Parental Responsibility

Vomityspice

firsltly, for a PSO to be granted you need concrete proof of an order or law being broken. otherwise IT WILL FAIL, wasting £180.

Where did you get this from? You seem unaware that PSO's are designed to 'stop' something from happening (which is usually neither a legal question or one of evidence). It might be helpful if you had a quick look at the guidance on the Children Act that helpfully suggests that PSO's are used in children's application when it may be necessary, when parents cannot agree on a proposed course of action.

The Court, when making a judgment, take the view that the welfare of the child is the Court's paramount consideration and the Court will take into account the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned, as well as all other relevant factors known to the parties.

Indeed, a quick look on Google (see http://www.hartnellchanot.co.uk/just-mums/legal-issues/prohibited-steps-order.html) includes '..prevent a change of surname'. (PS - They are Family Law specialist???). Further, I can say with actual experience of many PSO applications, you are mistaken in your beliefs (as expressed above).

and calling the child by another name in the street isn't breaking any rules.

I think I covered this in my previous post? I'm fairly sure I said;

'there is nothing stopping her from calling the children by the new 'family' name. i.e. you can call yourself anything you like! as long as your not attempting to deceive.'

s for schools, doctors etc, all you have to do is remind/ inform them of the laws surounding PR and they are lagally bound to comply. if they don't, all you have to do is go over their head to their superiors.

I also think I covered this as well; i.e.

By all means they could inform all the likely people that may come into contact with the children (Dr's , schools, dentists etc) but that wouldn't stop the ex from simply calling the children by the 'new' names.

However, your suggestion doesn't stop the ex from simply referring to the children by the new name. Whilst it might be potentially cheaper, you have to factor in the problem of contacting every possible organisation that the children may come into contact with. That might be a bit tricky?

It's quite plain to see that your knowledge is very limited in this area, so my ADVICE is to leave it to people who don't give worthless advice based on either hearsay or what you "think" is correct. you obviously have little or no experience in court protocol, so why bother "advising"??

Still not sure why you persist with these assumptions? My experience of family court legal activity spans over two decades. Care to share you 'wealth of experience' (given that just about everything you have intimated is actually incorrect??).

as i said, all your advice would suceed in achieving is to see the OP £180 lighter when all they had to do was write a few letters and post them. (60p ish)

The OP is in the best position to make a decision on how best to spend their money. A simple PSO application would in fact stop the ex from calling the children by a new name. Your proposed method, whilst initially cheaper (see flaws above), doesn't stop the ex from de facto changing the names (i.e. doesn't resolve the OP's problem as outlined) by simply using the new name.

another point well worth mentioning is that PSO apps often fail. they are nototriously hard to get, so going to court on a whim where no laws either have or will be flouted is absolutely futile.

Have any proof of this? or is it just your own belief/experiences? A properly constructed application (particularly in respect of a child's surname) is almost bound to be granted!

As ever, always happy to be corrected by your undoubted knowledge in this area........ perhaps at some point you might want to elucidate us as to what you are basing your advise on??

Happy to pitch my Law degree (LLB), Legal Practice Course (Post Grad) and Masters in Law (LLM) against your undoubted legal background...... And just to further compound my 'experience' in family law, I am also a qualified and registered Social Worker. So I suspect my actual experience is enough to confidently suggest that PSO would resolve the OP's original problem, whilst your suggestion would actually do nothing.

I'm sure we are all waiting to be educated by your superior experience / knowledge in family law....... (Still poking the grumpy bear with the pointy stick!)

speedster

yeah right.

tell you what, let the OP decide which course to follow. your expensive and futile route or the free and easy route.

PSO's are notoriously hard to get, and more importantly even harder to enforce, but i'm sure that as you know everything, that you would have known that?? also, PSO's aren't really for name change stuff as this can be done sucessfully out of court (as i have said 100 times) they are intended for far more serious issues like emmigrating, moving hundreds of miles away, health and welfare issues.

you can cut and paste all the legal stuff you like, especially from a law firm who are only interested in draining your wallet, but at the end of the day, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

and this is a money saving forum, not a "throw money down the toilet on an expensive, greedy, useless solicitor" forum

court is expensive, daunting and stressful. should ALWAYS be a last option.

also, as you know everything, you would know that my route saves involving and aggravating the ex too, which again, is always preferable to a court slanging match. if you're advising court as a first option, then you're as bad as the money grabbing lowlife solicitors who prey on the non resident parents involved in the family law circus. even in legal circles, family solicitors are seen as scum.

so you'll have to excuse me for not being too impressed with your approach and cut and pasted leagal bumpf.

i'll continue helping and advising the cheapest and least aggravating course of action and leave you to the excellent advise of throwing money down the toilet approach.

note to OP. please let us know how you get on, whichever route you take.

