Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Ady347
    • By Ady347 10th Oct 19, 11:19 PM
    • 11Posts
    • 0Thanks
    Ady347
    Molestation order questions
    • #1
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:19 PM
    Molestation order questions 10th Oct 19 at 11:19 PM
    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.
Page 1
    • Socajam
    • By Socajam 10th Oct 19, 11:26 PM
    • 636 Posts
    • 906 Thanks
    Socajam
    • #2
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:26 PM
    • #2
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:26 PM
    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
    • By Ady347 10th Oct 19, 11:30 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Ady347
    • #3
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:30 PM
    • #3
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:30 PM
    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
    • By Ady347 10th Oct 19, 11:33 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Ady347
    • #4
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:33 PM
    • #4
    • 10th Oct 19, 11:33 PM
    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
    • By Socajam 11th Oct 19, 12:11 AM
    • 636 Posts
    • 906 Thanks
    Socajam
    • #5
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:11 AM
    • #5
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:11 AM
    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
    • By elsien 11th Oct 19, 12:19 AM
    • 20,258 Posts
    • 51,593 Thanks
    elsien
    • #6
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:19 AM
    • #6
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:19 AM
    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.
    Last edited by elsien; 11-10-2019 at 12:22 AM.
    All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.

    Pedant alert - it's could have, not could of.
    • CIS
    • By CIS 11th Oct 19, 11:17 AM
    • 11,431 Posts
    • 6,691 Thanks
    CIS
    • #7
    • 11th Oct 19, 11:17 AM
    • #7
    • 11th Oct 19, 11:17 AM
    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.
    I no longer work in Council Tax Recovery but instead work as a specialist Council Tax paralegal assisting landlords and Council Tax payers with council tax disputes and valuation tribunals. My views are my own reading of the law and you should always check with the local authority in question.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 11th Oct 19, 12:22 PM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    • #8
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:22 PM
    • #8
    • 11th Oct 19, 12:22 PM
    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
    • By Glatter 11th Oct 19, 1:07 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Glatter
    • #9
    • 11th Oct 19, 1:07 PM
    • #9
    • 11th Oct 19, 1:07 PM
    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.
    Originally posted by 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.
    Originally posted by Ady347
    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.
    Last edited by Glatter; 11-10-2019 at 1:14 PM.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 11th Oct 19, 1:31 PM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    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.
    Originally posted by Glatter


    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
    • By Glatter 11th Oct 19, 2:21 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Glatter
    Please do remember that the order is likely to be varied or even dismissed once the OP takes this back to the county court
    Originally posted by Comms69
    You make it sound as though the courts are running a job creation scheme

    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.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 11th Oct 19, 3:40 PM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    You make it sound as though the courts are running a job creation scheme

    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.
    Originally posted by Glatter


    I don't understand your point.


    You are factually incorrect in some regards.


    Primarily you seem to not understand that orders can be served ex parte, which is where there is a fundamental difference between how such orders can be given.
    • Savvy_Sue
    • By Savvy_Sue 11th Oct 19, 6:47 PM
    • 40,285 Posts
    • 37,732 Thanks
    Savvy_Sue
    Call me suspicious, but is it definitely a genuine court order?

    The OP doesn't mention any appeal - those who know about such things seem to suggest one should be possible.

    Rather feel OP cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor!
    Still knitting!
    Completed: TWO adult cardigans, 3 baby jumpers, 3 shawls, 1 sweat band, 3 pairs baby bootees, 2 sets of handwarmers, 1 Wise Man Knitivity figure + 1 sheep, 2 pairs socks, 3 balaclavas, multiple hats and poppies, 3 peony flowers, 4 butterflies ...
    Current projects: pink balaclava (for myself), seaman's hat, about to start another cardigan!
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 11th Oct 19, 6:53 PM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    Call me suspicious, but is it definitely a genuine court order?

    The OP doesn't mention any appeal - those who know about such things seem to suggest one should be possible.

    Rather feel OP cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor!
    Originally posted by Savvy_Sue


    Not an appeal as such, but a full hearing. Now I don't remember fully, but I'm pretty sure the order had a date on it if I wished to have the hearing, BUT my solicitor might have confirmed this on my behalf.


