Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
LIP for a Fact Finding
- Thread starter DadLad
- Start date
Does it make a difference if legal aided ex is respondent? Can they still claim costs regardless?
I think what's concerning me the most is that I'm being set up to fail. I have the ex and her team as well as Cafcass who are all against me.
I don't want to walk into this final hearing after 3 years and come out with nothing. That will absolutely destroy me, I've jumped through every hoop and I've been persistent.
I have evidence which counter all of the ex's allegations. But I think even when proven, Cafcass are still the biggest burden to face. The officer assigned to my case is on a "I hate men" vigilante mission which is extremely concerning.
I think the plan of action first is: I need to respond to the scott schedule with counter evidence to support.
Secondly, write a position statement with a contact schedule and possibly addressing the S7 report?
Or would this give the ex and her representation and Cafcass ways to find excuses? Would it be better to put the ex and Cafcass on the spot on the day?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated
I don't want to walk into this final hearing after 3 years and come out with nothing. That will absolutely destroy me, I've jumped through every hoop and I've been persistent.
I have evidence which counter all of the ex's allegations. But I think even when proven, Cafcass are still the biggest burden to face. The officer assigned to my case is on a "I hate men" vigilante mission which is extremely concerning.
I think the plan of action first is: I need to respond to the scott schedule with counter evidence to support.
Secondly, write a position statement with a contact schedule and possibly addressing the S7 report?
Or would this give the ex and her representation and Cafcass ways to find excuses? Would it be better to put the ex and Cafcass on the spot on the day?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated
If you have the email in writing that they've agreed to include those pieces of evidence in the bundle and they haven't, then I would just send the evidence to the court, with the files attached to an email to the court, along with a copy of their email agreement, and say in your email. The attached evidence was agreed to be included in the bundle (see attached copy email from xxxxxxx Solicitors) but has been left out of the bundle. I am therefore attaching it to go with the bundle.
It's a really tough time for you with everything hanging on this after 3 years. It must have caused a whole lot more anxiety with this confusing situation of not being able to respond to a Scott schedule.I think what's concerning me the most is that I'm being set up to fail. I have the ex and her team as well as Cafcass who are all against me.
I don't want to walk into this final hearing after 3 years and come out with nothing. That will absolutely destroy me, I've jumped through every hoop and I've been persistent.
I have evidence which counter all of the ex's allegations. But I think even when proven, Cafcass are still the biggest burden to face. The officer assigned to my case is on a "I hate men" vigilante mission which is extremely concerning.
I think the plan of action first is: I need to respond to the scott schedule with counter evidence to support.
Secondly, write a position statement with a contact schedule and possibly addressing the S7 report?
Or would this give the ex and her representation and Cafcass ways to find excuses? Would it be better to put the ex and Cafcass on the spot on the day?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated
Can you just clarify what has been done so far as it does sound confusing. Your next hearing is a composite final hearing and fact find, yes? You have both submitted Scott schedules and statements, as ordered, right? But there is no instruction to be able to respond to the Scott schedule, or opportunity to before the bundle goes in right?
Presumably once you've received her Scott schedule and statement, you know what the allegations are and can respond to them with evidence and send those to the court saying these are your responses to the allegations in the Scott schedule. If the court doesn't accept that, it would be unreasonable. As yes it would look like a stitch up.
You could also respond to the allegations in a position statement.
If you're convinced the Cafcass officer attending will have it in for you and you're LIP then do your best but be prepared for it to go against you and then appeal. Because surely there are grounds for appeal if you had no opportunity to respond to the allegations. So also be prepared to ask for permission to appeal at the end of the hearing if it goes against you. You need that recorded to be able to submit an appeal.
So you need to respond to the Section 7 report as well? I thought that would have been done previously.
What does the section 7 report recommend?
The order states for both parties to submit and file a scott schedule and evidence to support - this has been completed
The order doesn't mention responding to the allegations even though in the schedule there is a section to respond.
The order also doesn't ask for a response to the S7 report but I think that it's crucial due to how biased and flawed the report actually is.
The ex's solicitor is also refusing to accept my evidence into the bundle after already agreeing.
I think that the way my case has been managed is extremely backwards and confusing.
I'm not entirely sure how responding to the Section 7 at this stage might help - might it not be better to just cross examine Cafcass on the Section 7 report and undermine it that way? There is nothing in the order saying you can't cross examine is there?
So if scott schedules and evidence have been completed and submitted, you could now give your responses and evidence to hers before the hearing couldn't you? Surely that would be separate from "the bundle" and you could submit them to court anyway and ask for them to be added to the bundle and confirm you've shared them with the other side. If there's a section to respond, then I'd respond.
Ex's solicitor refusing evidence is par for the course, but as they previously agreed to it you can send that to court along with proof it was agreed to be in the bundle.
Yes it's messy and confusing - you can expect ex's solicitor to try every trick in the book. The fact there isn't clarity about the Scott schedules doesn't help, but the order wording might be assumign that "submitting Scott schedules" includes "submitting responses" - ie completing the response section of the form.
