Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Blindsided. Would Welcome Advice, Thank You.
- Thread starter skydock
- Start date
Calling my solicitor this morning to see if she can sign-off that solicitor-led mediation has ended (with a view to completing the C100/F9). Also want to learn if she has an obligation to notify the other party. Want to get things moving asap and start leading the way, rather than having to knee-jerk react.
I don't know if that works differently in Scotland but in the Uk you just go directly to the mediator. In Scotland there is something called a minute of agreement which I believe is legally binding (possibly the same thing as a consent order - ie a legally agreed order without court). There is also means-tested legal aid available in Scotland I believe.
Shared Parenting Scotland seems to be the main organising for advising on Child Arrangements orders etc and if you look around the website there is various information, links and there are group meetings as well for different areas - for support with these situations.
www.sharedparenting.scot
Shared Parenting Scotland seems to be the main organising for advising on Child Arrangements orders etc and if you look around the website there is various information, links and there are group meetings as well for different areas - for support with these situations.
Home - Shared Parenting Scotland
www.sharedparenting.scot
Maybe give Shared Parenting Scotland a call.
Or - there's some fairly detailed information about the process here. It looks like it's called an initial writ rather than a C100 in Scotland.
www.custodyxchange.com
Or - there's some fairly detailed information about the process here. It looks like it's called an initial writ rather than a C100 in Scotland.
Family Court Process in Scotland: 5 Steps to Child Custody
The child arrangements process from start to finish in Scotland. How to apply for an order, prepare for hearings and proofs, etc.
www.custodyxchange.com
Thanks for the link. I forgot I'd actually bookmarked that. Need sleep and...time. Will also call SPS.Maybe give Shared Parenting Scotland a call.
Or - there's some fairly detailed information about the process here. It looks like it's called an initial writ rather than a C100 in Scotland.
Family Court Process in Scotland: 5 Steps to Child Custody
The child arrangements process from start to finish in Scotland. How to apply for an order, prepare for hearings and proofs, etc.
I've refreshed my (broken, fragmented) memory via the link you provided. Thanks. So, my STBXW has ended 'collaborative practice' (presumably with the reason that she's been in a coercive relationship or has developed some fear of me since the first meeting).
The courts don't want to decide parenting arrangements and expect forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to have been attempted. There are 3 types oof ADR recognised:
1. Mediation (we were going to do this but my STBXW went straight for collaborative practice)
2. Collaborative Practice (4-way meeting involving parents and their respective solicitors -- my STBXW ended this after one session).
3. Arbitration (direct alternative to court. Risky, rapid process where outcome can be decided in a day or two).
Having spoken to my solicitor today, I've asked her to send a letter asking if my STBXW will consider mediation (I expect she won't). In parallel I will schedule a session with a local mediator and have them invite my STBXW; that way I cover both bases and will hopefully soon know if mediation is a no-go (I expect that to be the case).
In my mind, that leaves arbitration or court. However, from what my solicitor has said, it's quite common for one party to claim they don't wish to collaborate but then change their mind after a 'colling off' period.
The courts don't want to decide parenting arrangements and expect forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) to have been attempted. There are 3 types oof ADR recognised:
1. Mediation (we were going to do this but my STBXW went straight for collaborative practice)
2. Collaborative Practice (4-way meeting involving parents and their respective solicitors -- my STBXW ended this after one session).
3. Arbitration (direct alternative to court. Risky, rapid process where outcome can be decided in a day or two).
Having spoken to my solicitor today, I've asked her to send a letter asking if my STBXW will consider mediation (I expect she won't). In parallel I will schedule a session with a local mediator and have them invite my STBXW; that way I cover both bases and will hopefully soon know if mediation is a no-go (I expect that to be the case).
In my mind, that leaves arbitration or court. However, from what my solicitor has said, it's quite common for one party to claim they don't wish to collaborate but then change their mind after a 'colling off' period.
I have had a read of this thread in one go. Sorry if what I am about to say was covered and I missed it.
In my opinion, based on experience and anecdote.
Family litigation is an atrocious affair. Truly appalling. If there is a way of bypassing contested proceedings, that would be a great prize. In England, an order by consent is secure because it is not so open to appeal as an order from contested hearings.
Full blown court proceedings will be time consuming and will give your ex many opportunities to exercise malintent should the mood lead her that way.
I did not realise the above until it was too late. My case suffered as a result.
Opposition breeds contempt. Contempt is not warded off by courts, so far as I've seen. I'd be tempted to try and bag any shared care order that gives minimum 50% living with you. Fighting for an extra 10-15% is a high stakes game.
Just a cautionary note for your consideration.
In my opinion, based on experience and anecdote.
Family litigation is an atrocious affair. Truly appalling. If there is a way of bypassing contested proceedings, that would be a great prize. In England, an order by consent is secure because it is not so open to appeal as an order from contested hearings.
Full blown court proceedings will be time consuming and will give your ex many opportunities to exercise malintent should the mood lead her that way.
