Molestation order questions

Ady347

Hi,
4 days of trying to ring CAB, searching the net, cant afford solicitor, thought I'd ask here.

To cut along story short.

3 weeks ago I decided to let the dust settle with my soon to be ex wife on trying to see my kids. Since the new bf came along she was cancelling my days to see them, not sticking to the agreed pickup and drop off times, the usual... I tried visiting her, calling her, texting her about seeing my boys and getting ignored..

1 week ago I get a court order delivered by hand, opened it thinking it was about the up and coming divorce to find it's a non molestation order against me for harrassment and I'm not aloud to contact her or go with 100m of her or her property.

I'm obviously obeying by this order even if I domt agree with it, quite frankly I'm tired of all this..

What I'm wondering is the following

I live in a small town, if I'm in a supermarket doing my shopping and I happen to bump into her am I supposed to ditch my shopping and leave?

If I walked into a pub and she is in their I would walk out, but what happens if she walks into my space?

She lives in a cul de sac on a main trunk route that goes through her village. I have no choice but you use this route occasionally. I know I'm likely to see her walking to and from school runs so purposely avoid at those times but what happens if I'm driving through and theirs a chance encounter?

I cant find anything on the internet that goes into details about these orders.

Socajam

This is a tough one.
On another note, who is paying all these bills?
Do the boyfriend live in the house, if that is a yes, I would stop until she agrees to mediation.
Some may disagree, but if it means losing the house, I would, because there is no way in hell would I be paying a mortgage on a house and another man is living there - children or no children.
You need to get yourself a solicitor, because this can turn nasty really fast, the last thing you need is for police to pick you up.
You are entitled to pay child support, but at the same time you are entitled to have access to your children.
Good luck

Ady347

We rented, dont know much about bf as I'm not around them but he has his own place. I walked away with the clothes on my back, gave her everything we had from 10 years marriage and pay monthly csa. We were married at time of birth of boys so I know I have parent responsibility. Tbh I'm trying to stop this getting nastier, maybe I was harassing her but end of day it was all done in a non threatening way and it was just about me seeing the boys.

Ady347

The rented house is now solely in her name, I settled all joint debts such as elec bill, council tax etc... she didnt work was a housewife.. we had savings of about £2000 which I gave her to keep her going with no worries until universal credit got sorted (it was all amicable at first) gave her everything in house, white goods etc....

Socajam

You need to get legal advice and real fast - just so that you can have access to your children
I would not approach her either in person or by phone
I really cannot understand parents who bring children into the mess they create. Let the child/children see the other parent, unless they are abusive to the child/children.
By stopping you from seeing your children, its them who are really suffering and this will return to hit her in the backside when they get older.

elsien

If it's a molestation order then the person normally has a duty to serve the information including the witness statement on you before the court case. Did this not happen, to give you the chance to put your side?
If it was done without notifying you, which the court can do, there alaboukd be a further date so you can challenge it if you wish to do so.

CIS

You need legal advice.



Setting random distances is always a pain as it's far too subjective when it comes to enforcement - our clerks always push to avoid anything that involves setting distances.

Comms69

Speak to a solicitor and contest this immediately.


1: Because you'll end up being arrested, which you will
2: because she now has legal aid to fight the custody battle, so that will be three times as long

Glatter

Ady347 wrote: »

Hi,
4 days of trying to ring CAB, searching the net, cant afford solicitor, thought I'd ask here.

To cut along story short.

3 weeks ago I decided to let the dust settle with my soon to be ex wife on trying to see my kids. Since the new bf came along she was cancelling my days to see them, not sticking to the agreed pickup and drop off times, the usual... I tried visiting her, calling her, texting her about seeing my boys and getting ignored..

1 week ago I get a court order delivered by hand, opened it thinking it was about the up and coming divorce to find it's a non molestation order against me for harrassment and I'm not aloud to contact her or go with 100m of her or her property.

I'm obviously obeying by this order even if I domt agree with it, quite frankly I'm tired of all this..

What I'm wondering is the following

I live in a small town, if I'm in a supermarket doing my shopping and I happen to bump into her am I supposed to ditch my shopping and leave?

If I walked into a pub and she is in their I would walk out, but what happens if she walks into my space?

She lives in a cul de sac on a main trunk route that goes through her village. I have no choice but you use this route occasionally. I know I'm likely to see her walking to and from school runs so purposely avoid at those times but what happens if I'm driving through and theirs a chance encounter?

I cant find anything on the internet that goes into details about these orders.

Ady347 wrote: »

We rented, dont know much about bf as I'm not around them but he has his own place. I walked away with the clothes on my back, gave her everything we had from 10 years marriage and pay monthly csa. We were married at time of birth of boys so I know I have parent responsibility. Tbh I'm trying to stop this getting nastier, maybe I was harassing her but end of day it was all done in a non threatening way and it was just about me seeing the boys.

This all sounds very strange.

Non moleststion orders are granted to victims of domestic violence, yet you don't seem to know anything about that. You seem to suggest that the only contact you had had with your wife was a non-treatening communication to arrange contact with your children.

The terms of the non-molestation order is not in accordance with what I would expect any court would order.

You seem to imply this was all a great surprise to you. That is a great surprise to me because the court would usually want to ensure the terms are both workable, and do not cause you unnecessary difficulty, yet at the same time protect the interests of the applicant. They cannot do this without understnding your position either directy, through your legal representatives and often in conjunction with the police.

Also, immediately following the order, the court would want to ensure you fully understand the terms.

Anyway, it is what it is. What exactly are you struggling to understand from the terms (as you have expressed them here)

1. You are not permiutted to contact your wife.
2. You are not permitted to go within 100m of your wife.
3. You are not permitted to go within 100m of her property.

