Family Court without a Solicitor - Anyone done it?
Discussion
I'm in the unenviable position of having to take my ex (mother to my two children) to court to agree childcare arrangements. However, I'm not in the position to be paying hand over fist for solicitors fees. I'm not eligible for Legal Aid, either.
I've applied for MIAM (Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting) and I'm confident that the ex won't show up. It's my understanding that they can then sign my court application and I can file for a Child Arrangements order where I can out across what I want the Court to order.
Has anyone had any success in doing this without a solicitor?
Cheers
Mike
I've applied for MIAM (Mediation Information and Assessment Meeting) and I'm confident that the ex won't show up. It's my understanding that they can then sign my court application and I can file for a Child Arrangements order where I can out across what I want the Court to order.
Has anyone had any success in doing this without a solicitor?
Cheers
Mike
Not in the first round of setting up a contact order. Legal aid was still available at that time. However I have been back since when the ex tried to stop overnight contact. I did this on my own, and the ex had a solicitor. End result was I wiped the floor clean with them and she hasn't tried it again since 
You can do it yourself, but research as much as you can and be realistic about what you'll be able to get. "Standard" contact starts at every other weekend and half of holidays. Your own particular circumstances might vary this somewhat. Keep it focussed on what's best for children, not "I want" or "She wants".
You have no rights to see your children, but they have a right to see you! A subtle, but very important difference.
You can do it yourself, but research as much as you can and be realistic about what you'll be able to get. "Standard" contact starts at every other weekend and half of holidays. Your own particular circumstances might vary this somewhat. Keep it focussed on what's best for children, not "I want" or "She wants".
You have no rights to see your children, but they have a right to see you! A subtle, but very important difference.
Cold said:
Start at 50:50 shared care and work back from there depending on what's practical for the three of you. Unless there's a serious welfare or safety concern a solicitor will have a hard time convincing a judge otherwise.
This will only work if both parents agree, if one parent (Usually the mother) disagrees then the judge's hands are pretty much tied in that they will have to issue a residence and defined contact order.Thanks guys.
To provide a little more background. The ex and I have been split up for coming up three years now. For the first year of that, it was ad-hoc and I'd have them whenever she was working or I wanted to see them. For the last two years, there has been a structure to it. I have them every Tuesday and Thursday night and every other weekend, Friday to Monday morning (I drop them to school). So that's 7 nights in every 14.
However, when in comes to Bank Hols, Christmas, Birthdays and School Hols, the ex often agrees to things (written and/or verbally) and then reneges on those agreements. Leaving me, and more importantly, not know when they will see her/me next. It gets very upsetting for the kids (7 & 5) as I try to set their expectations as to when they'll be seeing their mammy next, or wen they'll be seeing me next. They miss both of us very much when they're with the other.
What I want the court to do, is formally order the arrangement we have from a day to day perspective as well as order who the children stay with on the exceptions, such as Bank Hols, Birthdays etc. I'm happy to propose that they be split evenly. And even that birthdays should be spent with whoever they are supposed to be with that day, according to the routine schedule. I just want it formalised so she can't renege on it.
I guess, a supplementary question would be, is the order even worth the paper it's written on? What are the consequences if she continues to renege?
To provide a little more background. The ex and I have been split up for coming up three years now. For the first year of that, it was ad-hoc and I'd have them whenever she was working or I wanted to see them. For the last two years, there has been a structure to it. I have them every Tuesday and Thursday night and every other weekend, Friday to Monday morning (I drop them to school). So that's 7 nights in every 14.
However, when in comes to Bank Hols, Christmas, Birthdays and School Hols, the ex often agrees to things (written and/or verbally) and then reneges on those agreements. Leaving me, and more importantly, not know when they will see her/me next. It gets very upsetting for the kids (7 & 5) as I try to set their expectations as to when they'll be seeing their mammy next, or wen they'll be seeing me next. They miss both of us very much when they're with the other.
What I want the court to do, is formally order the arrangement we have from a day to day perspective as well as order who the children stay with on the exceptions, such as Bank Hols, Birthdays etc. I'm happy to propose that they be split evenly. And even that birthdays should be spent with whoever they are supposed to be with that day, according to the routine schedule. I just want it formalised so she can't renege on it.
I guess, a supplementary question would be, is the order even worth the paper it's written on? What are the consequences if she continues to renege?
Mikeyplum said:
I just want it formalised so she can't renege on it.
I guess, a supplementary question would be, is the order even worth the paper it's written on? What are the consequences if she continues to renege?
To get an order generally takes time, especially if the ex is being difficult. If an order is granted and she ignores it you can bring the matter back to court to explain herself in front of a judge. Penalties can be given for persistent breaches of a court order. These can include community service, a fine, or in exceptional circumstances a prison term.I guess, a supplementary question would be, is the order even worth the paper it's written on? What are the consequences if she continues to renege?