So if scott schedules and evidence have been completed and submitted, you could now give your responses and evidence to hers before the hearing couldn't you? Surely that would be separate from "the bundle" and you could submit them to court anyway and ask for them to be added to the bundle and confirm you've shared them with the other side. If there's a section to respond, then I'd respond.
Ex's solicitor refusing evidence is par for the course, but as they previously agreed to it you can send that to court along with proof it was agreed to be in the bundle.
Yes it's messy and confusing - you can expect ex's solicitor to try every trick in the book. The fact there isn't clarity about the Scott schedules doesn't help, but the order wording might be assumign that "submitting Scott schedules" includes "submitting responses" - ie completing the response section of the form.
Thanks Ash.
With regards to responding, do I go into detail or just write denied in the box?
Will it be best to not give everything away in the response to prevent the other side from forming a cover up?
Would part of it help until cross examination when the ex is being put on the spot?
Or do I respond in detail with all the evidence to support?
I haven't done a Scott schedule so not sure - someone else might be able to help there. How much space is there in the response box? I'd be inclined to put "Allegation Denied" followed by brief explanation of why and mention of supporting evidence to go with that denial. Then attach any evidence.
Did you ever get any legal advice on that issue - about the order not mentioning responses?
I'd submit what you need to and rely on cross examination on the day and know your own statement very well for if you're cross examined on it.
It could make a big difference having your evidence seen that knock the allegations on the head and as part of the S7 cross examination you could say to the cafcass officer - those recommendations are based on believing Ms Ex's allegations aren't they? The evidence proving them false is now with the court, so your recommendations need changing would you say? Or something like that.
Did you ever get any legal advice on that issue - about the order not mentioning responses?
I'd submit what you need to and rely on cross examination on the day and know your own statement very well for if you're cross examined on it.
It could make a big difference having your evidence seen that knock the allegations on the head and as part of the S7 cross examination you could say to the cafcass officer - those recommendations are based on believing Ms Ex's allegations aren't they? The evidence proving them false is now with the court, so your recommendations need changing would you say? Or something like that.
Cafcass recommendations are:
No contact if all allegations are found.
ICFA and Parenting course if no allegations are found.
And if the court make some findings, but not all, then Cafcass would have to give consideration to the extent of the findings made and complete an updated risk assessment to explore parent’s response, acceptance and level of insight.
This is what I mean about this Cafcass officer. The ex cried during the home visit and she wrote in the S7 report that she is visibly upset and any contact would cause emotional harm to the child.
I don't understand how those recommendations can be made from really petty allegations. The report is so badly written, completely biased and flawed and they made one sided observations.
Last edited:
My partner had a FF as a LIP. He was the applicant and had applied for enforcement. Ex was also LIP. He didn’t have a great outcome in that mum admitted the breaches but the judge just felt sorry for the mother despite all the evidence against her so made no changes that he asked for to the order. Cafcass was heavily biased towards mum too and I feel they heavily influenced the judge as things were going his way until Cafcass were involved. However the reason I’m posting is because part of my partners evidence was also recordings, some video recordings and some dash cam footage. The court gave my partner permission to submit the recordings as evidence but he had to have his own device to play them in court so he took his laptop, so if you do submit video or audio recordings just make sure you have a device with you that can play them in court if needed.
I think what's really frustrating and worrying is the fact that the evidence can stack against the mother and prove the allegations false.
But even then, Cafcass can still go against you and side with the mother. What is the point of going through so much financial and emotional strain for such a long time providing the allegations are false to then result in a unfavourable outcome due to Cafcass?
In my partners case the judge stated that the amount of evidence my partner had showed he had set out to vilify the mother
He literally just had text conversations, some dash cam and video footage and transcripts of the videos incase the judge decided not to watch the footage. The judge also made negative comments about the fact that he had transcribed the video evidence. So in previous court cases he’s being told he doesn’t have enough evidence and the next time he has to return to court he’s being told he has too much. 
I suppose the outcome could have been worse. Cafcass were trying to order that daughter only had to see my partner if she wanted to but the judge decided to keep the order as it was, so thankfully he didn’t lose any time in the CAO with either child. Unfortunately the ex still succeeded in totally alienating his daughter from him as the judge refused to put anything into the CAO that my partner requested, to make it more watertight and prevent ex from continuing the alienating, so he now only has time with his son and not daughter.
In my partners case the judge stated that the amount of evidence my partner had showed he had set out to vilify the mother
I suppose the outcome could have been worse. Cafcass were trying to order that daughter only had to see my partner if she wanted to but the judge decided to keep the order as it was, so thankfully he didn’t lose any time in the CAO with either child. Unfortunately the ex still succeeded in totally alienating his daughter from him as the judge refused to put anything into the CAO that my partner requested, to make it more watertight and prevent ex from continuing the alienating, so he now only has time with his son and not daughter.
This is exactly the type of things which I refer to when saying that the family courts are set up for fathers to fail.
I agree that the courts are probably unreasonably unfair on Dads self repping. If a Barrister made all those points that's seen as acceptable and fair game. But when you're speaking up for yourself they see you as attacking the Mother. It's bizarre. A lawyer can attack the Mother with evidence but a Dad can't. But not everyone can afford lawyers.