If you enter a supermarket that you wife is already in, and that takes you within 100m of her, you will be in breach.

Similarly, if you enter a pub in which your wife is already within, unless it's a very large pub, that will take you within 100m of her, and you will be in breach.
It is your responsibility to remain further than 100m of your wife, and if she is heading towards you, it remains your responsibility to remain at least 100m from her.. Failure to do this and you will be in breach (although you may use such facts as mitigation). If she is really taking determined action that would result in you being in breach, you should report this to the police immediately. Repeated actions by the applicant contrary to the spirit of the order (together with your admission you do not agree with the order) may ultimately result in the court revoking the order.

If her property is down a cul-de-sac, it better be more than 100m down that cul-de-sac if you are to travel along the adjoining road, otherwise you will be in breach of the order.

You will, in any event, be taking a big risk by travelling down that road, if, as you seem to accept, you will possibly come within 100m of her as she exits the road, travels along that road herself as part of the school run, etc. This would put you in breach of the order.

Furthermore, unless you no longer wish to have any contact with your children, I cannot see how that will change under the current terms. You would almost certainly need to make contact with your wife as she looks after them, but such contact would put you in breach of the order.

You also mention you were seking a divorce. It will be almost impossible to arrange a divorce without contacting your wife, and that will put you in breach of the order.

Breach of the order could render you liable for a custodial sentence of up to 5 years.


In a small town, together with your hopes and desires, the order has been drafted in terms that has set you up for certain failure. This is not something any court would intentionally do, but now it has, you need legal representation to successfully apply to have it amended to allow you to carry on with your life, but at the same time afford the protection of the applicant that the court was previously convinced to grant.

Comms69

Glatter wrote: »

This all sounds very strange.

Non moleststion orders are granted to victims of domestic violence, yet you don't seem to know anything about that. You seem to suggest that the only contact you had had with your wife was a non-treatening communication to arrange contact with your children. - To be clear, granted ex parte they are granted solely on the say so of the victim. So yes in general granted to victims, but in this case the court has not examined any facts

The terms of the non-molestation order is not in accordance with what I would expect any court would order. - agree, normally it's to not enter a certain street or area, but the house may be located in such a way that the order would be unnecessarily onerous if ordered in such a way.

You seem to imply this was all a great surprise to you. That is a great surprise to me because the court would usually want to ensure the terms are both workable, and do not cause you unnecessary difficulty, yet at the same time protect the interests of the applicant. - Served ex parte, ie without notice, such an order would be surprising. Received one myself, contested and won the full hearing They cannot do this without understnding your position either directy, through your legal representatives and often in conjunction with the police. - incorrect, sorry. The police have zero involvement.

Also, immediately following the order, the court would want to ensure you fully understand the terms. - indeed, usually served by a bailiff with-in 24 hours

Anyway, it is what it is. What exactly are you struggling to understand from the terms (as you have expressed them here)

1. You are not permiutted to contact your wife.
2. You are not permitted to go within 100m of your wife.
3. You are not permitted to go within 100m of her property.

If you enter a supermarket that you wife is already in, and that takes you within 100m of her, you will be in breach.

Similarly, if you enter a pub in which your wife is already within, unless it's a very large pub, that will take you within 100m of her, and you will be in breach.
It is your responsibility to remain further than 100m of your wife, and if she is heading towards you, it remains your responsibility to remain at least 100m from her.. - indeed, but it's worth remembering these are civil orders, and if she was to deliberately attempt to breach his conditions. IE turn up outside his house, the courts would be far more likely to dismiss the order than take action against the OP Failure to do this and you will be in breach (although you may use such facts as mitigation). If she is really taking determined action that would result in you being in breach, you should report this to the police immediately. - to the courts (the police are only responsible for arresting the individual to be brought before the courts) Repeated actions by the applicant contrary to the spirit of the order (together with your admission you do not agree with the order) may ultimately result in the court revoking the order. - The OP is entitled, by law, to a hearing to dispute the order. There is no reason necessary for this

If her property is down a cul-de-sac, it better be more than 100m down that cul-de-sac if you are to travel along the adjoining road, otherwise you will be in breach of the order.

You will, in any event, be taking a big risk by travelling down that road, if, as you seem to accept, you will possibly come within 100m of her as she exits the road, travels along that road herself as part of the school run, etc. This would put you in breach of the order.

Furthermore, unless you no longer wish to have any contact with your children, I cannot see how that will change under the current terms. You would almost certainly need to make contact with your wife as she looks after them, but such contact would put you in breach of the order. - the family court would likely dismiss the order if appropriate

You also mention you were seking a divorce. It will be almost impossible to arrange a divorce without contacting your wife, and that will put you in breach of the order.

Breach of the order could render you liable for a custodial sentence of up to 5 years. - true, but to be clear for the sake of the OP, this is never going to happen on the first breach


In a small town, together with your hopes and desires, the order has been drafted in terms that has set you up for certain failure. This is not something any court would intentionally do, but now it has, you need legal representation to successfully apply to have it amended to allow you to carry on with your life, but at the same time afford the protection of the applicant that the court was previously convinced to grant.

Please do remember that the order is likely to be varied or even dismissed once the OP takes this back to the county court

Glatter

Comms69 wrote: »

Please do remember that the order is likely to be varied or even dismissed once the OP takes this back to the county court

You make it sound as though the courts are running a job creation scheme :cool:

I had hoped the content of my post was entirely clear, but I respect your right to disagree with what I posted, just as the OP says they disagree with the terms of the non-molestation order they say they have been served, but that does not make either null and void.