    I agree a solicitor is worthwhile, depending on my legally minded you are, I was able to get a substantial discount by writing the full reply - 350 down from 600.


    You can check the validity of the order either at the courts, or with the police. The courts might be quicker.
    • Glatter
    • By Glatter 12th Oct 19, 10:10 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Glatter
    I don't understand your point.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    Quite.

    You are factually incorrect in some regards.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    In your opinion.

    Primarily you seem to not understand that orders can be served ex parte, which is where there is a fundamental difference between how such orders can be given.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    With all due respect, you clearly have no idea what I do or do not understand.
    • Glatter
    • By Glatter 12th Oct 19, 10:16 PM
    • 5 Posts
    • 2 Thanks
    Glatter
    Call me suspicious, but is it definitely a genuine court order?

    The OP doesn't mention any appeal - those who know about such things seem to suggest one should be possible.

    Rather feel OP cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor!
    Originally posted by Savvy_Sue
    You are right to be suspicious.

    The OP has not stated the order was made without notice
    (I understand this forum expects us to post in English, as indeed is the expectation nowadays within the legal profession, especially when in the presence of, or otherwise communicating with, lay persons)

    It would only be appropriate to make such an order made without notice, if:
    a) it is deemed necessary to grant without any delay making such notice impossible, or
    b) there is a real risk that, with notice, the respondent, may further molest the applicant in an attempt encourage the abandonment of the application.

    In this case, where admittedly we only have the evidence of the respondent, the OP claims only to have visited and communicated with his wife for the purposes of securing some access to his children, and this order has come as somewhat of a surprise. That, on the face of it, would not appear to be a case where an application without notice would be necessary nor appropriate.

    Of course, the underlying issue here is that the court would have made their decision based on the evidence of the applicant, and therefore not have heard from the respondent.

    Where a court makes such an order against the respondent without notice, such an order must include:
    1. the fact it was was made in the absence of the respondent, that it was made only on the evidence of the applicant, and that no finding of fact has been established
    2. a return date, time & location (essentially a hearing where the respondent can attend and put their case forward to the court) within 14 days of the order is included.
    3. the order must also contain a statement regarding the right to apply to have the order set aside or varied. Furthermore this must include that there is no requirement to await the return date stated. This is important, as such an application would normally need to have been made within 7 days of the order.

    The OP does not seem to have been given any of this based on lack of mentioning any of it in their OP; indeed the OP admits 7 days have now elapsed from the original date of the order.

    If the OP genuinely cannot afford legal representation, then legal aid may be available, although that will take weeks to have approved, so would require a legal representative to act in advance of funding approval (which of course it may not be), or an adjournment to be requested.
    Legal representation in court is not always necessary; indeed a court cannot object to anyone wishing to rtepresent themselves in court.
    A solicitor will probably be able to advise what the OP should do through an initial interview, assuming the OP goes well prepared with all the facts to hand, including whether representation at court is advised - such an initial interview is often given free of charge or for a nominal fee (refer to the CAB for details of who offer this locally)
    In the event legal aid is not available to the OP, representation in court is advised, and the OP is not in a position to pay, it may be possible to find someone to provide this without charge (that's 'pro bono' to those who like to confuse others by using a langauge hardly anyone else ever uses )
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 14th Oct 19, 10:43 AM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    Quite.

    In your opinion.

    With all due respect, you clearly have no idea what I do or do not understand.
    Originally posted by Glatter


    You aren't helping yourself. Your post is only correct if the order is given after a hearing. When heard ex parte (without notice) - which is the case here - you are incorrect.


    You aren't helping the OP by then make 'smart' comments, without actually addressing what I've said.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 14th Oct 19, 10:51 AM
    • 10,366 Posts
    • 12,541 Thanks
    Comms69
    You are right to be suspicious.

    The OP has not stated the order was made without notice
    (I understand this forum expects us to post in English, as indeed is the expectation nowadays within the legal profession, especially when in the presence of, or otherwise communicating with, lay persons) - yes they have - "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." - if there was a hearing the order would be given at the hearing and the OP would know about it.

    It would only be appropriate to make such an order made without notice, if:
    a) it is deemed necessary to grant without any delay making such notice impossible, or
    b) there is a real risk that, with notice, the respondent, may further molest the applicant in an attempt encourage the abandonment of the application.



