Child access arrangements and court applications

[spaced_penguin]

Hi, I am new to the forum and I’m after some advice.

My relationship with ex was perfectly fine before our son was born. We had an argument about teddies in the cot within the first few weeks and we never recovered, she wanted them and I was against it. In my mind she never forgave me and after that I could never do anything right, lots of little petty arguments and we stopped communicating, basically I felt like I was walking on eggshells. As an example, she never once went for a walk with me with the baby, she would only do this if we were walking to town.

When our son was 11 months old she said she wanted to separate and it’s now been 5 months. Her initial belief was that our son should live with her and she made it very difficult for me to have access. I was in an Airbnb and she maintained she had to inspect and sign off it being appropriate, she then requested the same once I’d moved into permanent accommodation. She has no empathy and maybe I missed some personality traits. There were a few red flags now that I’ve thought about it however we were together for 5 years.

We’ve done two rounds of legal representation shuttle mediation. there are no safeguarding issues or accusation but she wouldn’t even come into the same room for mediation, her belief is that shuttle was faster. Definitely not based on the bill.

We currently have a 9:5 split with six transitions a fortnight, ideally I would like an equal 2:2:5:5 split but she won’t agree. As a compromise my solicitor put forward an 8:6 split 2:2:6:4 which would still give my ex the majority share. This was refused so I have subsequently started a court application. Whether my request for the signed MIAM made her think I don’t know. However, she said she wanted to discuss and came round last night, she has now said she will accept an 8:6 split but she wants 6 transitions a fortnight 2:2:5:1:1:3. To me this is absolutely ridiculous, it unnecessary increases the number of transitions and I can’t see this being to the benefit of out son, there must be some reason why she wants me to have him every Wednesday.

I don’t know whether I should accept or continue with court application (I don’t know if this can be withdrawn) one thought is to accept and then go to court when he is four on the basis I would then have a better chance of obtaining 50:50 access.

Surely a judge or social worker would think fewer transitions would be better for our child. My concern of going to court is that I only retain the current 9:5 split with 6 transitions a fortnight.

We both work full time but I have greater work flexibility. Since we separated he spends over an extra hour in nursery on her days compared to my days.

The law definitely needs to change, I can’t see why the legal default isn’t 50:50 access for each parent.

Thanks in advance.

 

[bujanin]

Hello and welcome. I still find it flabergasting the way that the mothers become the overlords/ladies dictating what's right and proper and inspecting and signing off, all that big cheese stuff.

2:2:5:1:1:3 - I agree seems ridiculous. Especially the 1:1:3. Where does the Wednesday figure then, is it a 1?

Have you asked her what the thinking is?

 

[Roblox]

Hi

So this is a bit tricky

If I've understood correctly your son is 16 months? At that age a 8:6 split is pretty good. As you mention when a bit older you should be able to press for 50 50.

I agree the number of transitions look excessive but at the same time every other weekend and one tea time in the week is quite common. Just wondering if for now, if not too onerous, it might be worth accepting.

 

[Roblox]

The courts, as you mention, will look at the kids best interests and may view the number of transitions as excessive. But often what is in the kids best interests gets trumped by what suits the Mother.

Do you live far away? I think the one good thing for this arrangement would show to your son that there's a fluidity between houses which longer term may be in your favour.

 

[spaced_penguin]

Hi, thanks for replies

The two one nights are a Wed and Thur, Wed with me, back to her for one night and then back to me for three nights.

I did try and ask for her rationale but nothing was forthcoming. I suspect she will either aim to remove my single Wed night in the future. She also works from home on a Friday and drops him off at nursery later, so it could be this.

Her 8:6 split with 6 transitions isn’t documented and is only a verbal offer, she rejected my initial proposal by solicitors letter. Under the current 9:5 arrangement we still have the single night with each parent. Her offer is to give me both the Wed & Thur on the weeks when I don’t have him at the weekend. My concern is that a judge may just accept the current arrangement as appropriate given his age so I end up with one less night and still 6 transitions.

My ex has become very controlling, she believes she can do no wrong and has no empathy. I had thought PND or some form of trauma related depression, however she blames me for everything and has a different memory of events, possibly to justify in her mind the separation. She believes she has to win or she’ll be a failure.

My solicitor is away for a week. I had a brief email yesterday. Her view is now that we’ve started proceedings we still get a court order and let the judge decide, the 8:6 offer is only verbal so my ex would possibly state she never offered this.

Does anyone know if it is possible to stop the court proceedings if we get an agreement. My solicitors email implied not but I am unable to speak to her for a week. The cost is horrific and that why I believe my ex is trying to compromise. If we agree surely we get it documented by the solicitors rather that get the court order.

