It's ok now the courts have adjourned the final hearing, but I am very concerned about the case.
I have submitted a C2 application back to court on the grounds of the following.
1) A finding of fact was ruled out the 03.11.2014 by a district judge he believed their was no grounds for domestic violence against the defendant considering the evidence.
2) He also ruled a medical expert report, again no grounds to support the defendants claims.
He suggested 4 sessions of supervised contact on the grounds i had not see my daughter for 1 year. The first session went very well but then child was very tired during the 3 sessions. I suggested different times to the centre but they did not change them. The observation notes were missing information, and there was various changes to the observations notes. These notes have not been supplied to the court but only discovered two weeks ago in the SARS information.
I requested SARS information from CAFCASS,and core assets and made some disturbing discoveries.
1) CAFCASS had passed over notes to core assets prior to the contact sessions commencing that contain scott schedule allegations that had been ruled out on the 03.11.2015. This is surely a breach to article 6 rights Human rights rights to fair trial.
2) CAFCASS had passed notes to core assets in relation to mental health being a problem with my contact even though my GP supplied a statement to the court saying there is absolutely nothing in my records to stated i am any danger and the courts ruled it out anyway!!. My doctor has commented on the notes being passed to core assets as shocking and the court have a duty of care to investigate.(They haven't)
In the SARS request that i asked for their are email exchanges from core assets to CAFCASS involving third parties that bear no relevance to child contact. These emails state my qualifications are bluff and making various accusations. I have only met these people on 4 occasions.
My background is that i am child counsellor and former chair of governors of primary school. My qualifications are certainly not bluff that is for sure. My partner of 1 year and 5 months is teacher and is fuming.
I have no criminal convictions, charges or offences and i have not seen my daughter for 21 months to date. I mentioned my concerns to the judge about my discoveries with regards ***** ***** attacks and providing false and misleading information and he stated i would need to apply to court of appeal.
He offered no more contact sessions and has delayed the case for another 3 months because the CAFCASS involved is off sick so cannot be investigated at this stage.
The defence now supported by a barrister and i am litigant has stated that my former does not want me to have contact. I stated i have been assessed on 1 hour and 35 minutes of contact but what apears to be corruption involved.
He has indicated a possible family assisted order at the final hearing.
I have an older daughter who is now ten that i has live me twice a week for 7 years so i cannot understand the logic to this it is just ridiculous.
I believe it is very clear that for ever reason CAFCASS have stirred the pot so to speak" and the defence is taking advantage of being unrepresented.
Any guidance please in this matter
Thank you for your response. My apologies for my delat in responding to you - quite a busy day.
I note that the final hearing has been adjourned - which now gives the opportunity to attend and at the final hearing.
I note that you have submitted an application wihitn procedings (on Form C2) in relation to two parts of the case that you consider have not been purused - no finding of fact and also a medical report being asked for. I note that these actually relate to directions which are nearly a year old. In reality - I consider that you are now likley out of time to seek to Appeal the decision that a Finding of Fact hearing should have taken place - Appeals have a strict time limit of 21 days.
I note that you consider that the first contact session went well - but then your child was tired. I note that you tried to change the time with the contact centre - but this wasnt possible. This will be acxcepted as contact centres are very busy and places are often limited. Your though process in relation to the time does appear as though you are considering your childs best interest and the quality of the time that your child spends with you. I am sure that a Judge would agree with this position.
Although the court is entitled to make enquiries in relation to to your mental health - if it remains your position that your mental health poses no risk to child contact, as supported by your GP letter - then you should hold this position. If Cafcass have taken a different position - then you need to analyse and break down what Cafcass are saying in light of the evidence they are presenting and explian yourself fully - perhaps their opinion is based upon meeting with you - perhaps you were stressed and agitated during any such meeting - it is this you would need to explain so that it makes sense to the Judge.
In relation to your qualifications - you should be able to ascertain some confirmation as to your posts and positions previoulsy as well as your certficates.
I note that you are disappointed that the contact offered was limited and that there have been delays as a result of cafcass illness - I agree that delays are not in the best interest of a child especially when a relationship is being re-introduced - it can be confusing for a child to start to develop a relationship and for this to be halted.
I note that your ex is opposed to you having contact. The decision will of course be made by the Judge is agreement is not reached and from what your are saying - it does not appear as though the Judge is going to side with your ex and agree that your child should spend no time with you. A Family Assistance Order - is where Cafcass are by order to befriend, advise and assist any person in an order - this is with a veiw to promoting a relationship with the child.
There does also have to be consisitency - if you are having an unsupervised relationship with another child - with no social services concerns or involvement - then this really does need to be considered.
You have described that you ex appears to be attempting to frustrate a relationshio between you and your child. You need to point this out to the Judge.
Whilst I appreciate that any court proceedings are frustrating - you will do best to take a step back - and present a case at the final hearing that is child focussed - argue you are not a risk to your child and that the child has a right to have a relationship with you. You should try to seek a progressive order - which allows for you spending more time with your child in the future.
Please remember to