Weird mixed court outcome from second FHDRA

[lunico93x]

Last week had the "further FHDRA" in which yet another DDJ (magistrate in a dinner jacket more like) was to consider need for FFH, police disclosure, etc. He did order an FFH, despite my clear submission that the false allegations were a fig-leaf for her diagnosed mental illness. He didn't quite accept that but he did of his own accord order a psychiatric assessment of her (and only her), to get to the bottom of that side. My alcohol test results shone through, and she was told to not bring them up again. CAFCASS FCA as usual sitting there looking as dim as she probably is, just salivating waiting for me to say the alienation word (I didn't).

I had to push the judge on K v K and the President's Guidance on facts to take to trial, and he made a damp squib effort to narrow the scope, which got her 27 allegations down to I think 21-22, mine down from 13 to 10. Mine are all 100% focused on the child and the harm that's come to the child, hers are literally - as usual - 100% past nonsense, and the vast majority just completely and utterly made up. None of them, bar maybe one, are to do with my alleged impact on our child going forward, and that's also one that's easily disproven.

DDJ ordered a three-day FFH to try 30 allegations in total - completely mad. Day after I made a C2 application to narrow the scope vis-a-vis K v K, so I'm hoping I can either get the FFH kicked out at a future hearing or get the scope much tighter; I cannot afford £12k+ for a three-day hearing on allegations which by case law shouldn't even be brought into trial anyway. If all of her allegations go to FFH and any are found against me - and we all know with balance of probabilities and the way some judges think that is always a possibility - I would have grounds to appeal under K v K, so it must be tightened up first.

Judge also, in complete rejection of my ex's dramatic and emotional pleadings (despite having full representation at the hearing), ordered that I at last get information on our child's school etc. So I finally get to know where she is and be involved in the decisions around her first primary school etc. etc.

All in all I got a lot out of the hearing, and I self-repped. I've used barristers at some hearings, but I have some legal training from the past (albeit, a niche kind of law, and I never practised in the traditional sense) and once I get over the nerves, if I'm well-prepared I can do a decent job of it.

The thing that's got me though is two-part:

1. The sheer number of allegations this muppet DDJ seems to think should go to FFH, without even properly exploring what the allegations are, and certainly without them having any bearing on the future arrangements of the child (which is the current state of the law);
2. The final draft order, though it hasn't been sealed yet, from ex's solicitor, has made it look like it's all about ex's allegations. She'll get to submit a 12-page statement by date X, then I'll get to submit a 12-page statement in response, then after that she'll get to submit another 6-page statement in response to me. That doesn't make any sense, am I right? A real head-scratcher there but we're definitely not on equal footing.

Overall, as I say, I got lots out of it, the needle is shifting, but the DDJ made a hash of the FFH stuff. Hopefully my application within proceedings leads to a hearing - or even at the pre-trial review - where this can be rectified. And I'll prepare my evidence as if we were on an equal footing and can always change it last minute if I can't get it sorted before the PTR. I do think K v K and the President's Guidance on FFHs really tightens things up though, but the glorified magistrates that are DDJs, and family solicitors, don't yet seem to understand this.

Anyway, part-rant, part-question (1-2 above), but I just wanted to write this down because I'm going round in circles trying to make sense of it. I probably just need to wait and see what happens with my application within proceedings and at the PTR. But then, I also want to do whatever I can to steer the ship in the right direction sooner rather than later.

Thanks folks.

 

[Nanaforsonsjustice]

If you haven’t both provided a statement detailing the allegations and both provided a scott schedule, it sounds from your post that that is what you are now ordered to do. Once you have done this you will both then provide a further statement in response to the allegations. Make sure the order states you can also provide a statement in response to her allegations.

Normally you both submit statement with evidence and a Scott schedule on the same day at the same time and then you provide a response statement with evidence on the same day at the same time. Then at your next DRA hearing the judge will make a decision as to whether to proceed with the FFH and that is only normally if the allegations affect the child or will alter the outcome of the proceedings. If they do agree to a FFH they can then limit the allegations again to only certain ones. We did all this for my son and then she decided that due to the wealth of his evidence against her she didn’t want a FFH and so he said he didn’t and the magistrates decided a FFH wasn’t necessary.

 

[lunico93x]

If you haven’t both provided a statement detailing the allegations and both provided a scott schedule, it sounds from your post that that is what you are now ordered to do. Once you have done this you will both then provide a further statement in response to the allegations. Make sure the order states you can also provide a statement in response to her allegations.

Normally you both submit statement with evidence and a Scott schedule on the same day at the same time and then you provide a response statement with evidence on the same day at the same time. Then at your next DRA hearing the judge will make a decision as to whether to proceed with the FFH and that is only normally if the allegations affect the child or will alter the outcome of the proceedings. If they do agree to a FFH they can then limit the allegations again to only certain ones. We did all this for my son and then she decided that due to the wealth of his evidence against her she didn’t want a FFH and so he said he didn’t and the magistrates decided a FFH wasn’t necessary.

I see where you're coming from but this last hearing was the step after Scott Schedules were exchanged; the one you refer to as the next DRA meeting. So the schedules and only the short narrative statement on coercive control were ordered at the initial FHDRA, this one ordered the full "evidence" statement.

