So basically your W is telling you unless you give her something of value (paying a JOINT bill) then she will not give you something of value (a meeting with her to discuss JOINT assets). That is the very definition of quid quo pro and honestly, if she wants to play things out that way you are wise to get an attny and let her see the *true* meaning of "something for something".
Even if just for a consult you should be speaking to an attny to find out your rights and responsibilities before you meet with your W on your own. IMO you are very foolish not to. Clearly you have lots of emotional ties to your W (wondering what you should talk about, wondering if you should give her a hug) and that is NOT the way to approach a business meeting. You need facts and figures. It makes very little sense to enter into a meeting with your W to negotiate when you have no idea what sort of negotiating power you have.
It is irrelevant if your W has used the vehicle or not. Legally you are still married, legally you have a joint obligation to pay for joint possessions (and if she is on the title it is a joint possession) and it was her choice to leave therefore her choice to NOT have access to the vehicle. None of those choices eliminate financial responsibility.
Going in to this meeting with your W without the proper information as far as the scope of the law goes is not wise. It should tell you an awful lot that she felt she needed her dad there. Daddy's can't protect their little princesses when it comes to asset division and divorce.
It is close to impossible for a husband and wife to treat the division of assets as a mere "business deal" due to the emotional ties they share (good or bad, there are shared emotional ties). Seeing an attny won't eliminate the emotional ties but it will properly arm you with the information you need to effectively create a settlement.
