I wouldn't worry too much. I think it is all administration. So she was approved for legal aid on financial grounds. But when they gather the info to determine whether the case has any merit they might not be interested... I don't think legal aid would be all that keen on pursuing this in court. They only do that in exceptional situations. This isn't exceptional.
ACT What is the Difference Between Legal Aid and Funded Lawyer?
- Thread starter goodgravy
- Start date
So it is going to conference and I just feel a bit sick about the whole thing. Reading correspondence between the ex and the kids she has worded them all up that they'll be living with her full time and that they'll then all be moving to WA in a few months together. All kids are very excited (as kids are at the prospect of a shiny new adventure).
I think I will be getting a lawyer to come along to the conference. I (and I reckon the kids) have too much at stake. I have a 2-year-old son with my new partner and the kids are potentially going to miss out on a relationship with him if the ex gets her way.
Can anyone offer any insight into how these conferences play out and how much I'm probably going to be out of pocket for a lawyer?
I think I will be getting a lawyer to come along to the conference. I (and I reckon the kids) have too much at stake. I have a 2-year-old son with my new partner and the kids are potentially going to miss out on a relationship with him if the ex gets her way.
Can anyone offer any insight into how these conferences play out and how much I'm probably going to be out of pocket for a lawyer?
Quick lesson in child psychology.
Kids say what they think their parental audience at that time wants to hear. If they feel like mum will embrace their excitement and be upset with their disappointment, they're going to be excited.
This is why the Court doesn't put any weight in comments made by the kids to the parents. An affidavit is a statement of fact, but as far as kids' opinions go, the only factual component a parent can provide is that the child said something to them. It's not necessarily fact that what they said is true.
As such, the Court only accepts evidence of the kids' views if they are shared with an objective third party professional who can serve as an expert witness. Kids are more likely to speak candidly with someone in whom they have no personal investment.
Thus, just because the kids tell mum they're excited, doesn't mean they're excited. You might find the kids would prefer to stay where their friends and school are.
Now, the conference, from what you've described, sounds like a dispute resolution conference. Generally speaking, you should be more intimidated by the Court than by a conference. A conference is overseen by a neutral third party, and their only role is to keep both parties civil and focused on resolving the issue at hand. They don't tell the parties what to do and they don't tell the parties if they think they're being a bit daft in negotiations.
This is why it is a good idea to take a lawyer who represents your best interests. I'm not sure what the cost will be, but its easy to get an estimate from a few around.
Now, this is personal experience from dispute resolution.
At the first conference my husband attended with his ex, he signed a parenting plan that he didn't agree with. It reduced what his time with his daughter was for the preceding two years from alternate weekends and one overnight each week to just alternate weekends, which meant an 11-day gap between when his then 3-year-old daughter would see him. His lawyer, who was funded, said it was better to have something in place than nothing at all, and it would deter the ex from withholding the child again, so he signed.
A month later, he filed for parenting orders looking to return to the previous arrangements, and a month after that, the Court made the parenting plan into interim orders for the duration of proceedings. The care arrangements that had been in place and had worked well for two years were done away with and replaced with care arrangements that had been in place for two months and were causing all kinds of problems for the child, all because he signed that stupid parenting plan.
Parties were ordered back to a conference after completing a post separation parenting course, the ex still refused to budge on time spent with, but wanted a bunch of other new demands considered. At the end, my husband left with a proposal, but what he didn't do was sign it. He took it away "for consideration", then chucked it straight in the bin. He learned once before not to sign a document he didn't agree with, he wasn't going to make the same mistake again, and he wasn't even represented in the second conference.
After ten months in proceedings, he ended up with equal time.
So, moral of the story is: don't sign anything if you don't agree wholeheartedly with everything that's in there, and don't be afraid to refuse to sign anything on the day. If you think you're going to get a better deal in Court, don't sign, and don't just do what your lawyer tells you to. Think about it all carefully.
My only other advice is to go in with a list of issues that need to be discussed, a list of outcomes you prefer, a list of alternative outcomes that could be considered, a list of outcomes you won't compromise on, and a list of reasons for each in terms of children's best interests. It will give you something to refer to.
Anyway, hope this helps.
Kids say what they think their parental audience at that time wants to hear. If they feel like mum will embrace their excitement and be upset with their disappointment, they're going to be excited.
This is why the Court doesn't put any weight in comments made by the kids to the parents. An affidavit is a statement of fact, but as far as kids' opinions go, the only factual component a parent can provide is that the child said something to them. It's not necessarily fact that what they said is true.
As such, the Court only accepts evidence of the kids' views if they are shared with an objective third party professional who can serve as an expert witness. Kids are more likely to speak candidly with someone in whom they have no personal investment.
Thus, just because the kids tell mum they're excited, doesn't mean they're excited. You might find the kids would prefer to stay where their friends and school are.
Now, the conference, from what you've described, sounds like a dispute resolution conference. Generally speaking, you should be more intimidated by the Court than by a conference. A conference is overseen by a neutral third party, and their only role is to keep both parties civil and focused on resolving the issue at hand. They don't tell the parties what to do and they don't tell the parties if they think they're being a bit daft in negotiations.
This is why it is a good idea to take a lawyer who represents your best interests. I'm not sure what the cost will be, but its easy to get an estimate from a few around.
Now, this is personal experience from dispute resolution.