 

[Roblox]

I believe you can apply to court to stop proceedings but given what you've outlined I think you're better seeing it through. Also without court order anything you agree isn't legally enforceable so she will have more power to mess you around.

You mention a verbal offer, was that as part of mediation or just between yourselves?

How your ex is behaving isn't uncommon. Unfortunately given child's age you need to tread quite lightly here.

On the costs you will likely benefit from a barrister at court. Often solicitors costs are an expensive which can be foregone. There's some good resources on the site that can help in that regard.

 

[spaced_penguin]

my ex rejected 8:6 in mediation. We had a phone call to discuss holidays and I read from this that the mediator hadn’t clearly put forward the 8:6 - it was shuttle mediation. Off the back of this my solicitor sent a letter with an 8:6 and 4 transitions which was rejected.

Since requesting the signed MIAM she knows that I’m starting court proceedings, during a transfer this week she mentioned discussing it. She verbally said she would agree to 8:6 but only with 6 transitions. To me she could therefore deny all knowledge and I suspect her response to the court will still be 9:5.

While I still think it should be 50:50, I would take 8:6 but think 4 transitions would be better for our son.

She also has to work abroad for about three weeks of a year, to balance the 8:6, I said I would look after him when she’s away. She’s not accepting of this and wants her parents to look after him - they live in France whilst I live round the corner from her.

 

[Roblox]

Without agreeing anything do you think you could get something in writing, even like text or WhatsApp messages, that in principle she is in agreement with 8 and 6. Like just suggesting options and seeing if she responds. Or does all written comms have to be via solicitors

 

[spaced_penguin]

I did think of messaging with a suggestion of me having the Monday and Tuesday one week and then only the Monday the following week, in effect swapping my days as an alternate 8:6 option with 4 transitions. My other option was thinking of sending a solicitors letter saying I would accept the 8:6 but with four transitions. For whatever reason the 6 transitions is in her interest not our sons.

Until this week she has dictated all communication on access via her solicitor or mediation. This has been an unnecessary waste of money. When we separated and she moved out she wouldn’t even tell me when I would next see my son. This came via solicitors letter. She is a very different and difficult person, she has a lot of NPD traits now and she sees me as the enemy and the person to blame.

 

[Fellowshipper]

I can't give you any concrete advice here as I have no personal experience in my own situation to relate, but I am just curious why were you against having teddies in the cot and also did you get your way that time?

 

[spaced_penguin]

My ex is half French. In France I believe it is the norm to have teddies in the cot, however in the UK due to SIDS it is not advised. I’m an engineer and do safety stuff, initially I was probably over anxious about things when he was born, I believe most parents are. My ex believes nothing bad will happen to her so there’s no need to worry about it. She was very childish and tried to compare it to crossing the road saying that she could also be run over, I said you stop look and listen to mitigate this, her response was, no I always walk straight out without looking - she could never be wrong. We probably went 3 months without teddies and then she gradually introduced them when she went over to France for six week. We had agreed in principle on two but she kept pushing the boundaries and adding more, it was like she was trying to antagonise me to create an argument.

I’m thought and thought about things that maybe I could have done differently but it won’t bring either of them back, she now hates me and I really don’t know where I went wrong.

 

[Ash]

I would advise you don't withdraw the application. It could make it much harder to apply again in future if you do, and also you can't rely on a verbal agreement as she could change her mind at any time. I agree with your solicitor to continue with the court process. It may not go beyond the first hearing (FHDRA). Which stands for First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment. Basically it's an opportunity for negotiatons at court and a consent order to be drawn up and then it needs go no further. Even if you agree to her proposal at least it will be in a court order and formal and state that the child "lives with" both parents.

I think there could be a compromise. She maybe feels 2-2-5-5 is too long a period away at the age your child is. Instead you could propose 2-2-3-2-2-3

That would be

Week 1: Mon Tues Dad, Wed Thurs Mum, Friday, Saturday Sunday Dad
Week 2: Mon Tues Mum. Wed Thurs Dad, Friday, Saturday Sun Mum

If you can reach agreement outside of court, and have it put in a consent order (you would each need a solicitor) then the consent order would be drawn up and just sent to court for sealing and it would cancel the application.

I think all the single overnights back and forth would be bad for the child though.

 

[Ash]

If you want to adapt that to 6 out of 14 instead of 7 it could be the same as above but only Monday night in week one instead of Monday and Tuesday. So then it would be

1-3-3-2-2-3

 

[spaced_penguin]

We did discuss a 2-2-3 during mediation, my ex wouldn’t accept the alternating week days that he would spend with each parent.