JulietAmber_2

Hi everyone and thanks for all your comments. We are still waiting for the threat of court action to come to fruition. I the meantime, my partner has put in writing that he does not give permission for a change in name and sent a copy to ex and a copy to school.
Thanks again and I'll keep you updated!

speedster

no probs.

if the school stonewall you, just go straight over their heads.

i have heard of a lot of cases like this regarding schools and doctors surgeries (mine included) where they try and tell you that the mother can do what they like and father has no rights to demand name stays etc.

thing is, you'll only get through to receptionist and chances are, they'll know naff all and you will get stonewalled.

a stern letter informing them of the law does the trick.

no need for an expensive, futile and aggravating court episode..

Vomityspice

PSO's are notoriously hard to get, and more importantly even harder to enforce, but i'm sure that as you know everything, that you would have known that?? also, PSO's aren't really for name change stuff as this can be done sucessfully out of court (as i have said 100 times) they are intended for far more serious issues like emmigrating, moving hundreds of miles away, health and welfare issues.

Your continued insistence that PSO's are hard to get is simply wrong. It is perfectly clear you have no idea about the issue. Despite repeated attempts to get you to evidence your beliefs, you continue to evade the question. Perhaps you might deign us will your undoubted legal experience?


As I am here to assist you (and the OP) gain a better understand on the subject, I would first point you in the direction of Dawson v Wearmouth (1999) 1 FLR 1167, (1999) 1 FCR 625. (Full citation given). As you will see, this case (I realise you may not have access to LexisLibrary or Westlaw so am happy to forward the judgment for your education) this case came soon after the introduction of the Children Act 1989, revolved around precisely the issue of preventing a child from being known by a new name. Further, even it you don't have access to legal databases, a quick search on Google, using the serach terms "Prohibited Steps Order" and "change name" gives an abundance of correct legal advice to indicate that PSO's can and have been used from precisely this reason. To assist, I have linked the search so your can avail yourself to this information. See http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&source=hp&biw=1024&bih=421&q=prohibited+steps+order%22+%22Change+name%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=b58b1466451b89c6

Whilst there is some merit to your view that your would want to avoid court if at all possible, your advice would have no impact on the ex if she were to swear a deed poll to change the children's name. Given that situation, the father (who I assume has PR) would simply not be involved or given an opportunity to challenge until he discovered the change. With a certified deed poll, the school, dentist, dr ect would also happily comply with the new name.

Whilst I also have some sympathy in your view that PSO's should not be used for 'trivial' things (See Re C(A Minor)(Leave to seek Section 8 Order) [1994] 1 FLR 26) , relating to the issue of a holiday, and B v B (Custody:conditions) [1979]1 FLR 385 on the issue of what time a child should go to bed! However, this issue of 'triviality' is subjective, so what might trivial to you, may well be incredibly important to the applicant. Note that the wording of the statute, gives no indication that 'trivial matters' should not be dealt with by a PSO.

and this is a money saving forum, not a "throw money down the toilet on an expensive, greedy, useless solicitor" forum

You are correct that the theme of money saving should run through the advice that is proffered, however, I would also want a solution to a problem that is posed. Whilst you personal views on solicitors are undoubtedly telling, it is pertinent to point out that I have not suggested the use of a lawyer. A PSO application is well within the capacity of a layman application. It is actually very simple and a quick look on Google would undoubted evidence the ease of completing the form. Not sure why you dislike solicitors, but it is not really relevant is it?

court is expensive, daunting and stressful. should ALWAYS be a last option

Expensive? I will admit, if you are on a low wage £175 is perhaps a large sum, however, the OP would need to take a view on achieving a solution to the problem as outlined. Daunting and stressful? I understand that people often expect that family court hearings occur in environments akin to something they have seen on TV. However, private law applications are normally held 'in chambers' so similar to sitting around a large table in a room. Most courts provide opportunities to visit beforehand to allay any fears. My original post 'suggested' the OP might want to consider making an application, as it would be for the OP to make the decision on what will suit them best.

also, as you know everything, you would know that my route saves involving and aggravating the ex too, which again, is always preferable to a court slanging match. if you're advising court as a first option, then you're as bad as the money grabbing lowlife solicitors who prey on the non resident parents involved in the family law circus. even in legal circles, family solicitors are seen as scum.