At the first conference my husband attended with his ex, he signed a parenting plan that he didn't agree with. It reduced what his time with his daughter was for the preceding two years from alternate weekends and one overnight each week to just alternate weekends, which meant an 11-day gap between when his then 3-year-old daughter would see him. His lawyer, who was funded, said it was better to have something in place than nothing at all, and it would deter the ex from withholding the child again, so he signed.
A month later, he filed for parenting orders looking to return to the previous arrangements, and a month after that, the Court made the parenting plan into interim orders for the duration of proceedings. The care arrangements that had been in place and had worked well for two years were done away with and replaced with care arrangements that had been in place for two months and were causing all kinds of problems for the child, all because he signed that stupid parenting plan.
Parties were ordered back to a conference after completing a post separation parenting course, the ex still refused to budge on time spent with, but wanted a bunch of other new demands considered. At the end, my husband left with a proposal, but what he didn't do was sign it. He took it away "for consideration", then chucked it straight in the bin. He learned once before not to sign a document he didn't agree with, he wasn't going to make the same mistake again, and he wasn't even represented in the second conference.
After ten months in proceedings, he ended up with equal time.
So, moral of the story is: don't sign anything if you don't agree wholeheartedly with everything that's in there, and don't be afraid to refuse to sign anything on the day. If you think you're going to get a better deal in Court, don't sign, and don't just do what your lawyer tells you to. Think about it all carefully.
My only other advice is to go in with a list of issues that need to be discussed, a list of outcomes you prefer, a list of alternative outcomes that could be considered, a list of outcomes you won't compromise on, and a list of reasons for each in terms of children's best interests. It will give you something to refer to.
Anyway, hope this helps.
Yup, I agree except. Don't take a solicitor. Waste of money. I sat through 4 hours of talking - the ex had a legal aid solicitor and I had a solicitor and it cost me lots of money. Now it was a few years ago but my recollection was that it cost more than $3000 for the conference, but it could have been more. And at the end of it, nothing happened. Even though agreements were made, she didn't sign anything and it was a complete waste of time.
So go along - if you can get an agreement, great. Then get her solicitor to write it up. If you don't then she will have to go to court to get permission to relocate. She could relocate without your consent and if she did that you will have to apply to court, so keep your money in your pocket until you really need it...
So go along - if you can get an agreement, great. Then get her solicitor to write it up. If you don't then she will have to go to court to get permission to relocate. She could relocate without your consent and if she did that you will have to apply to court, so keep your money in your pocket until you really need it...
Really interesting insights from both of you. Thank you. I've made extensive notes and scenarios that I would accept to take into conference with me. Allforher would you agree with Sammy's suggestion (I know this is not advice) that a lawyer is potentially a waste of time?
I was thinking if I didn't actually get my lawyer to come in with me I get mine to look over all my proposals beforehand and advise me wether they're sound.
I was thinking if I didn't actually get my lawyer to come in with me I get mine to look over all my proposals beforehand and advise me wether they're sound.
Look, admittedly, a lawyer didn't help my husband. He really caused more damage, because he advised him to sign the parenting plan, knowing my husband wasn't happy with it. After that, he opted out of having legal representation at mediation because he has a wife with a law degree, extensive familiarity with family law, and a personal investment in the child it all affected. When the mother actually did start negotiating just before the trial was scheduled to commence, it was me who wrote the final version of the consent orders they have now. So, I guess that put him at a slight advantage than the average person.
Your idea of getting the proposal checked before actually signing it is a good idea.
Your idea of getting the proposal checked before actually signing it is a good idea.
I think I'm mistakenly making the assumption that the conference has some kind of legal authority and will actually lead to an outcome. I need to get my head around the idea that it's all voluntary and could just be like all the unsuccessful mediations we've had where ex stormed out or didn't turn up. Ie. Not invest so much. Would this be an accurate suggestion?
I was actually going to get the lawyer to check what I've written up before the conference. I've got a whole lot of conditions and proposals including financial that i would accept and negotiate on ( as well as a list of non-negotiables) but have no idea whether they're actually enforceable or legally sound. I want a binding child support agreement among other things.
I was actually going to get the lawyer to check what I've written up before the conference. I've got a whole lot of conditions and proposals including financial that i would accept and negotiate on ( as well as a list of non-negotiables) but have no idea whether they're actually enforceable or legally sound. I want a binding child support agreement among other things.
Yes, try and remember that the Court is putting you through the motions in the hopes that you can reach an outcome together without having to have Court time and resources spent on it, but not being able to do so isn't going to hurt your case. Do your best, but the bottom line is that if you don't agree, you don't agree, and you need the Court's help to resolve the matter. Nothing that is said in mediation can be tendered as evidence in the proceedings, either.
I wouldn't waste money on a lawyer before the conference. It's totally pointless if what you have written up gets rejected by the other party anyway. You don't have to have anything tendered as a minute of consent orders to present at mediation, you don't even have to sign anything even if you do agree. You can take it away, think on it, and then decide if you want to go ahead with it or not. At the very least, it's a good opportunity to get a feel for what the other party wants, which will help you find new ways to try and negotiate an agreement without going to trial.
I wouldn't waste money on a lawyer before the conference. It's totally pointless if what you have written up gets rejected by the other party anyway. You don't have to have anything tendered as a minute of consent orders to present at mediation, you don't even have to sign anything even if you do agree. You can take it away, think on it, and then decide if you want to go ahead with it or not. At the very least, it's a good opportunity to get a feel for what the other party wants, which will help you find new ways to try and negotiate an agreement without going to trial.
Similar threads
