QLD Application of Consent Order - Super Splitting Questions

[Scruff]

As far as I can tell from reading this thread, there are no existing orders and there is no agreement. Therefore this...

Our client is not willing to amend the Consent Orders in circumstances where she has now incurred considerable legal costs in formalising the agreement which you have ultimately reneged on, namely, superannuation splitting orders so as to equalise your respective entitlements.

... appears to be a blatent misrepresentation of the facts - something which can get a lawyer into a lot of trouble.

You can't "reneg" on an agreement or orders that never existed.
Perhaps one of our qualified legal experts could clarify if there is a legal and/or ethical issue with this claim and the way it's worded?

 

[Atticus]

You can't "reneg" on an agreement or orders that never existed.

I noted the same thing.... An ' agreement' doesn't exist until it is an actual formal agreement, ie, signed by all parties... A consent ORDER, including a super splitting agreement doesn't exist until an application has been scrutinised by the court, & stamped....

 

[Scruff]

Yeah I saw that. My point is more aimed at whether or not the lawyer has intentionally made a misrepresentation - which I believe they have.

The whole letter appears to rely on the facts as stated in that one sentence, which itself appears to be intentionally misleading. I would think that constitutes misconduct.

 

[Jenifa]

Hi Scruff and Attacus, you are correct, he (the respondent) has not signed the Application for Consent Order or the actual Consent Order drawn up from the 'unsigned' Application. He disputed and rejected it based on false, misleading and inaccurate information provided by her (the Applicant). My partner then sent all the accurate information including the super she was hiding and requested the missing bank statements and bank account (for the 3rd time) to which the lawyer responded as you read.