ncp making trouble

System

verysillyguy06 wrote: »

Its a difficult one, at 9 the child's view is just starting to be taken'more serious' ...Cafcass should have talked to your daughter. Social Care would not usually get involved unless there is CP alleged and then they would be asked by the court themselves....


Has Cafcass seen the child? Has the child got a ' responsible adult' involved or has the mother still got full PR and is seen as able to use them?

cafcass were supposed to be involved but they told him that wont happen untill jan even though this mess has been going backwards/forwards to court for a year .
not impressed by the contact centre either everything he was promised would be done hasnt been and the mother has been able to promise the child a pony if she returns to live with her bearing in mind she is on minimum benefits ! she would sell her own gran for a few quid , this is a woman who sold both her childrens xmas presents about a month after xmas

it REALLY isnt me /my child involved .

tandraig

then ask for a postponement of the hearing if the agencies involved havent got their act together! how can the court decide if all the facts arent known? does the mother know this and think she can bulldoze her way through? has she got a smart lawyer? delay delay delay!!!

daska

tandraig wrote: »

about the hand delivering letters late on friday - if you look at it another way - the solicitor is ensuring the letters are delivered and giving you an extra couple of days to read them and think about things. if they were posted on friday you wouldnt get them until monday or tuesday. he is going a bit above and beyond the call of duty there - the solicitors I used to work for didnt care if clients got letters a bit late or too late - they were just posted via royal mail!

If it is the solicitor being conscientious then surely it wouldn't always be on a friday?

I hope the dad is keeping a detailed diary.

System

delivering the letters on a friday i believe is a tactick to provoke him as its always the night before a visit to the contact centre.he has a log of everything even the abusive text messages. the mother has a fear of cafcass not sure why but in the beginning his lawyer recognised her name from years back but wouldnt disclose previous dealings.

tandraig

If his lawyer has had dealings with her in the past - if she was a client that is - then he would not be able to represent your child. if she wasnt a client then surely he would be able to say how he knows about her. something strange here hun.
why would your sons solicitor be trying to provoke his dad? I really am not understanding the dynamics of this relationship between solicitor and client!!!
you obviously dislike and distrust this solicitor - my advice then would be to dismiss him and get another one you DO trust.

System

tandraig wrote: »

If his lawyer has had dealings with her in the past - if she was a client that is - then he would not be able to represent your child. if she wasnt a client then surely he would be able to say how he knows about her. something strange here hun.
why would your sons solicitor be trying to provoke his dad? I really am not understanding the dynamics of this relationship between solicitor and client!!!
you obviously dislike and distrust this solicitor - my advice then would be to dismiss him and get another one you DO trust.

ITS NOT MY CHILD ITS MY BROTHERS
i dont have a son
i have never met the solicitor im over 100 miles away

tandraig

chrissy - dont get stroppy hun - YOU are the one posting for advice! so I am just answering you as the concerned party. perhaps it would be better if your brother posted? because I for one am having difficulty understand what is going on here? I dont mean to sound as if its your child - you said before its your brothers - but, its sort of easier to answer if I imagine I am talking to the parent? a lot of info sort of gets lost or distorted when another person is posting in the third person. and i cant keep saying 'well tell your brother I would............' Its difficult for you I should think being so far away - sorry If i have offended you.

emlou2009

the posts just dont make sense.

the childs mother wants to see the child. the child wants to see the mother.

so why does social services/a solicitor need to be instructed by the child? unless the father wants to stop the mother seeing the child and the child wants to contest this? i've read this thread twice over now and thats the only sense i can make of it!

daska

To summarise what the situation appears to be:

girl (9)
father PWC
mother NRP, alcoholic
court order for supervised contact only
ongoing residence case
PWC's solicitor has previous professional/social(?) knowledge of NRP
NRP's solicitor delivers paperwork to PWC on friday evening before visit to contact centre
NRP trying to bribe child into demanding to 'go home'
NRP has made accusations against PWC that have to be answered in court

emlou2009 wrote: »

the childs mother wants to see the child. the child wants to see the mother.

so why does social services/a solicitor need to be instructed by the child?

They don't. But without CAFCASS actually meeting the child and parents and speaking with them individually, what it comes down to is one parent saying one thing and the other parent saying something different. A year is a long time to wait for CAFCASS to do their part. Especially if the NRP is levelling accusations at the PWC which could presumably, given the context, be more effectively investigated if CAFCASS would get involved.

@CHRISSYG: was there previous SS involvement? if there was and your neice still lives in the same area then she should presumably still have a care manager?

System

at last someone gets the situation. s/s have not been involved before. ncp is also alledging that grandparents are mentally abusing child ! the father has no objection to supervised visits but must be through a 3rd party as he cant stand the sight of her [if only he hadnt been wearing beer goggles when he met her !!] this "woman" is only fighting for custardy of her daughter not her son by another man.