I did not realise the above until it was too late. My case suffered as a result.
Opposition breeds contempt. Contempt is not warded off by courts, so far as I've seen. I'd be tempted to try and bag any shared care order that gives minimum 50% living with you. Fighting for an extra 10-15% is a high stakes game.
Just a cautionary note for your consideration.
Hi, thanks for reading and sorry to hear of your ordeal. I think there's absolutely no way my STBXW will 'allow' me 50% time with the children; she may go for 60/40 but not with it being labelled as 'shared care'. I do not with to go to court but it may be necessary...
We've had other Dads from Scotland on here who've been through court and got orders. I'm sure you wouldn't be expected to try arbitration. If the other two forms of dispute resolution have failed then it seems to me that an application (or whatever it's called) to the Sheriff for an order is the next step. Maybe get a second opinion from another solicitor.
Sorry, I misread an earlier post where it said 60/40 in your favour. I am off the mark in my earlier post.
Now I think I understand. Thank you for clarifying.
70/30 to her is a little less than the default, i.e. 4/14 plus half the holidays. I'd see the default as an absolute minimum, so 70/30 is a no go.
You have a similar situation to me, seemingly limitless funds from family on the other side. That swings the odds in her favour.
I would still be mindful that battle tends to make people meaner. All is fair in love and war, this is both.
I must admit and, apologies if this has been mentioned already. Should my starting point be 'shared care', in that both parents are somehow considered to be legally equal, rather than there being a 'primary carer'? Struggling to find something clear on that. I was of the understanding that the only way to have 'equal rights' if you will, is to have a 50/50 split child arrangement but, it seems to me that a 60/40 may not be detrimental, is that right? I'm normally good at understanding things but, time poor and fried brain. Thank you
So, there are two considerations:
- The label: Lives with Both OR Spends Time with
- The schedule : 50/50, 60/40, 70/30 etc
The Lives with Both gives you certain rights, the main one being holidays I.e. other parent cannot just disappear with the child for weeks on end.
The criteria that determines what you need as a schedule minimum to qualify as Shared Care which is approximately 5/14 nights in a 2 week period.
The reality is, unless you can normalise your relationship, those that don't have Lives with Both end up fighting another parent who thinks they can do whatever they want without consulting you.
If you can get Shared Care and are happy with 60/40 and this avoids court then it might be a good way to avoid thousands in legal costs and a protracted battle.
Just taken your time to consider exactly what is best for your child and if you can support that, along with the full implications for example 50/50 means no CMS but 60/40 does, or you'd need to ensure you can manage within your support network all the childcare of a 50/50 schedule
- The label: Lives with Both OR Spends Time with
- The schedule : 50/50, 60/40, 70/30 etc
The Lives with Both gives you certain rights, the main one being holidays I.e. other parent cannot just disappear with the child for weeks on end.
The criteria that determines what you need as a schedule minimum to qualify as Shared Care which is approximately 5/14 nights in a 2 week period.
The reality is, unless you can normalise your relationship, those that don't have Lives with Both end up fighting another parent who thinks they can do whatever they want without consulting you.
If you can get Shared Care and are happy with 60/40 and this avoids court then it might be a good way to avoid thousands in legal costs and a protracted battle.
Just taken your time to consider exactly what is best for your child and if you can support that, along with the full implications for example 50/50 means no CMS but 60/40 does, or you'd need to ensure you can manage within your support network all the childcare of a 50/50 schedule
Thanks, 60/40 was what I was thinking would potentially be a way to avoid court. We agreed this initially. 50/50 would mean I'd retire later (would have to take a different job) and I don't have any family nearby. That said, I could make 50/50 work and put my all into it. I'm wondering if, legally, 'shared care' has to be stated or, if a certain amount of days per year, week, month/whatever frequency automatically qualifies as 'shared care' (or if I'm talking crap).
Finally, I also wonder if , by going for 40/60 (if I did, in order to attempt to avert court) I'd be exposing myself and the children to future pitfalls. I would pay child maintenance, that's not my main concern.
Finally, I also wonder if , by going for 40/60 (if I did, in order to attempt to avert court) I'd be exposing myself and the children to future pitfalls. I would pay child maintenance, that's not my main concern.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just to be clear, it will need to be stated on any Childcare Order, consented or court dictated, that it is either a SPENDS TIME WITH or LIVES WITH BOTH order.
This is what will determine how it is seen in the future, it normal and usual for that to be done automatically but the legal process can be tricky, so you will need to ensure it is done by specifically mentioning it.
The 70/30 is a negotiating position, yours is 50/50, you'll be hoping to settle at 60/40.
If you open with 60/40 then I'd feel you'll struggle to move the conversation anywhere but down.
This is what will determine how it is seen in the future, it normal and usual for that to be done automatically but the legal process can be tricky, so you will need to ensure it is done by specifically mentioning it.
