Hi guys, I’ve just received the draft interim order from our FHDRA yesterday.
Judge said emphatic NO to fact finding, but yes to independent social worker completing a S7 due to CAFCASS delays (ex is paying for it to try and prove alienation).
However, they were very clever by caveating their request with- “If ISW considers that a separate fact find hearing needs to take place ahead of preparing a final s7 they will prepare an interim report to restore proceedings for further directions”. The judge only agreed to take on board recommendations of a FoF, not interim report to re-direct before s7 completion. Can I dispute this?
The judge also agreed to a statement being given to the independent social worker prior to starting. But they wish to include all evidence of allegations.
Isn’t evidence meant to assessed by a judge, and not a social worker?
This seems like just a roundabout way for them to get their fact finding that was refused..
Judge said emphatic NO to fact finding, but yes to independent social worker completing a S7 due to CAFCASS delays (ex is paying for it to try and prove alienation).
However, they were very clever by caveating their request with- “If ISW considers that a separate fact find hearing needs to take place ahead of preparing a final s7 they will prepare an interim report to restore proceedings for further directions”. The judge only agreed to take on board recommendations of a FoF, not interim report to re-direct before s7 completion. Can I dispute this?
The judge also agreed to a statement being given to the independent social worker prior to starting. But they wish to include all evidence of allegations.
Isn’t evidence meant to assessed by a judge, and not a social worker?
This seems like just a roundabout way for them to get their fact finding that was refused..