Section 7 report advice

[blindex]

So I had my Cafcass section 7 report. Now a district judge ordered Cafcass to undertake the section 7 report because in his judgment he found the LA's Family Support services were aligned to the mother treating her allegations as facts (based on the files disclosed by the LA), and therefore in order for justice to be done Cafcass should do the section 7 report. These are the judge's words not mine

What does Cafcass do?

- Use the Local Authority disclosure notes as the basis for his core recommendations
- Despite no fact finding hearing taking place, the FCA himself treat the mother's allegations as fact stating several times over that I lack insight on my coercive and controlling behaviour towards her
- Determines that I have a particular 'type of personality' that is detrimental to parenting, despite not having done any assessment whatsoever and provided no scientific evidence to back up his theories
- Recommends that I undertake a course for fathers who are perpetrators of domestic abuse
- The bulk of the report is littered with platitudes that do not add any new factual context for analysis. For example, the FCA says that 'if the allegations are true' mother's attitude towards the father are justified... or stating that this is not a case where the parents merely do not get on (duh, that's why in a court of law).

Now to what matters:

- Contact centre reports between me and the children are glowing, the LA social service and the school have themselves witnessed that the children are relaxed with the father (there are many allegations by the mother against me of child abuse), and the children (8 and 4 years old) have told to the Cafcass officer that they love me and want to have sleep overs with me, etc
- I have weekly unsupervised contact with the children, no sleepovers, for nearly four months now and no safeguarding concerns have been raised

In the Section 7 report:

- The FCA notes that my main concern is how I will co-parent the children with the mother, that I propose that contact be stepped up gradually, that I raised no safeguarding concerns in relation to the mother.
- The mother has made new allegations (sexual violence) and continues her crusade against me. The FCA's overall tone is of condescending understanding towards mother's 'anxieties' which he finds justified....


Despite all that the FCA's recommendation is that I have limited access to the children in the long term.

What to do?

 

[Ash]

What is the FCA? Trying to follow all that . So Cafcass haven't done a new section 7 they've just aligned with social services? As part of Cafcass section 7, did they come and visit you at your home and talk to you? Did they see you with the children (I assume yes at the contact centre?).

It sounds to me like Cafcass are going with their "conflict between parents" thing as being harmful to the children and basically saying less conflict for the children if they stay with the Mother and have "limited access" with you. Did they actually use the term "access"? Because that doesn't exist any more.

So yes they are going with the "conflict between parents" thing as a reason to limit time - by saying they have concerns about co parenting being possible. That's no excuse. There doesn't need to be any contact or co parenting with your ex if it's a clearly defined order - it can be parallel parenting. Everyone knows where the kids are and when and the only need to communicate is if there is a situation where something needs to be different (eg child off sick or going home early one day) or to change pick up or drop off arrangements in holidays eg and that can just be a brief text.

I'm guessing FCA is Family Court Adviser? Is that the Cafcass officer who did the section 7? Or a separate Family court adviser who was asked to monitor things?

You mentioned you used to have overnights before until four months ago. When did you separate and how long were you having overnights before they stopped?

Whatever the children say they will go with what they decide is in the childrens best interests.

Have you had any legal advice or are you self repping. Off the top of my head I would think you could either argue the case at final hearing with evidence (possibly putting cafcass on the stand and cross examining them to undermine their report). Or ask for a fact find to have allegations dismisse.d Although that would delay matters. But I cannot see how "limited time" with you will help the situation if the ex wants no time with you at all.

 

[blindex]

Hi Ash,

Yes, FCA is the Cafcass officer that wrote the report. He did speak to me but did not see me with the children (but I have glowing contact centre notes). But the main conclusions in the report are based on the findings from Family Services, and treating mother's allegations as facts (though the judge, the appeal judge, and the FCA himself recommended that there should be no fact finding hearing)

He used the word 'contact' as opposed to access.

To me you are spot on in your assessment of 'conflict between parents' formulaic approach.

It's been a year since the mother took the children away from me. Before that we were married for over ten years and I had daily care of the children until then (i.e. over seven years). I had just two overnight contacts because the mother made further allegations following that, we had an appeal hearing, a whole mess. Nevertheless Cafcass in the s7 report have acknowledged that there has been no safeguarding issues during interim contact. I'm legally represented and my barrister told me that my statement and evidence bundle are the largest they ever seen in the family court.

The court ordered that we submit a statement in response to the Cafcass proposals. I'm doing just that and I'm forensically picking all the recommendations apart. It is a really shod piece of work what they done.

Now, I need to understand from my solicitors what the legal position is. To me this is the whole travesty, the courts are saying that a FFH is not needed in our case, but at the same time appear also to be saying that they cannot determine the issues without one and therefore have to proceed as if the domestic abuse MAY have occurred. Which is paradoxical isn't it.

I'm not sure cross examining the FCA at court will add any value. He is quoting directly from the Social Services report, so we know his analysis is flawed.....

 

[Ash]

That is the whole point of cross examining him - to prove to the Judge that his analysis is flawed so his report is undermined/dismissed by the court and the court find in your favour. While focusing in your statement and evidence, on the history, the positive reports from the contact centre, what the children said they wanted, and stating that you feel that there will be no issues with regular time with both parents as if the Mother does not wish to co parent directly, there can be minimal communication by email, with a defined order and all changeovers being to and from school, for a seamless transition for the children .

