S7 where to go from here

[Merlin836]

I had a Drha hearing .
My ex turned up with her family and they were refused access to sit in the hearing although one member was eventually allowed in as McKenzie (after agreement ) .
I had several allegations thrown at me which many I disputed and some I admitted to as there was proof ( such as I was a gambling addict a few years back and I took drugs one time in the past ) these were brought up but the judge was incredibly lenient and stated they're all historic events and do not. Impact the child plus I can receive help if necessary (I've been accused of being alcoholic too and DA ) .
My ex asked for the hearing to be adjourned and she was told no .
They even said they don't think the DA allegation which is a pure lie will be wholly relevant as it's a one off incident in the past a few years ago (it never happened but she twisted something to try and make it look like it did )
They've decided on a S7 . I have a hearing a good few months away with no contact sadly .
I can send presents to my daughter but nothing more .
The thing is my ex was told in the first hearing and second she had to update me every week (no pictures ) about how my daughter is doing and she did once a week for a few weeks but since the hearing my ex has not sent me an update and she's blocked me ( I've not tried to contact her but I'm blocked anyway .
I'm not sure how this will go but is it a step in the right direction and should I leave it a week or two and then get In touch with cafcass if ex does not update me about our daughter ?

 

[StayStrong]

Sorry to hear this mate, appears to be text book stuff that judge is wise to. You also appear to be 'steady, cool, calm and collected' which is a good way to be.

Sad as it is that you are not receiving updates as you should be, my best advice is to remember that " give enough rope and.....". Wait until the S7 is underway and you will have a more substantive opportunity then. Even if updates magically reappear it will be apparent the S7 has triggered them.

Take care of yourself in the meantime, SS.

 

[Ash]

That is good news you've avoided a fact find and the Judge saw through some of it. Maybe he saw all her family turn up lol. It's a shame you're not getting any interim time - that is happening too often. Is it still the same after this hearing - that she is meant to update you weekly with photos? And did you mention that wasn't happening?

 

[Merlin836]

Sorry to hear this mate, appears to be text book stuff that judge is wise to. You also appear to be 'steady, cool, calm and collected' which is a good way to be.

Sad as it is that you are not receiving updates as you should be, my best advice is to remember that " give enough rope and.....". Wait until the S7 is underway and you will have a more substantive opportunity then. Even if updates magically reappear it will be apparent the S7 has triggered them.

Take care of yourself in the meantime, SS.

Thank you Stay strong
I think I will wait before raising the 'updating issue' it's the only link I have to my daughter so even that is hard to take but I it'll work out hopefully .
Cheers

 

[Merlin836]

That is good news you've avoided a fact find and the Judge saw through some of it. Maybe he saw all her family turn up lol. It's a shame you're not getting any interim time - that is happening too often. Is it still the same after this hearing - that she is meant to update you weekly with photos? And did you mention that wasn't happening?

She is supposed to update me but not with photos or video calls as id previously had on occasion in case I put them on social media which I never have but it's to stop more allegations being thrown my way .
She was reminded to still carry on as she'd been instructed but she's since stopped .

 

[Ash]

Well she's breaching then if she's not sending you updates.

 

[hazemaze]

Didn't you say they allowed her family in last time why did they refuse this time

 

[Ash]

Are you supposed to only communicate through a third party now? If so ask them to send a politely worded message, asking the Mother to comply with the interim order and send you weekly updates about the child. And say they can be sent to this third party.

 

[Merlin836]

Well she's breaching then if she's not sending you updates.

I thought so too so I'm going to keep

Are you supposed to only communicate through a third party now? If so ask them to send a politely worded message, asking the Mother to comply with the interim order and send you weekly updates about the child. And say they can be sent to this third party.

She's supposed to communicate with me as she was asked how we communicated in the first hearing .
I'm not sure why she didn't use text , Whatsapp but she chose to just use a messenging service but now she seems to have stopped using that .

 

[Merlin836]

Didn't you say they allowed her family in last time why did they refuse this time

I didn't even know one of her family members was there as it was one of the clerks who told her she cannot come in .
Barrister raised an objection and this time it was dealt with as last time it wasn't dealt with properly

 

[hazemaze]

I was under the impression family members can be there. Did she have a solicitor with her as well? Good on the barrister

 

[Merlin836]

I was under the impression family members can be there. Did she have a solicitor with her as well? Good on the barrister

It seem to be that the court wasn't too keen on allowing family members to be McKenzie friends .

 

[Ash]

My ex used to take her H and ask for him to be a McKenzie friend. It needed my agreement. I was advised to agree to it and the court agreed to it. It's unusual to take more than one family member to court. But normally they wouldn't be allowed into the actual hearing, unless it was just one person and agreed by the other party and the court that that person could be a McKenzie friend. I believe it's usually allowed. But only the one person.

 

[Merlin836]

My ex used to take her H and ask for him to be a McKenzie friend. It needed my agreement. I was advised to agree to it and the court agreed to it. It's unusual to take more than one family member to court. But normally they wouldn't be allowed into the actual hearing, unless it was just one person and agreed by the other party and the court that that person could be a McKenzie friend. I believe it's usually allowed. But only the one person.

I think that's what the issue was. I was surprised her sister was not the McKenzie friend although her in law was not allowed to be a McKenzie friend also due to objection but we didn't object to her being moral support when asked .
Maybe the fact there were two family members present in the hearing last time may have raised some concerns

 

[hazemaze]

Why are they doing a s7 if the allegations have been wiped out...Good luck

 

[Merlin836]

Why are they doing a s7 if the allegations have been wiped out...Good luck

I don't quite understand it myself . The allegations have not been disproven via evidence but I did give them enough I think to question my ex claims and two I've admitted to but they're historical events ( i.e the gambling addiction ) so they seemed to have dismissed them.

 

[Ash]

It seems fairly standard - to do a S7 to assess both parents for suitability.