Mikeyplum said:
I guess, a supplementary question would be, is the order even worth the paper it's written on? What are the consequences if she continues to renege?
Realistically? Nothing. Maybe a few stern words from the judge at a later hearing. You've got a good chance of having your previous and ongoing arrangements upheld as the kids are used to this. Of course, she may well continue to be obstructive and there's very little that most judges are willing to do about it apart from frowning at the mother. She won't get a fine, she won't go to jail and she won't be forced by the police to hand over the children.
Good luck, don't go buying a new patio no matter how tempting.
I'm in a similar situation, I have my kids about 3 nights per week on average. It's been like that for a couple of years, and we've both been pretty flexible to work around each other. But now ex is getting stroppy about things saying "either we get back together or I'm moving to the other side of the country". All in limbo at the moment (waiting for me to make a decision on us getting back together, which just isn't something I can do even 'for the sake of the kids'), but I'm expecting it to turn nasty at any moment. I know that as soon as it does, the kids will be further weaponised against me. When things have got a bit heated in the past, she's regularly said to me "you have them too much, they should only come to you every other weekend". At the same time she's constantly phoning/messaging me to say that she can't cope with them when they're with her!
I had a consultation with a solicitor a few weeks ago, mainly about applying for a prohibited steps order to try and stop her moving away. Obviously, we can't practically maintain a shared care arrangement if she moves 300 miles away from me. I chatted to the solicitor for about an hour, free of charge, gave her the details and she advised on potential options and how the system works. Most solicitors will do this as it's generally how they get new business (like how other trades give their time to come out and measure up for quotes etc). Nothing to stop you going to see several different solicitors at different stages, with your questions. Lady I spoke to was talking about £5k fees to take things to court. She also said that attempts to use mediation first are essential, except in certain circumstances.
So I've not got as far as court yet myself. From what I can gather, the answer on whether you should self represent is 'it depends'. If you're case is quite strong, and the opposition doesn't have legal representation either (can she afford it herself, would she qualify for legal aid?), and you are reasonably confident that you can get your point across coherently without rambling or getting angry/emotional about things, then it might be worthy of a punt. I've got a friend who's ex is a real nasty piece of work, making all sorts of false accusations against him, when in reality she isn't fit to be raising a child (he ultimately won custody of his daughter). First time they went to court, he was pretty confident, and he should have been in a very strong position. But his ex's barrister ran rings around him, clouding the argument with her false accusations. It's difficult to defend yourself in person (you want to say 'that's a load of b
ks', but in reality, you just get drawn into trying to defend yourself, and generally it's much easier for a legal professional to defend you in the third person). On the other hand, if she can't get legal representation for herself, it might end up looking bad if your barrister tears strips off her and she turns on the waterworks.
The fact that you've had an informal arrangement in place, and obviously working, for a decent length of time, puts you in a very strong position. Why should the status quo be changed so your kids end up with less contact with you? That's your main argument. You are just trying to firm up a casual agreement (and on the face of it that's something that should be achievable by mediation at worst). And even if you do get the contact you want written into a court order, she can still easily flout it if she wants to ("they're ill today, can't come to yours/oops, I forgot/my car broke down.").
There's a forum on separateddads.co.uk that appears to have some quite helpful people on it, could be worth a browse at least.
I had a consultation with a solicitor a few weeks ago, mainly about applying for a prohibited steps order to try and stop her moving away. Obviously, we can't practically maintain a shared care arrangement if she moves 300 miles away from me. I chatted to the solicitor for about an hour, free of charge, gave her the details and she advised on potential options and how the system works. Most solicitors will do this as it's generally how they get new business (like how other trades give their time to come out and measure up for quotes etc). Nothing to stop you going to see several different solicitors at different stages, with your questions. Lady I spoke to was talking about £5k fees to take things to court. She also said that attempts to use mediation first are essential, except in certain circumstances.
So I've not got as far as court yet myself. From what I can gather, the answer on whether you should self represent is 'it depends'. If you're case is quite strong, and the opposition doesn't have legal representation either (can she afford it herself, would she qualify for legal aid?), and you are reasonably confident that you can get your point across coherently without rambling or getting angry/emotional about things, then it might be worthy of a punt. I've got a friend who's ex is a real nasty piece of work, making all sorts of false accusations against him, when in reality she isn't fit to be raising a child (he ultimately won custody of his daughter). First time they went to court, he was pretty confident, and he should have been in a very strong position. But his ex's barrister ran rings around him, clouding the argument with her false accusations. It's difficult to defend yourself in person (you want to say 'that's a load of b
ks', but in reality, you just get drawn into trying to defend yourself, and generally it's much easier for a legal professional to defend you in the third person). On the other hand, if she can't get legal representation for herself, it might end up looking bad if your barrister tears strips off her and she turns on the waterworks.The fact that you've had an informal arrangement in place, and obviously working, for a decent length of time, puts you in a very strong position. Why should the status quo be changed so your kids end up with less contact with you? That's your main argument. You are just trying to firm up a casual agreement (and on the face of it that's something that should be achievable by mediation at worst). And even if you do get the contact you want written into a court order, she can still easily flout it if she wants to ("they're ill today, can't come to yours/oops, I forgot/my car broke down.").
