My ex has not disclosed her assets with the Legal Aid Agency otherwise she wouldn't qualify. Our court case is on-going, no final hearing yet. My solicitor advised me not to report her as it could look bad on me in court. Does anyone have a similar experience?
Guest viewing is limited
- You have a limited number of page views remaining
- 2 guest views remaining
- Register now to remove this limitation
Reporting Legal Aid fraud experiences
- Thread starter blindex
- Start date
Your solicitor is right.She will accuse you of financial and controlling abuse(if she didn't already) and it will not paint a great picture for judge.Focus on your case and leave her Legal aid.Legal aid solicitors are notoriously bad anyway-they only get paid 1/3 of normal private fees -so it's not the greatest advantage.
No worries,I understand your instinct is to expose her lies because you probably experienced many of her allegations. But this is what they aim to do and use everything against you.
As I understand it, her finances aren't really the reason she'd be eligible for legal aid. The only family cases eligible for legal aid are where DV has been accused (which is why so many exes accuse Dv - free lawyers and they don't need much in the way of evidence - a letter from womens aid possibly, who just believe what she tells them). I may be wrong but if she is eligible because she claims to be a victim of DV I don't think her finances are looked at at all.
But no don't raise it - focus on your case. It could be useful evidence for later though - if you want to prove she's lied about something. But it needs to very clearly prove she's lied. Not guesswork or assumption. If you're separated, you won't actually know what her bank statements say. And as mentioned above it could be seen as controlling behaviour - talking about her finances. There are tricky lines. I know cases where a Dad has asked the court to order the Mother producing her medical records. For very valid reasons! And the court sees this of intrusive of the Mother's privacy and the Dad being a bit controlling.
But no don't raise it - focus on your case. It could be useful evidence for later though - if you want to prove she's lied about something. But it needs to very clearly prove she's lied. Not guesswork or assumption. If you're separated, you won't actually know what her bank statements say. And as mentioned above it could be seen as controlling behaviour - talking about her finances. There are tricky lines. I know cases where a Dad has asked the court to order the Mother producing her medical records. For very valid reasons! And the court sees this of intrusive of the Mother's privacy and the Dad being a bit controlling.
Hi Ash,actually even when there is a documented DV or abuse,they still need to past financial mean test and even when they are unemployed but have mortgage the equity counts towards mean test. Then they have to have merits if the case,so for example Legal aid can refuse if mother is allowing contact and this is just about increased contact, because it contradicts their claim of DV. The case has to have a good chance of “winning”.So in short-solid evidence needed first,financial mean test and then merits of the case.
It is only in criminal cases legal aid is awarded automatically with no financial mean test.
Well thanks for telling me that as I was unaware. I knew it was means tested for mediation but thought DV overrode means testing. It's exactly the kind of thing an ex who makes allegations would do though. Mine got away with "having it both ways" throughout court which was almost laughable. On the one hand she'd claim to be a poverty stricken single Mother (especially when she was ordered to pay my costs and came up with a load of fake accounts). On the other hand she would keep talking about her husband and their established family life with my son! She couldn't seem to see she couldn't have it both ways and it was obvious she was lying about something! But somehow court weren't particular interested in that as it was about finances. But she was trying to use the "distress" argument - something I've come across since then - and something an ex's solicitor can use when you try and enforce.
Do you mean the child tax credits? I think some people were eligible to keep those before the income limit came in (if they already had them).
I totally agree we are in impossible situation.We know they are lying but god forbid we call it as it is and we only give them ammunition to call us controlling and coercive
that’s why I stay away from anything she can argue for the life. It will never ends well for us… only brownie points for them
I wouldn't go as far as to say that. Proving she is lying is the purpose of final hearing and how you get things changed. Brownie points for you. What is wrong is that there is no punishment for lying (one case of perjury I've heard of out of millions of cases).
If her taxable income exceeds 60k that will need to all be repaid. HMRC will catch up with her.