 

[Nanaforsonsjustice]

I see where you're coming from but this last hearing was the step after Scott Schedules were exchanged; the one you refer to as the next DRA meeting. So the schedules and only the short narrative statement on coercive control were ordered at the initial FHDRA, this one ordered the full "evidence" statement.

That’s a strange way to do it by the court.

 

[lunico93x]

To update this:

- The sealed order arrived;
- FFH ordered for SEPTEMBER for three-days only hearing Mother's allegations;
- This is despite the judge at the hearing saying my allegations would also be heard.

Firstly a seven-month delay is disproportionate. Secondly, her allegations are all historic and have no nexus to the child's welfare. Thirdly, there is a severe due process error here. I'm now out-of-time to appeal a case management decision, and in any case the decision didn't reflect what happened at the hearing.

I've heard the Family Court is bad but this is very poor quality.

 

[Ash]

It sounds like ex's solicitor wrote up the order in her favour and it's incorrect. You may need to challenge it. Did you approve the draft before it was sent for sealing? If not you can write to the court and object that the order is incorrect, and xyz should be in there and ask for the matter to be referred to the Judge. No mention of ex's psychiatric assessment in the order either?

If you don't get very far, you might need to ask for a directions hearing and the Judge to write the order. This is one of the hardest things about self repping. The ex's solicitor gets to write the order and they can't be trusted. If you had a barrister, your barrister would write the order.

What was it you wanted to appeal - the last hearing? How long is it out of time?

 

[lunico93x]

It sounds like ex's solicitor wrote up the order in her favour and it's incorrect. You may need to challenge it. Did you approve the draft before it was sent for sealing? If not you can write to the court and object that the order is incorrect, and xyz should be in there and ask for the matter to be referred to the Judge. No mention of ex's psychiatric assessment in the order either?

If you don't get very far, you might need to ask for a directions hearing and the Judge to write the order. This is one of the hardest things about self repping. The ex's solicitor gets to write the order and they can't be trusted. If you had a barrister, your barrister would write the order.

What was it you wanted to appeal - the last hearing? How long is it out of time?

You're right, it is likely that. I've raised it with the court but am not hopeful. It will have to be challenged down the road somehow.

The psych assessment is still in, but they're trying to spin it as just a general once-over at their suggestion. They were ordered to prepare the Part 25 on my behalf, because I don't use a solicitor, and they've written it that way. Again, I'm challenging it so it should really have a hearing before being signed off. They're also angling for a psychiatrist who is a published "domestic abuse" advocate. It's really the most impressive display of mafia tactics I've ever seen in my life.

 

[Ash]

You can expect every dirty trick in the book from an ex's solicitor. They are solely acting to win for their client. This goes overlooked by the courts, because it's an adversarial process. They are taking advantage of the fact you don't have a solicitor. If you did they would have to comply with various solicitor protocols. Even then they would try the odd thing. I usually think the main reason to have a barrister at a hearing is to get the order written up well.

So as it stands only ex is submitting a list of allegations is that right? Not you as well? Are you sure that isn't what was decided in court? Eg maybe the Judge dismissed your allegations at the hearing and just ordered the psychiatric report?

You could send for a transcript of the hearing but that could take at least 3 weeks.

 

[lunico93x]

You can expect every dirty trick in the book from an ex's solicitor. They are solely acting to win for their client. This goes overlooked by the courts, because it's an adversarial process. They are taking advantage of the fact you don't have a solicitor. If you did they would have to comply with various solicitor protocols. Even then they would try the odd thing. I usually think the main reason to have a barrister at a hearing is to get the order written up well.

So as it stands only ex is submitting a list of allegations is that right? Not you as well? Are you sure that isn't what was decided in court? Eg maybe the Judge dismissed your allegations at the hearing and just ordered the psychiatric report?

You could send for a transcript of the hearing but that could take at least 3 weeks.

100% was discussed at the hearing; the judge even cut down my allegations from 13 to 10, so clearly intended to engage with them.

I do have a barrister for most hearings but couldn't this time.

I've put in a C2 for a hearing to narrow the scope of the FFH, in which I (or a barrister) will push the K v K point, and ask again for it to be thrown out. At that point I'd be prepared to appeal it and it wouldn't be out of time. This time round I had to wait to see what the order actually said. I've also written to the clerk of the designated circuit judge for the court and asked for intervention on their side.

I'm happy to challenge things, it's just a real shock to the system and they add up, mentally speaking. I guess the upside of this last round is that I got the psych expert ordered (big win) and I got the order that the ex has to give me school details and that I be involved in selecting the primary school, which is this year. A few big wins, a few big knocks, but a decent possibility those can be rectified, hopefully.

 

[Ash]

Good luck. Don't be shocked - expect every dirty trick in the book. Judges don't check orders usually when they're written by a solicitor. Something wrong there!

If they got it totally wrong, the worst they'd get is a ticking off at the next hearing - if anyone remembers by then.

So if the psychiatric assessment is ordered, is that part of a part 25 application? It should say that an expert needs agreeing between the parties. If you can't agree, then you'll have to submit options to the court and let the court decide.

No way do you want a biased DA specialist as that is not an independent psychiatric assessment. It would end up supporting the ex.

It needs to be neutral, independent psychiatrist. However bear in mind, they might believe what she tells them. Was it definitely a psychiatrist's report rather than a psychologist's report?

When you wrote to the court, did you copy in ex's solicitor?