There's a forum on separateddads.co.uk that appears to have some quite helpful people on it, could be worth a browse at least.
mjb1 said:
I'm in a similar situation, I have my kids about 3 nights per week on average. It's been like that for a couple of years, and we've both been pretty flexible to work around each other. But now ex is getting stroppy about things saying "either we get back together or I'm moving to the other side of the country". All in limbo at the moment (waiting for me to make a decision on us getting back together, which just isn't something I can do even 'for the sake of the kids'), but I'm expecting it to turn nasty at any moment. I know that as soon as it does, the kids will be further weaponised against me. When things have got a bit heated in the past, she's regularly said to me "you have them too much, they should only come to you every other weekend". At the same time she's constantly phoning/messaging me to say that she can't cope with them when they're with her!
I had a consultation with a solicitor a few weeks ago, mainly about applying for a prohibited steps order to try and stop her moving away. Obviously, we can't practically maintain a shared care arrangement if she moves 300 miles away from me. I chatted to the solicitor for about an hour, free of charge, gave her the details and she advised on potential options and how the system works. Most solicitors will do this as it's generally how they get new business (like how other trades give their time to come out and measure up for quotes etc). Nothing to stop you going to see several different solicitors at different stages, with your questions. Lady I spoke to was talking about £5k fees to take things to court. She also said that attempts to use mediation first are essential, except in certain circumstances.
So I've not got as far as court yet myself. From what I can gather, the answer on whether you should self represent is 'it depends'. If you're case is quite strong, and the opposition doesn't have legal representation either (can she afford it herself, would she qualify for legal aid?), and you are reasonably confident that you can get your point across coherently without rambling or getting angry/emotional about things, then it might be worthy of a punt. I've got a friend who's ex is a real nasty piece of work, making all sorts of false accusations against him, when in reality she isn't fit to be raising a child (he ultimately won custody of his daughter). First time they went to court, he was pretty confident, and he should have been in a very strong position. But his ex's barrister ran rings around him, clouding the argument with her false accusations. It's difficult to defend yourself in person (you want to say 'that's a load of bks', but in reality, you just get drawn into trying to defend yourself, and generally it's much easier for a legal professional to defend you in the third person). On the other hand, if she can't get legal representation for herself, it might end up looking bad if your barrister tears strips off her and she turns on the waterworks.
The fact that you've had an informal arrangement in place, and obviously working, for a decent length of time, puts you in a very strong position. Why should the status quo be changed so your kids end up with less contact with you? That's your main argument. You are just trying to firm up a casual agreement (and on the face of it that's something that should be achievable by mediation at worst). And even if you do get the contact you want written into a court order, she can still easily flout it if she wants to ("they're ill today, can't come to yours/oops, I forgot/my car broke down.").
There's a forum on separateddads.co.uk that appears to have some quite helpful people on it, could be worth a browse at least.
Feel for you there, chap. I had a consultation with a solicitor a few weeks ago, mainly about applying for a prohibited steps order to try and stop her moving away. Obviously, we can't practically maintain a shared care arrangement if she moves 300 miles away from me. I chatted to the solicitor for about an hour, free of charge, gave her the details and she advised on potential options and how the system works. Most solicitors will do this as it's generally how they get new business (like how other trades give their time to come out and measure up for quotes etc). Nothing to stop you going to see several different solicitors at different stages, with your questions. Lady I spoke to was talking about £5k fees to take things to court. She also said that attempts to use mediation first are essential, except in certain circumstances.
So I've not got as far as court yet myself. From what I can gather, the answer on whether you should self represent is 'it depends'. If you're case is quite strong, and the opposition doesn't have legal representation either (can she afford it herself, would she qualify for legal aid?), and you are reasonably confident that you can get your point across coherently without rambling or getting angry/emotional about things, then it might be worthy of a punt. I've got a friend who's ex is a real nasty piece of work, making all sorts of false accusations against him, when in reality she isn't fit to be raising a child (he ultimately won custody of his daughter). First time they went to court, he was pretty confident, and he should have been in a very strong position. But his ex's barrister ran rings around him, clouding the argument with her false accusations. It's difficult to defend yourself in person (you want to say 'that's a load of b
ks', but in reality, you just get drawn into trying to defend yourself, and generally it's much easier for a legal professional to defend you in the third person). On the other hand, if she can't get legal representation for herself, it might end up looking bad if your barrister tears strips off her and she turns on the waterworks.The fact that you've had an informal arrangement in place, and obviously working, for a decent length of time, puts you in a very strong position. Why should the status quo be changed so your kids end up with less contact with you? That's your main argument. You are just trying to firm up a casual agreement (and on the face of it that's something that should be achievable by mediation at worst). And even if you do get the contact you want written into a court order, she can still easily flout it if she wants to ("they're ill today, can't come to yours/oops, I forgot/my car broke down.").
