matter how old the thread is if the poster is still login and posting in TAM.

but never mind I already read all of grayson's threads a get it, sorry for the question grayson, I hope you are doing alright


----------



## thummper (Dec 19, 2013)

I noticed that the thread was originally posted in March. This is one of the things that has frustrated me about TAM and other sites. We allow ourselves to really get caught up in the poster's marital problem and there's a lot of advice, pro and con to help him/her out. Suddenly, the thread ceases and we NEVER know the outcome. :wtf: A couple of them have really preyed on my mind, including one posted by a lady named "Sweetz" who had cheated on her hubby, but had decided to reconcile. Was her R successful??? Guess we'll never know. The threads just ceased. Anybody else hate it when a thread suddenly comes to a screeching halt with no closure? :scratchhead:


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

I've wondered how therapists deal with this, too. It is a lot more personal for them because they really get to know their clients, then suddenly the client just stops coming to see them.


----------



## Thorburn (Nov 23, 2011)

Thor said:


> I've wondered how therapists deal with this, too. It is a lot more personal for them because they really get to know their clients, then suddenly the client just stops coming to see them.


As a therapist I can chime in. Some folk end treatment when they feel they achieved their goals. Recently I had a client do just that. When he first came to see me (overa year ago) he was suicidal, estranged from his wife and son, fearful of losing his job, just a mess. On our last session he hugged me and told me I saved his life. I told him I did nothing, that he did it all. He is back with his family, bought a new home, is getting promoted, etc. It ended well.

Some get to feeling better and stop treatment, decline and come back in again, and the cycle continues. They never reach their goals. I did D & A work years ago and saw this more times then I can count. They sober up, get some health back, feel like they can take on the world, leave the program, and fall back into substance abuse. 

Others know that they will never be cured. I have some clients who have been coming to see me almost weekly for over two years. I have about 4 of those. They feel a need to come talk to keep their heads clear. One actually got worse after seeing me for about a year, and I found out he was lying to me. I confronted him, told him I was ending treatment. He begged me not to end treatment, told me the truth, and said I am the only person who knows everything he has done in life. I relented about ending treatment and his life has actually improved, as he is now taking to heart his treatment goals. 

We just went over our averages and it turns out that the average person comes for 4 visits. Oftentimes they work through the crisis and feel they no longer need treatment. 

Here on TAM people move on. There have been a few who have stopped posting that I remained in contact with through email. I can't share those but oftentimes it has to do with other issues in their lives that they are working on and it has nothing to do with why they came on here.

Some get what they need and don't feel a need to post anymore. Some (IMO) do so at their own risk. They don't like what they hear, they are denial, or rug sweep. Others, who go through D are remaking their lives.

I do feel that we would benefit from hearing the end story, but in this type of forum, quite a few don't feel the commitment to do so. I could list quite a few that fall into this category. 

I was on another forum for a while. Got some good solid advice. The one guy who gave great advice died. I did not know he was sick and we got the story after he died about his illness. I was one of the last folks he wrote to before his death. I felt like I lost a mentor. I stopped posting there and started here on TAM. 

There are just too many of us and I figure that many check in from time to time and don't bother posting. To those folks I pray that your lives are better.


----------



## GROUNDPOUNDER (Mar 8, 2013)

Either he found out that nothing was going on and is too embarrassed to post it here, OR he found out that something was going on, AGAIN, and is too embarrassed to post it here...

There's no GOOD reason why he has not posted here again. I just hope that 2014 is better for him.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

GROUNDPOUNDER said:


> Either he found out that nothing was going on and is too embarrassed to post it here, OR he found out that something was going on, AGAIN, and is too embarrassed to post it here...
> 
> There's no GOOD reason why he has not posted here again. I just hope that 2014 is better for him.


No embarrassment at all. Nothing fishy occurred. But, as sometimes happens, life demanded more attention than a particular thread. Honestly forgot about this thread until I saw some new likes in my inbox tonight.

ETA: These days, I'm at a point where I don't even browse the CWI sub-forum. Triggers have become increasingly rare to the point of near non-existence. No red flags (real or imagined) in many months. If it weren't for those "likes" I wouldn't have known the thread had risen from the dead.


----------