 

[Ash]

Do you have a date for a final hearing? A fact find at this stage would delay matters, but if the allegations were dismissed then the concerns and doubts in the section 7 would also be dismissed. But do you have enough evidence to prove the allegations false? Often it is one word against another and found on the basis of probability.

The other reason to cross examine the Cafcass man in court is - his recommendation is only limited time with you and courts invariably follow the advice in the section 7 - UNLESS you can undermine his report.

 

[blindex]

Yes, but he will defer to the analysis done by the Family Services... Now you have to remember that the district judge ordered Cafcass to do the s7 report because upon reading the LA disclosure he found that she treated mother's allegations as facts

So I'll also need to request the Family worker from the Local Authority to be present in court to cross examine her as well.

What a fu**ing mess.....


But I have a secret weapon..... I taped my first conversation with her.....

 

[Ash]

With who? Your ex or the Social worker? Isn't that illegal if done without her consent? I'd check with your barrister whether that should be used.

 

[Ash]

I think it's reasonable enough to state that as the Social services Section 7 was considered to be too aligned with the Mother, the court ordered Cafcass to do a new section 7. Therefore the Social services section 7 was not accepted and the only one the courts will be considering is the Cafcass one. Hence you cross examine the Cafcass officer and can ask them - if the court determined the social services Section 7 was too aligned with the Mother, why did you use x y and z sections from their report rather than interview independently?

The biggest argument against a Cafcass officer is - they did not see you with the children. Therefore their report is flawed and dismissed - which is why you cross examine them. When their report is dismissed, there are no welfare issues.

What is the next hearing? A further directions hearing or a final hearing?

 

[blindex]

With who? Your ex or the Social worker? Isn't that illegal if done without her consent? I'd check with your barrister whether that should be used.

With the social worker, I checked with both the barrister and the solicitor and they both gave me the green light because it demonstrates how she blatantly misrepresented everything I spoke to her. Plus a have a cache of emails with the social worker that has already been submitted as evidence and demonstrate that I was engaging well with her (the social worker). Technically, this lady is from Early Help, not Social Services so she was clearly out of her depths....

 

[blindex]

I think it's reasonable enough to state that as the Social services Section 7 was considered to be too aligned with the Mother, the court ordered Cafcass to do a new section 7. Therefore the Social services section 7 was not accepted and the only one the courts will be considering is the Cafcass one. Hence you cross examine the Cafcass officer and can ask them - if the court determined the social services Section 7 was too aligned with the Mother, why did you use x y and z sections from their report rather than interview independently?

The biggest argument against a Cafcass officer is - they did not see you with the children. Therefore their report is flawed and dismissed - which is why you cross examine them. When their report is dismissed, there are no welfare issues.

What is the next hearing? A further directions hearing or a final hearing?

Directions hearing for the parties to present their views regarding the s7 report

 

[blindex]

Do you have a date for a final hearing? A fact find at this stage would delay matters, but if the allegations were dismissed then the concerns and doubts in the section 7 would also be dismissed. But do you have enough evidence to prove the allegations false? Often it is one word against another and found on the basis of probability.

The other reason to cross examine the Cafcass man in court is - his recommendation is only limited time with you and courts invariably follow the advice in the section 7 - UNLESS you can undermine his report.

So we do not have a date yet for the final hearing.

I've got a tonne of evidence to prove the allegations are false. My barristers told me that mine was the biggest bundle and statement they seen in a court of law. I've got text messages going back nearly four years.... emails.... receipts... photo and video evidence. Plus she put such a vile statement of hate with many passages that can be considered abusive....

My interaction with social services has been faultless...

You are not going to believe this, but I actually helped the mother load her stuff (and the children) into a removals van because she said she was doing a clear out.... Only later I realised that she'd taken her clothes and the children's as well, but in her statement she told that she 'fled' the family home....

 

[Ash]

So it's about where to present that evidence. Whether at a final hearing or a fact finding hearing. And what to ask for at the next directions hearing. I think the difficulty could be that as this S7 is so negative in terms of recommending time, that if you ask to go straight to final hearing, the only way of improving that recommendation is to cross examine the Cafcass officer and present all your evidence. But usually, before it gets to final hearing, welfare issues have been dismissed or confirmed. As they haven't dismissed welfare issues then a fact finding hearing could determine whether there are welfare issues or not. It sounds like it's been done back to front. Fact find should have been before section 7.

So consideration now needed as to how to achieve a successful outcome. Because this is family court and it has it's processes. And about how best to convey your innocence and that the allegations are false. A directions hearing won't allow for that.

If the directions hearing is to report back on the S7 you can guarantee your ex will say she agrees with it, and they will expect you not to agree with it, but it might be decided at that hearign whether it's accepted or not. I think all you could say is - you have evidence that the allegations are false and you don't agree that the inability of one parent to co parent should prevent a relationship for the children with the other parent as a defined order and something like "my family wizard" would mean minimal communication needed. But then you need to know what to ask for next,. Fact find or final hearing?

What does your barrister suggest?

 

[blindex]

So, I told my solicitor that I needed to write the statement in response to the Section 7 report as I know my case inside out and can pick it apart. Once I'm satisfied the document is in good shape, I'll share with them.

In parallel, I'm using the forum here as a sounding board and to get some advice so when I speak with the solicitor I have a pretty clear view of the landscape.

I suspect she will suggest that we go to a final hearing because the decision not to go for a FFH was already subject to an appeal. The appeal judge himself agreed that this is not a case that needs a FFH....