There's a forum on separateddads.co.uk that appears to have some quite helpful people on it, could be worth a browse at least.
I'm lucky in the fact that we do not want to get back together (I have a girlfriend [for how long, I'm not sure as the stress is starting to get to her too
] and she has a(nother) boyfriend. Thanks for the advice on seeing a solicitor. I visited one just before Christmas (as she reneged on an agreement we had then, too) and she quoted similar costs. However, she was very honest and told me that, if it were her, she wouldn't spend £5k on solicitors. She'd leave the informal agreement in place and spend £5k on the kids instead. Citing the ex's ability not to adhere to orders anyway.
Interestingly, the issue is a little backwards to what people assume. It's not that she won't let me see them. It's that she won't see them when she has promised. Leaving the kids upset that they can't see their mammy because "but mammy said...". I love them to bits, and they love me the same. But they also love their mother. But outside of the usual agreement, she looks for every opportunity to not see them. Throwing the fact that I "should get to know your kids better" even when I see them, arguably, more than she does.
I've been looking on separateddads today and have done on a couple of occasions. I have my C100 form mostly filled in and am awaiting an apt for mediation.
I'd be interested to hear from anyone who has represented themselves as a litigate in person. :thumbsup:
Amused2death said:
You have no rights to see your children, but they have a right to see you! A subtle, but very important difference.
not so subtle when one parent whispers in the ear of an impressionable mind and all of a sudden a 9 year old suddenly decides they want nothing to do with you .....or any of your side of the family....It's like Inception...when an idea is planted so successfully the child thinks it's their own, there's no court that can make that father-child relationship work, until or unless the child grows up and asks some questions...
I decided against throwing thousands of pounds at a problem that I can't solve
I've recently had to revisit this option and it reminded me of this thread, so thought I would update.
I've got all my court forms in order, so will be making an application to the court for an arrangement order, without a solicitor.
This comes after the ex has stopped me seeing the kids (or more importantly, stopping the kids from seeing me) every Thursday. Her reasons are twofold:
Firstly, as well as paying her a fixed sum via Standing Order every month, I also pay for a mobile phone contract. This falls outside of my obligations (they are met by the Standing Order), however reassures me that she will never have an excuse not to be contactable, or contact me, in an emergency involving the kids. When I first took out a contract for her, I provided her with the mobile phone that came with this - A Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge. Which she duly proceeded to break into a million pieces owing to her unworldly clumsiness. I recently renewed the contract, allowing her to keep the same contract but didn't give her a phone this time. A SIM only contract if you like. I gave the new handset to my current girlfriend as she was in need of one. The ex took exception to this and has threatened to stop me seeing the kids every Thursday until I give "her phone" back to her. She's clearly stated that if I give her the phone back, she'll reinstate access. I've offered to increase the monetary payments, but she's declined.
Secondly, she's stated that she is struggling to afford day to day living and needs me to pay more child maintenance. By restricting access on a Thursday, I will fall into the "2-3 nights per week" category with the CSA. She has states that she will now apply to the CSA for payments to be made on that basis.
I've called the CSA and they have re-assured me they will not get involved in forcing me to pay anything without a court order. So that's a relief. More interestingly, the helpful chap at the CSA advised me that if I have them 7 nights in every 14, this is essentially shared care and would be treated as a null claim. Meaning I shouldn't actually have paying anything. Which is slightly besides the point as I'm happy to contribute.
Despite trying to reason with the ex, advising her to contact the CSA and seek legal advice as she's grossly misunderstood the way to use the CSA payment guidelines., she's being persistent and last week was the first time she's stopped me seeing them on a weekday. I fear this week will be the same.
So I'm applying to the court to make an Arrangement Order to reinstate the previous arrangement we've had for the last 3 years.
Any advice appreciated, otherwise, fingers crossed.
I've got all my court forms in order, so will be making an application to the court for an arrangement order, without a solicitor.
This comes after the ex has stopped me seeing the kids (or more importantly, stopping the kids from seeing me) every Thursday. Her reasons are twofold:
Firstly, as well as paying her a fixed sum via Standing Order every month, I also pay for a mobile phone contract. This falls outside of my obligations (they are met by the Standing Order), however reassures me that she will never have an excuse not to be contactable, or contact me, in an emergency involving the kids. When I first took out a contract for her, I provided her with the mobile phone that came with this - A Samsung Galaxy S6 Edge. Which she duly proceeded to break into a million pieces owing to her unworldly clumsiness. I recently renewed the contract, allowing her to keep the same contract but didn't give her a phone this time. A SIM only contract if you like. I gave the new handset to my current girlfriend as she was in need of one. The ex took exception to this and has threatened to stop me seeing the kids every Thursday until I give "her phone" back to her. She's clearly stated that if I give her the phone back, she'll reinstate access. I've offered to increase the monetary payments, but she's declined.
