Oh dear that sounds like a ******** when you have gone to all this trouble.
I was going to use a word connected with your derriere which might have
expressed my meaning better, even if a little more crudely !
But
you see, the difficulty from the Court's point of view is that a
consent order means that there is agreement. If your
other half will not sign, that suggests the possibility that there is no
real agreement. Unfortunately, this sort of thing can and does happen now
and then.
So, the first thing is that the Court is concerned to
make sure that
you both understand the agreement ;
that
both parties are agreed on the terms ;
that the order accurately
reflects the terms of the agreement ;
that the terms of the agreement
are within the parameters of fairness and that, for example,
the
Court is not dealing with a well resourced spouse using his/her greater
resources to railroad a weaker spouse into agreement ;
that both
parties have access to independent advice.
I think that - if you
are still on speaking terms with your x2b - it might be a good idea to talk
it through with him, find out why he will not sign, what if anything it
would take to make him sign, and you may be able to get an idea of where
the problem lies. Better to do this now, while there is still time, than
find out in a judge's
chambers.
Your disagreement might be
trivial and easily resolved. But there may be no real agreement at all, in
which case there may be little choice but to go to a hearing.
And a word of warning - to both of you two good people. Don't go to a
hearing if the points involved are trivial. Believe me, it might even be
better to concede a point, if you can live with it, than to spend £5000
arguing over £500, if you see what I mean.
I haven't answered
your question directly, but I suggest you proceed along the lines
indicated. There used to be an old wartime saying, time spent on
reconnaisance is seldom, if ever, wasted.
LMM