What?? Surely the ex is aggravating the father by suggesting that the children be known by a new name! Im not sure, impacting on the children's identities is actually in the best interest of the children. Perhaps this is why your not part of the legal profession if you can't advocate on behalf of your client. Diplomacy has it place, but not doing anything to protect the children seems a tad like abdication.

Again your views on solicitors is abundantly apparent (would be interesting to discover where your animosity comes from....), yet as previously indicated, there is no need to pay a solicitor at all (very moneysaving surely?). Given your last statement, it is clear that you have some deep seated animosity towards the legal profession. As a social worker I would suggest that you consider some form of therapy to help you with this.

i'll continue helping and advising the cheapest and least aggravating course of action and leave you to the excellent advise of throwing money down the toilet approach.

You forgot to include 'ineffective' in your rant, but don't worry, we are all still waiting for you to evidence your undoubted expertise in the family law area...

To assist, may I suggest you look at Jonathan Herring (2007) Family Law (3rd Ed) Pearson:Longman. You should be able to get a copy quite cheap off Amazon or Ebay. Reading chapter 9 should get you up to speed on Section 8 applications so you can perhaps talk with some actual knowledge on the subject rather than your apparent ignorance. As Tony Blair was oft to say, "Education, education, education". It is apparent you are in desperate need of some.

Anyway, enough of using my pointy stick to annoy the grumpy bear, I await your 'evidenced' based response with almost uncontained relish

speedster

evidence? have assisted in a few applications and heard of plenty of others on fnf and dadsuk amongst others.

one word.
Procrastination


you seem to be all too familiar with it. all your cutting and pasting and monsterous postings do not deflect from the basics of this case. your approach is what you do for a living. it is not what is best for everyone. of course a legal bod will be advising court and dragging it out. that's how they get so bloody rich off the backs of the suckers who listen to them.

mind you, it's what you'd expect from anyone involved in the legal circle...........

the old joke is still valid.

what's the difference between a dead dog and a dead solicitor lying in the road???????

skidmarks in front of the dog.

Vomityspice

So actually your 'evidence' is anecdotal, we got there in the end! The fact is you think you know something about PSO's. Great!

one word.
Procrastination

Again, not sure why your quoting random words? By my understanding, I've not suggested anyone to put off taking action?? Perhaps you would care to explain (it might be amusing!)

you seem to be all too familiar with it. all your cutting and pasting and monsterous postings do not deflect from the basics of this case. your approach is what you do for a living. it is not what is best for everyone. of course a legal bod will be advising court and dragging it out. that's how they get so bloody rich off the backs of the suckers who listen to them.

Sorry to provide some semblance of 'legal research'. Instead of expecting people just to believe my word, I always find it helpful to 'evidence' the information available. It is then for the recipient to make a decision on the details. Whilst it is clear your aversion to the legal profession, you don't seem to be able to stick to the facts, rather preferring to make gross over simplistic stereotypical rants on your view of the legal profession. I'm not sure how helpful they are, but the are funny so I persist with you just for the comedy factor. You are comedy gold!

Anyway, back to the facts, as I have consistently suggested, a PSO application is incredibly simple to complete (perhaps that is where your hatred comes from??, you have made such poor applications, and lost and now take out your anger on others to justify why you failed?? Sorry my SW background is seeping out!). I'm not sure why you take this as 'touting for business'??? again I fear it is your perverse views creeping out.

As Sherlock Homes would say, 'Stick to the facts'! Whilst some solicitors undoubtedly make a great deal of money, I think you will find the majority of high street Solicitors are in the range of £35k to £60k. This may well fall into your definition of rich? As I have no idea of your salary, I have no comparator to make any assumption on. I can understand that for many, this size of salary would equate to 'bloody rich'.

Your view on the client relationship is also skewed, solicitors act on the instructions of their clients (however misguided they may be on occasions). You may have noticed there is a lack of solicitors hawking for clients to fleece, swooping for vulnerable clients at your local shopping centre. The vast majority of clients come to solicitors for help, this doesn't generally make them 'suckers' rather it makes them better informed and more likely to succeed (especially against someone who isn't legally represented - that would be you!).

mind you, it's what you'd expect from anyone involved in the legal circle...........

How would you know, it is clear you are happy in your own little world??? I advise you to spend some more time with some legal bods as you might actually learn something useful! It is good to get out more.

In a final attempt to get your head to explode, i'm happy to divulge I have also historically worked for CAFCASS as a family court adviser. Dying to hear your balanced views on the subject.....

Poke the stick at the grumpy bear, poke the stick at the grumpy bear.....

gratefulforhelp_2

My husband used to be a solicitor. He's quite nice...

Kimitatsu

Think we are all done now with grumpy bears and skiddy dogs!!

Thread closed