I am really not happy by the 1-1 that we currently have with the current 9:5 . I guess it is no worse with an 8:6 and I get an additional night. I suspect she has only offered the additional night thinking this would stop court proceedings. If we go to court then I can’t see this being offered and the only formal documentation from her on 8:6 is to reject it.

 

[Resolute]

At 16 months I think I would do anything necessary to get up to 8/6. This would give a very strong foundation for a better arrangement when the child comes towards school age.

Have you agreed on whether or not the order will he 'lives with both'?

 

[Ash]

Could it not be

1:2:5:2:1:3 ?

Not sure which days those are but at least there aren't two single nights close together. If she'd agree to that in a consent order with "lives with both parents" you'd be in a position to vary the schedule before your child starts school age 4. Hopefully she'd agree then but if not at least you'd already have 8/14 nights and it would simply be a case of a better schedule if you had to apply to court.

Assume that would be
Monday - ex
Tues Wed - you
Thurs, Fri, Sat Sun Mon - ex
Tues Wed - you
Thurs - ex
Friday Sat Sunday - you

That's actually 7/7 or 50/50 by the way - the same as her proposed schedule of 2:2:5:1:1:3

If she'd adjust it to 1:2:5:2:1:3 I'd accept it.

 

[spaced_penguin]

I can see the benefit of not having two single back to back. It feels she is trying to punish me with the single night. She definitely won’t accept 7:7 which is what I think you have outlined @Ash She will also only do transfers outside of holidays via nursery. I suspect she will only accept single nights if we both have him. I proposed today via text that I have him Mon & Tue one week and then Monday the following week off the back of my three day weekend, this would retain the Thursday night that she wants - but she will never agree to what I want it has to be her terms.

@Resolute my application is for a living with order. I had said in mediation that I would start court proceedings, I think she may have thought I was trying to call her bluff but I wasn’t. This is why I think she has come round to 8:6.

Maybe a 2,1,5,2,1,3

M/T ex
W me
Th/F/S/Su/M ex
T/W me
Th ex
F/S/S me

Although with this I can see a child not really wanting to visit day when it’s book ended by a 2 and 5 days with mum.

I think a 2/2/6/4 would work for the best, I do struggle when I don’t see him for 6 nights but I currently have to deal with that on our current 9/5.

I think she wants to block my ability to go back to visit family at a distance with him, she stated during mediation that three nights is too short a duration for the 500 mile round trip. Today she messaged to ask if she could go abroad with him at the end of the month, she has the luxury of being able to do this as she has six nights. She is very controlling.

 

[Ash]

I think above you said she wants 2:2:5:1:1:3. So presumably that is 2 5 and 1 with her and 2 1 and 3 with you?

It does seem to be getting very complicated but seems you might be getting there. The maximum time you'd have would be 3 nights, so a week-end away is possible. A longer holiday would have to be by agreement and if she wouldn't agree you could apply for a specific issues order for a holiday.

As she has agreed to 6/14 then yes maybe proceed with the application and see if agreement can be thrashed out at the first hearing for a consent order, but for that you'd need representation really which costs money. Maybe 2k for a barrister or half that for a solicitor. Personally I think you're likely to get better order wording if you use a barrister.

If the court decides, they usually prefer the same midweek nights each week. Unless 2-2-3-2-2-3 is agreed.

A standard order for a Dad is every other week-end and 1 midweek overnight (usually Wednesday). If it's a 3 night week-end Friday to Monday that would be 5 nights a fortnight. So for 6 nights a fortnight you would just get an extra midweek night on alternate weeks.

Eg Week 1 Friday to Monday am and Wednesday night
Week 2 Tuesday and Wednesday night.

That would be 3-2-1-5-2-1

That's probably what a court would order. Anything else you'd need to agree between you. But if applying to court I would stick with 50/50 and 2-2-5-5. Why not?

 

[spaced_penguin]

you are correct @Ash with the 2:2:5:1:1:3. 2 5 and 1 with her and 2 1 and 3 with me.

Her initial offer was a 1 week night and 1 night a weekend and every New Year. I was surprised her solicitor sent the letter, it was a terrible letter which I suspect my ex wrote on behalf of the solicitor.

I prefer the 3-2-1-5-2-1 which spreads the single nights. There is a benefit to her as she WFH Friday and always takes him to nursery later, she would have this option every week.

My application is for 50:50 2-2-5-5. With the current offer of 8:6 2-2-5-1-1-3 only being verbal, if we went to court I just hope I come away with this, otherwise it’s a significant expense.

To me, the law is so unfair.

 

[Ash]

It is indeed unfair.