Secondly, she's stated that she is struggling to afford day to day living and needs me to pay more child maintenance. By restricting access on a Thursday, I will fall into the "2-3 nights per week" category with the CSA. She has states that she will now apply to the CSA for payments to be made on that basis.
I've called the CSA and they have re-assured me they will not get involved in forcing me to pay anything without a court order. So that's a relief. More interestingly, the helpful chap at the CSA advised me that if I have them 7 nights in every 14, this is essentially shared care and would be treated as a null claim. Meaning I shouldn't actually have paying anything. Which is slightly besides the point as I'm happy to contribute.
Despite trying to reason with the ex, advising her to contact the CSA and seek legal advice as she's grossly misunderstood the way to use the CSA payment guidelines., she's being persistent and last week was the first time she's stopped me seeing them on a weekday. I fear this week will be the same.
So I'm applying to the court to make an Arrangement Order to reinstate the previous arrangement we've had for the last 3 years.
Any advice appreciated, otherwise, fingers crossed.
No advice here but watching with interest. I've filed my Child Arrangement Order, along with Occupation Order and Financial Order...simultaneously.
All the various hearings have just began and it's extremely time consuming, stressful and there isn't enough hours in the day to deal with everything.
But with just the one application from you, yes it's manageable. Certainly don't pay extra for solicitors. Probably won't make any difference to the outcome.
Good luck.
All the various hearings have just began and it's extremely time consuming, stressful and there isn't enough hours in the day to deal with everything.
But with just the one application from you, yes it's manageable. Certainly don't pay extra for solicitors. Probably won't make any difference to the outcome.
Good luck.
MYOB said:
No advice here but watching with interest. I've filed my Child Arrangement Order, along with Occupation Order and Financial Order...simultaneously.
All the various hearings have just began and it's extremely time consuming, stressful and there isn't enough hours in the day to deal with everything.
But with just the one application from you, yes it's manageable. Certainly don't pay extra for solicitors. Probably won't make any difference to the outcome.
Good luck.
Thanks. Did you have to pay fees for each of those orders, if you don't mind me asking?All the various hearings have just began and it's extremely time consuming, stressful and there isn't enough hours in the day to deal with everything.
But with just the one application from you, yes it's manageable. Certainly don't pay extra for solicitors. Probably won't make any difference to the outcome.
Good luck.
I'm assuming the occupation order is who they live with and financial who pays for what?
MikeDrop said:
Thanks. Did you have to pay fees for each of those orders, if you don't mind me asking?
I'm assuming the occupation order is who they live with and financial who pays for what?
I completed another form asking for "fee remission". Not sure what happens here but one assumes the judge for each case will decide on this. So at this stage, I haven't paid anything, although there is no charge for the Occupational Order application.I'm assuming the occupation order is who they live with and financial who pays for what?
Child Arrangements Order - to formalise access to children, including living arrangements.
Financial Order - to finalise the devolution of assets between the parties.
Occupational Order - not strictly part of the divorce. This is to allow access to the matrimonial home as I have been locked out with the locks changed. Judge can decide access rights (or non) to the home on a temporary basis until a pre-determined time (likely to be when the Child Arrangements Order is finalised).
MikeyPlum, I was under the impression that even with 50/50 shared care CMS calculator still says that one parent has to pay maintenance (a small amount) to the other?
I'm back here in the similar situation to the OP that I was earlier in this thread as well. The ex went quiet about moving away last year, all seemed to be going ok. Then Christmas day (we all spent Christmas at my house, with her as well, for the sake of the kids), she turns round and raises it again - "if things aren't better, I'm moving away in 6 months". Now by better she basically means me taking her back, which isn't going to happen. And when she says she's moving away, she obviously means her and the kids (although she doesn't mention them).
So here I am on tenterhooks again, waiting to see if she's serious this time (which she does appear to be, even possibly moving sooner) before starting on the legal route as I know that'll rile her right up. I can't really afford a big legal bill, and neither can she, and there's been even more water under the bridge on her side that makes her look like a bad parent. I haven't stood up to her at all about it yet (I think she's trying to provoke an argument/reaction from me, as is her style), just shrugged it off/ignore her when she mentions it.
She's living in a nice house, in a nice area, the kids are at a very good school and are settled. It's about 15 mile away from me, so near enough to be closlely involved with the kids, but far enough that she's not on my doorstep all the time. She wants to move to the town where she went to uni 20 years ago, on the grounds that she needs friends and support with the kids. All her old friends there are either going to still be part of the heavy drinking/partying crowd that she was in with then, or have moved on with families of their own, and won't be interested in her reliving her youth as a middle aged alcoholic. It's a fairly rough town (compared to what my kids are used to anyway), so there is no benefit at all to the kids to relocate there. Obviously she's going to have far less 'support' with parenting, as there is nobody that's going to fill the gap of me having the kids nearly half the week. So the entire plan is entirely deluded and fueled by her appetite for alcohol and casual sex. If she really needs to do that for her own reasons, it'd probably be best for the kids to stay here with me. Which is entirely feasible for me to do, with a bit of careful planning.
