Cafcass not suggesting a fact find - Accused of DV

[childfirst]

The Cafcass interview went as well as it could and the suggstions were more for the STBXW to carry out hair/blood tests etc.

I have the DV things against myself and the police allowed me to make a statement for acts she carried out on me.

Naturally Cafcass I assume spoke to the investigating officer and the suggestion is a fact find is not needed.

Do any of the seasoned veterans have a viewpoint on this? I have read this does occure when little to no evidene exists.

Thanks in advance

 

[JX11]

What stage are you at ? Is this interview prior to FHDRA or are you further down the line. If it is first contact with them it is little more than dad said this mum said that, they won’t try and establish any facts, they tend just to write down what both parties say with more weight to the mothers comments.
Do you have any more background? Is the DV stuff ongoing active investigation or has been NFA’d . This can be problematic as likely claims of risks to the child.

 

[childfirst]

What stage are you at ? Is this interview prior to FHDRA or are you further down the line. If it is first contact with them it is little more than dad said this mum said that, they won’t try and establish any facts, they tend just to write down what both parties say with more weight to the mothers comments.
Do you have any more background? Is the DV stuff ongoing active investigation or has been NFA’d . This can be problematic as likely claims of risks to the child.

Thank for your response.
I did an emergency hearing with a C1A as I have counter allegations of DV plus they have an addiction.
It was after this hearing where the judge said he had no CAFCASS report we both had CAFCASS call us and it was from this within the recommendations to court they suggested no fact finding. It is clear they have spoken to the police as they have confirmed no previous record and outlined dates of allegations etc.
It is an ongoing investigation but nothing in the report saying I should not be seeing my child.

 

[Resolute]

In general, it is better not to have a Fact Finding hearing. They are lengthy and expensive. It is usually better if the mud-slinging can be dealt with another way. For example, the court could make a decision based on disclosure of evidence and cross examination in the final hearing. Allegations do not necessarily need to be beaten. The could be classed as not "determinative", i.e. they would have no bearing even if true.

There are exceptions to every rule in my opinion. Each case is different and judge/magistrates can be a law unto themselves.