The 70/30 is a negotiating position, yours is 50/50, you'll be hoping to settle at 60/40.
If you open with 60/40 then I'd feel you'll struggle to move the conversation anywhere but down.
This is an aspect of your situation on you can really judge.
For example, in mine, I held off Divorce for many years even though I was in an incredibly toxic relationship, as I just didn't want to put the kids through it.
Ultimately the STBX started to punish the kids constantly as I stopped caring what she did to me and I determined that it was better they had as much time with me as possible to offset her approach and personality and give them a balanced upbringing- best of both.
I went for 50/50 and they wouldn't entertain anything beyond the bare minimum of every other weekend.
I was prepared to settle for less, including 60/40 which I offered at Mediation but it failed as she just wouldn't budge.
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate and sorry to hear of your own ordeal. I appreciate you staying on the forum to help others -- including me (and, more importantly, my children -- I can't express enough gratitude for that).
Yes, going forward I certainly wouldn't have 60/40 as a starting position since it would put me at a potential negotiation disadvantage. When my STBXW opened with 70/30 in collaboration, I was hoping she simply did so because she knew she'd have to move from it -- but now I'm not so sure.
Yes, going forward I certainly wouldn't have 60/40 as a starting position since it would put me at a potential negotiation disadvantage. When my STBXW opened with 70/30 in collaboration, I was hoping she simply did so because she knew she'd have to move from it -- but now I'm not so sure.
Last edited by a moderator:
Another option on scheduling is default plus. Something like:
Wk 1, Wed + Fri school pick up - Mon drop off
Wk 2, Wed school pick up - Fri school drop off
Holidays halved carefully on a detailed model
This would give a starting point shy of 50/50. Which may have pragmatic benefit. It will make your ex feel more important from the get go. There is still room to drop without losing proportion necessary for lives with both. Just give up the Thu in Wk 2.
Wk 1, Wed + Fri school pick up - Mon drop off
Wk 2, Wed school pick up - Fri school drop off
Holidays halved carefully on a detailed model
This would give a starting point shy of 50/50. Which may have pragmatic benefit. It will make your ex feel more important from the get go. There is still room to drop without losing proportion necessary for lives with both. Just give up the Thu in Wk 2.
Basically you can have "lives with both parents"/shared care if you have 5 nights a fortnight (not usually less). However in Scotland I think it's still called Residency, Contact and Shared Residency. They still have contact orders.
While, say 6 nights out of 14 could still be "shared residency" making you equal in terms of being the parent with care, in reality, some ex's (and some solicitors) still see the ex as the main parent, because the child spends more midweek time with them. But legally it means neither has to ask consent to go abroad and you are equal legally. My order was lives with both parents for less than 50/50 and it had a clause that said. "For the avoidance of doubt, this order provides for an equal sharing of the care of the child, despite the imbalance of midweek nights". That was intended to make it clear that both parents were equal. However, there is still Child Maintenance to pay when it's less than 50/50 which meant my ex still considered herself the resident parent even though she wasn't, so it didn't change her attitude, but it did give me a bit more power to deal with various authorities.
So in reality a full 50/50 is more easily seen as fully equal because it is equal time, it is legal residency with both parents as well and because there's no Child Maintenance to pay.
Any Lives with both parents/shared residency order, is, however, taken much more seriously by the courts if it's breached or during further applications and in serious circumstances means it's not such a huge step to transfer residency because both parents already have residency. It would need to be an extreme situation for a court to change shared residency to sole residency for one parent - but effectively that would take more power away from the Mother as a kind of punishment.
IME once there is a lives with both parents order, that's the way the courts seem to deal with an ex misbehaving a lot - so neither parent has sole residency.
While, say 6 nights out of 14 could still be "shared residency" making you equal in terms of being the parent with care, in reality, some ex's (and some solicitors) still see the ex as the main parent, because the child spends more midweek time with them. But legally it means neither has to ask consent to go abroad and you are equal legally. My order was lives with both parents for less than 50/50 and it had a clause that said. "For the avoidance of doubt, this order provides for an equal sharing of the care of the child, despite the imbalance of midweek nights". That was intended to make it clear that both parents were equal. However, there is still Child Maintenance to pay when it's less than 50/50 which meant my ex still considered herself the resident parent even though she wasn't, so it didn't change her attitude, but it did give me a bit more power to deal with various authorities.
So in reality a full 50/50 is more easily seen as fully equal because it is equal time, it is legal residency with both parents as well and because there's no Child Maintenance to pay.
Any Lives with both parents/shared residency order, is, however, taken much more seriously by the courts if it's breached or during further applications and in serious circumstances means it's not such a huge step to transfer residency because both parents already have residency. It would need to be an extreme situation for a court to change shared residency to sole residency for one parent - but effectively that would take more power away from the Mother as a kind of punishment.
IME once there is a lives with both parents order, that's the way the courts seem to deal with an ex misbehaving a lot - so neither parent has sole residency.