I've no idea what my chances are of convincing the family court to either A) prohibit her from moving away so far, or B) making me the resident parent, with or without legal representation. But I've got to try something, even if it is so that I can stand proud and say I did my best.
I'm back here in the similar situation to the OP that I was earlier in this thread as well. The ex went quiet about moving away last year, all seemed to be going ok. Then Christmas day (we all spent Christmas at my house, with her as well, for the sake of the kids), she turns round and raises it again - "if things aren't better, I'm moving away in 6 months". Now by better she basically means me taking her back, which isn't going to happen. And when she says she's moving away, she obviously means her and the kids (although she doesn't mention them).
So here I am on tenterhooks again, waiting to see if she's serious this time (which she does appear to be, even possibly moving sooner) before starting on the legal route as I know that'll rile her right up. I can't really afford a big legal bill, and neither can she, and there's been even more water under the bridge on her side that makes her look like a bad parent. I haven't stood up to her at all about it yet (I think she's trying to provoke an argument/reaction from me, as is her style), just shrugged it off/ignore her when she mentions it.
She's living in a nice house, in a nice area, the kids are at a very good school and are settled. It's about 15 mile away from me, so near enough to be closlely involved with the kids, but far enough that she's not on my doorstep all the time. She wants to move to the town where she went to uni 20 years ago, on the grounds that she needs friends and support with the kids. All her old friends there are either going to still be part of the heavy drinking/partying crowd that she was in with then, or have moved on with families of their own, and won't be interested in her reliving her youth as a middle aged alcoholic. It's a fairly rough town (compared to what my kids are used to anyway), so there is no benefit at all to the kids to relocate there. Obviously she's going to have far less 'support' with parenting, as there is nobody that's going to fill the gap of me having the kids nearly half the week. So the entire plan is entirely deluded and fueled by her appetite for alcohol and casual sex. If she really needs to do that for her own reasons, it'd probably be best for the kids to stay here with me. Which is entirely feasible for me to do, with a bit of careful planning.
I've no idea what my chances are of convincing the family court to either A) prohibit her from moving away so far, or B) making me the resident parent, with or without legal representation. But I've got to try something, even if it is so that I can stand proud and say I did my best.
mjb1 said:
MikeyPlum, I was under the impression that even with 50/50 shared care CMS calculator still says that one parent has to pay maintenance (a small amount) to the other?
I'm back here in the similar situation to the OP that I was earlier in this thread as well. The ex went quiet about moving away last year, all seemed to be going ok. Then Christmas day (we all spent Christmas at my house, with her as well, for the sake of the kids), she turns round and raises it again - "if things aren't better, I'm moving away in 6 months". Now by better she basically means me taking her back, which isn't going to happen. And when she says she's moving away, she obviously means her and the kids (although she doesn't mention them).
So here I am on tenterhooks again, waiting to see if she's serious this time (which she does appear to be, even possibly moving sooner) before starting on the legal route as I know that'll rile her right up. I can't really afford a big legal bill, and neither can she, and there's been even more water under the bridge on her side that makes her look like a bad parent. I haven't stood up to her at all about it yet (I think she's trying to provoke an argument/reaction from me, as is her style), just shrugged it off/ignore her when she mentions it.
She's living in a nice house, in a nice area, the kids are at a very good school and are settled. It's about 15 mile away from me, so near enough to be closlely involved with the kids, but far enough that she's not on my doorstep all the time. She wants to move to the town where she went to uni 20 years ago, on the grounds that she needs friends and support with the kids. All her old friends there are either going to still be part of the heavy drinking/partying crowd that she was in with then, or have moved on with families of their own, and won't be interested in her reliving her youth as a middle aged alcoholic. It's a fairly rough town (compared to what my kids are used to anyway), so there is no benefit at all to the kids to relocate there. Obviously she's going to have far less 'support' with parenting, as there is nobody that's going to fill the gap of me having the kids nearly half the week. So the entire plan is entirely deluded and fueled by her appetite for alcohol and casual sex. If she really needs to do that for her own reasons, it'd probably be best for the kids to stay here with me. Which is entirely feasible for me to do, with a bit of careful planning.
I've no idea what my chances are of convincing the family court to either A) prohibit her from moving away so far, or B) making me the resident parent, with or without legal representation. But I've got to try something, even if it is so that I can stand proud and say I did my best.
