Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Clauses in 'recital section'
#1
Hello all.

Is it still considered a definete breach of court order if respondent fails to meet the condition(s) listed within the 'recitals' section?

In my court order I had weekly video facetime calls put in the recitals, this stopped out the blue last week. Will the judge punish the respondent because of this or will they let them off simply because it is a 'recital'

Thanks
Reply
#2
In short no, they are not binding. You can read this here.

https://becket-chambers.co.uk/2019/08/01...aw-orders/

I am not (nor is anyone I know) affiliated with these Chambers, it was the first result on the Web.

What is your situation? Is Facetime in lieu of contact? Is there no chance of face to face contact now that things are easing? If there is no face to face contact, then there has to be telephone/video contact.

Post a little about your history and the current order pls.
Reply
#3
(06-16-2020, 12:42 PM)Chi21965 Wrote: In short no, they are not binding. You can read this here.

https://becket-chambers.co.uk/2019/08/01...aw-orders/

I am not (nor is anyone I know) affiliated with these Chambers, it was the first result on the Web.

What is your situation? Is Facetime in lieu of contact? Is there no chance of face to face contact now that things are easing? If there is no face to face contact, then there has to be telephone/video contact.

Post a little about your history and the current order pls.

Facetime is not in lieu of contact. facetime was incorporated because we live far, daughter in london, me in birmingham and i wanted to see her mid week.

face to face contact not likely, the contact centre has been closed for some time now.

As of Sept 2019 it was 'ordered by the court' that the father is entitled to see his child on
- supervised on a weekly basis for 8 weeks (first 4 weeks, 1 hour, 2nd 4 weeks, 2 hours)
- then 'supported' on a fortnightly basis for 2 hours for 4 weeks.
- then for four hours on a fortnightly basis for 2 hours in the centre (supported) and 2 hours in 'the community'
- etc etc and progresses on further assuming contact is going to plan and bonding is taking place.
unfortunately developing the bond was much more difficult than I thought so we remained at the fortnightly supervised stage up until covid.

in the recitals there is a sentance : "And Upon the parties agreeing that a Facetime call between child and father can take place once per week between 6.30pm and 7.00pm"

it seems that the 'recitals' and the instructions following 'ordered by the court' are in two different sections.

due to covid, visitational contact has not been taking place because the contact centre is closed. However COVID under no circumstances stop whatsapp facetime calls. Out the blue the mother, last week decided to stop the whatsapp calls, when emailed on wednesday and thursday, respondent replied friday claiming she is receiving threatening and abusive messages and suspects that it is me or my family member. Respondent says she had to deactivate telephone number 'bullcrap' (i know she had a second line long time ago and that the number i had for her was only used for whatsapp)

anyway in my court hearing i will request a user based video calling app i.e. Google Duo or Skype, one that doesnt need phone number.

The sudden whatsapp calls stopping comes straight after my house windows being smashed (bricks thrown) for the fifth time where the criminals are apprehended on the motorway southbound towards london. they will eventuall get Interviewed by the MET with a possibility that there is no prosecution. they were hooded and masked at the scene.

Anyhow with the contact centre being closed i will be asking for video calling to be reinstated to twice a week.

Will the judges fine the mother for suddenly unnaccessarily dropping the weekly whatsapp calls on such weak grounds? i mean its being done remotely?

she says a lot of stuff that isnt factual, but the words hurt and i feel it has been written like that to influence the judges. I wouldnt be surprised if the bloody solicitor told her to make up lies about the text messages, i know she wouldnt dare log it with the police as it would be a true case of misleading them / fraud.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)