    Judges err on the side of caution when making ex parte orders as the respondent has the opportunity to dispute it. The only requisite is that the claimant makes the appropriate statements. Given I've been there and seen what the statement was which granted my ex a non-mol, and subsequently I contested this and won, I know the standard is low.

    In this case, where admittedly we only have the evidence of the respondent, the OP claims only to have visited and communicated with his wife for the purposes of securing some access to his children, and this order has come as somewhat of a surprise. That, on the face of it, would not appear to be a case where an application without notice would be necessary nor appropriate. - funnily enough, it's quite common for people to lie. and having a non-mol means legal aid funding for any child arrangement proceedings, there is a pretty damning reason to get a non-mol. There is no finding of fact in a without notice applications. A statement is provided to the judge, who then issues the order on the basis of that statement.

    Of course, the underlying issue here is that the court would have made their decision based on the evidence of the applicant, and therefore not have heard from the respondent. - indeed

    Where a court makes such an order against the respondent without notice, such an order must include:
    1. the fact it was was made in the absence of the respondent, that it was made only on the evidence of the applicant, and that no finding of fact has been established - Agreed
    2. a return date, time & location (essentially a hearing where the respondent can attend and put their case forward to the court) within 14 days of the order is included. - agreed
    3. the order must also contain a statement regarding the right to apply to have the order set aside or varied. Furthermore this must include that there is no requirement to await the return date stated. This is important, as such an application would normally need to have been made within 7 days of the order. - agreed

    The OP does not seem to have been given any of this based on lack of mentioning any of it in their OP; indeed the OP admits 7 days have now elapsed from the original date of the order. - that is a concern of mine also

    If the OP genuinely cannot afford legal representation, then legal aid may be available, although that will take weeks to have approved, so would require a legal representative to act in advance of funding approval (which of course it may not be), or an adjournment to be requested.
    Legal representation in court is not always necessary; indeed a court cannot object to anyone wishing to rtepresent themselves in court. - agreed, but it's worth paying for considering the alternative is malicious reporting of breaches and the cost of any child arrangement hearings
    A solicitor will probably be able to advise what the OP should do through an initial interview, assuming the OP goes well prepared with all the facts to hand, including whether representation at court is advised - such an initial interview is often given free of charge or for a nominal fee (refer to the CAB for details of who offer this locally)
    In the event legal aid is not available to the OP, representation in court is advised, and the OP is not in a position to pay, it may be possible to find someone to provide this without charge (that's 'pro bono' to those who like to confuse others by using a langauge hardly anyone else ever uses )
    Originally posted by Glatter


    Agreed and to be honest this post was much better than your initial one. I think it's obvious this was served ex parte
    • TBagpuss
    • By TBagpuss 14th Oct 19, 1:45 PM
    • 7,704 Posts
    • 10,008 Thanks
    TBagpuss
    OP, are you sure that it is an order and not an appliation *for* an order?

    If it is an order, then if it was made without notice, it should include a 'return date' when you can go to court to oppose it continuing and/or vary the terms (for instnace, to suggest a smaller excluion zone which would not prevent you driving along the maion road)

    If you are sure that it is an order, then read it carefully to make sure that you understand it.

    For instnace, orders of this kind often include an exclusionzone but it is normally around a location, not a person. So if the order forbids you from coming within 100m of her homne, then provided that the main road is more than 100m from her house, you will not be breaking the law if you drive along the road, even if she happens to be walking along side it at the time.

    If it does actually say that you can't go within 100m of *her* then you would be well advised to go back to the court to aask that this is varied for the exact reasons which you give - it puts you at risk of unintentionally breaking the order as you cannot know where she is at any time.

    I woyld suggest that you take the document you have recieved and see a solicitor. Many off er afree intital consultation, of 30 minutes or 1 hour, and they will be able to tell you whether the order is genuine, and what it means.
    Last edited by TBagpuss; 17-10-2019 at 12:58 PM.
    • elsien
    • By elsien 14th Oct 19, 5:31 PM
    • 20,258 Posts
    • 51,593 Thanks
    elsien
    OP doesn't appear to be coming back to the thread.
    All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well.

    Pedant alert - it's could have, not could of.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

169Posts Today

1,976Users online

Martin's Twitter