I contacted the CSA on the phone and the helpful chap stated it would be considered shared access which is a null claim. Worth giving them a call as there's not an awful lot of info immediately available online. I'm back here in the similar situation to the OP that I was earlier in this thread as well. The ex went quiet about moving away last year, all seemed to be going ok. Then Christmas day (we all spent Christmas at my house, with her as well, for the sake of the kids), she turns round and raises it again - "if things aren't better, I'm moving away in 6 months". Now by better she basically means me taking her back, which isn't going to happen. And when she says she's moving away, she obviously means her and the kids (although she doesn't mention them).
So here I am on tenterhooks again, waiting to see if she's serious this time (which she does appear to be, even possibly moving sooner) before starting on the legal route as I know that'll rile her right up. I can't really afford a big legal bill, and neither can she, and there's been even more water under the bridge on her side that makes her look like a bad parent. I haven't stood up to her at all about it yet (I think she's trying to provoke an argument/reaction from me, as is her style), just shrugged it off/ignore her when she mentions it.
She's living in a nice house, in a nice area, the kids are at a very good school and are settled. It's about 15 mile away from me, so near enough to be closlely involved with the kids, but far enough that she's not on my doorstep all the time. She wants to move to the town where she went to uni 20 years ago, on the grounds that she needs friends and support with the kids. All her old friends there are either going to still be part of the heavy drinking/partying crowd that she was in with then, or have moved on with families of their own, and won't be interested in her reliving her youth as a middle aged alcoholic. It's a fairly rough town (compared to what my kids are used to anyway), so there is no benefit at all to the kids to relocate there. Obviously she's going to have far less 'support' with parenting, as there is nobody that's going to fill the gap of me having the kids nearly half the week. So the entire plan is entirely deluded and fueled by her appetite for alcohol and casual sex. If she really needs to do that for her own reasons, it'd probably be best for the kids to stay here with me. Which is entirely feasible for me to do, with a bit of careful planning.
I've no idea what my chances are of convincing the family court to either A) prohibit her from moving away so far, or B) making me the resident parent, with or without legal representation. But I've got to try something, even if it is so that I can stand proud and say I did my best.
It's a tricky situation you're in. Thankfully, I don't have to worry about the threat of getting back together, we both know that's not at all what we want. However, she is one for using the kids as leverage to get me to give in to her requests. So want that to stop with a court order.
She's still fully convinced that she's in the right and has even said I'll be far worse off financially if I take her to court. She's forgetting the her new fella is working whilst claiming sick pay and she hasn't declared him living with her whilst claiming Housing Benefit
Wonder how the court will see that?There have been some very helpful comments here and other interested parties coming forward due to similar circumstances. I will try and remain on topic whilst also offering my advice.
Family Court without a Solicitor - I would say that any court action without legal representation is unwise. With the family court this could either be more so ill advised yet, perversely, can on occasion work to your favour if handled correctly.
The problem is that most people do not know how to handle this correctly (and why should they?).
Someone mentioned the McKenzie Friend route. It is important that you know a McKenzie Friend can only support you within the court (that is moral support, assistance in your submissions and quiet advice to you directly). They cannot represent you or speak for you, address the court or examine witnesses.
As such consider them to be nothing more than friendly support during the process, but understand they cannot represent you in any meaningful way.
If you are going to represent yourself, with our without a MF you need to understand you will be classed as a Litigant in Person (not with legal representation).
The difficulty here is obviously going to be your understanding of the law, precedents, procedure and overall experience in how things work on a daily basis.
This does not mean you can't do it yourself, it just means there are many traps you could fall down (or be pushed towards) that you never considered were traps in the first place.
If you are going to do this (thought please read the section below before considering this) the important things to remember at all times are;
1) You are ALWAYS representing the best interests and well being of the children. Never let a single remark come out that puts you before them.
2) The court does not care what is fair between you and your partner. Remember this.
3) The court is equally not concerned about redressing lost time (it is in the past), nor attributing past blame when unproven (though often does towards men, a sorry fact).
4) The court does not care in the slightest about your emotions (but does manage to give weight to the mother's emotions). You have to suck that one up.
5) The Judge is going to be against you from the first moment as (s)he will have experienced a Litigant in Person on many occasions before. Deal with this (and bring them onside) in seconds during your opening address. Something along the lines of;
Sir (as it it not usually Your Honour), I am only a litigant in person because I cannot afford legal representation and there in no legal aid available to me. I wish to inform you that I do not enjoy being placed in this position and I do not wish my circumstances to distract from your valuable time. I will keep to the factual points as I understand them and will trust your judgement on these facts within the law.". Or something similar. Basically, you want the judge to know you are not a Walter Mitty idiot.
Going to court with or WITH legal representation - if you avoid it, then do. It is not nice.
1) The social services will be brought in. Cafcass being the main body. They will interview you, your ex AND your children. They also seem to work on the basis that if you are male you are automatically a Jimmy Saville. You cannot win against these people (this is an observation, not a professional opinion!).
2) It will cost you at least 5 figures by the time you have finished. You know that £5,000 quote? Turned out to be £20,000. You are already commited too deep to walk away at this point. And you vampire solicitors know this.
3) She (the ex) can say anything she likes without having any evidence and stop you and your child(ren) seeing each other for a year (the court process). You can do nothing after being found innocent of all allegations. She can start again tomorrow if she wishes.
Advice:
Stay away from solicitors and the courts. It is only going to cost you money/time/loss of seeing your children grow. Putting money aside, it will take up to a year and you will never be able to get that year back. If there is another solution then take it.
As you are in dispute over minor things and you retain very strong contact with your children I would advise you had a conversation with your wife saying the you know things can change at short notice, but the kids need longer notice to prepare. Tell her how much they love her and talk about her to you and share with her your hopes that the two of you have handled everything as well as possible. Don't go to court over something that does no need social workers and a judge to deal with. Save your battles.
PS Sorry been at home with flu all day so written too much!
Edited for the errors spotted, the many missed typos are down to the flu I am suffering with. No excuse for tardiness I know, but true!
Family Court without a Solicitor - I would say that any court action without legal representation is unwise. With the family court this could either be more so ill advised yet, perversely, can on occasion work to your favour if handled correctly.
The problem is that most people do not know how to handle this correctly (and why should they?).
Someone mentioned the McKenzie Friend route. It is important that you know a McKenzie Friend can only support you within the court (that is moral support, assistance in your submissions and quiet advice to you directly). They cannot represent you or speak for you, address the court or examine witnesses.
As such consider them to be nothing more than friendly support during the process, but understand they cannot represent you in any meaningful way.
If you are going to represent yourself, with our without a MF you need to understand you will be classed as a Litigant in Person (not with legal representation).
The difficulty here is obviously going to be your understanding of the law, precedents, procedure and overall experience in how things work on a daily basis.
This does not mean you can't do it yourself, it just means there are many traps you could fall down (or be pushed towards) that you never considered were traps in the first place.
If you are going to do this (thought please read the section below before considering this) the important things to remember at all times are;
1) You are ALWAYS representing the best interests and well being of the children. Never let a single remark come out that puts you before them.
2) The court does not care what is fair between you and your partner. Remember this.
3) The court is equally not concerned about redressing lost time (it is in the past), nor attributing past blame when unproven (though often does towards men, a sorry fact).
4) The court does not care in the slightest about your emotions (but does manage to give weight to the mother's emotions). You have to suck that one up.
5) The Judge is going to be against you from the first moment as (s)he will have experienced a Litigant in Person on many occasions before. Deal with this (and bring them onside) in seconds during your opening address. Something along the lines of;
Sir (as it it not usually Your Honour), I am only a litigant in person because I cannot afford legal representation and there in no legal aid available to me. I wish to inform you that I do not enjoy being placed in this position and I do not wish my circumstances to distract from your valuable time. I will keep to the factual points as I understand them and will trust your judgement on these facts within the law.". Or something similar. Basically, you want the judge to know you are not a Walter Mitty idiot.
Going to court with or WITH legal representation - if you avoid it, then do. It is not nice.
1) The social services will be brought in. Cafcass being the main body. They will interview you, your ex AND your children. They also seem to work on the basis that if you are male you are automatically a Jimmy Saville. You cannot win against these people (this is an observation, not a professional opinion!).
2) It will cost you at least 5 figures by the time you have finished. You know that £5,000 quote? Turned out to be £20,000. You are already commited too deep to walk away at this point. And you vampire solicitors know this.
3) She (the ex) can say anything she likes without having any evidence and stop you and your child(ren) seeing each other for a year (the court process). You can do nothing after being found innocent of all allegations. She can start again tomorrow if she wishes.
Advice:
Stay away from solicitors and the courts. It is only going to cost you money/time/loss of seeing your children grow. Putting money aside, it will take up to a year and you will never be able to get that year back. If there is another solution then take it.
As you are in dispute over minor things and you retain very strong contact with your children I would advise you had a conversation with your wife saying the you know things can change at short notice, but the kids need longer notice to prepare. Tell her how much they love her and talk about her to you and share with her your hopes that the two of you have handled everything as well as possible. Don't go to court over something that does no need social workers and a judge to deal with. Save your battles.
PS Sorry been at home with flu all day so written too much!
Edited for the errors spotted, the many missed typos are down to the flu I am suffering with. No excuse for tardiness I know, but true!
Edited by JulianPH on Tuesday 16th January 18:02
JulianPH said:
Scary stuff...
Is being a litigant in person really as bad as you suggest? It's my understanding that judges don't expect such people to know the law, hence having legal advisors present in court.The solicitors I have seen to date have all suggested there is no point/benefit adding a five figure sum to pay for their services and that their presence does not necessarily alter the outcome.
This is Family Court, not exactly criminal proceedings. Yes the stakes are high but are you not scare mongering just a little?
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff