Having trawled and trawled this site since I joined, I feel it only fair to share my experience of FDR today, hopefully it will help others on their journey and maybe even save them some money??
Soooo (deep breath) I arrived at court 9.15am today, my barrister i recognised instantly from his picture, as I had looked him up on on internet, I unfortunately spotted him when I nearly reversed into him on the car park.... this was not admittedly the best start, (and thats ignoring the two, single magpies I had seen on drive in...double sorrow???how unfair!!!) but I think if hed noticed me when I introduced myself at court he was to gratious to mention it Our discussion therefore began at 9.15, when we were due in front of the judge at 10.30am.
His, the ex's, barrister, turned however turned up 45 minutes late and I do believe he had slept in his car all night, judging from his appearance. His suit was baggy, dirty, and he smelt very strongly of stale cigarettes...ughh! If he hadnt spoke with the typical middle english accent all barristers seem to naturally possess (how do they do it??...elocution lesons from birth???) I would have mistaken him for the cleaner....until he spoke that is! However, he and the ex seemed to get along just fine and the negotions began.
Prior to the bag man err I mean exs barrister turning up, my barrister gave me (or should i say "gave one"?) a very stern talking to, regarding my expectations from the AR proceedings. This quite honestly made me think...oh s**t! What have i done? Quick! sign over everything to the ex, just to prove I am not an unreasonable person....and its not beem myself thats been the awkward one. I felt quite sick and panicky at this stage. It was a similar experience to a telling off from the headmaster at school...but in a..how did he ternm it..."respectful" way?
"So whats all this contribution arguement about he asked?" (in barrister speak it sounded a bit posher), I somewhat embarrassed explained, I had recieved a substantial, I believed, recent (2006) inheritance, from my deceased father, which due to exs problems with cocaine, alcohol and general dislike of work...had now been spent. This had then left me currently with part time earnings (30 Hours),sole responsibility for two young boys, no maintenance from ex for children or mortgage or marital debt since separtaion some 13 months ago. I am now left with a very large mortgage on the MH, liability for a mortgage on a rental property bought with my inheritance and stack of marital debt to alos contend with. In my mind my contribution statement had tried to prove to the court, that had the ex acted differently, I may have been able to support myself and children with my inheritance...had there been any left, post seperation?
However, here lies a word of warning to others, it appeared my "arguement" was in the view of my barrister a "little more than an accounting excercise". My barrister explained further that the judge would be looking to take a broad brush approach, looking at needs, and the here and now, of the two parties. He felt the litigation aspect of the divorce had run away with itself. Huh?
Why did my sol not tell me this? She activley pursued the contribution aspect of the AR proceedings. Shes even now talking about conduct, which again the barrister seemed to suggest was a no no...as I have also read on wiki. Therefore the sleepless nights of x referncing my bank statements to his business account statements, and showing the thousands I have simply given over to him it seems are to no avail now? I do belive on advice from my sol, I have un necesarily added to my costs?
Any ways, big swallow, gasp for air and in we go to see the judge 10.30 am. My barrister was to his credit was very good, I was satisfied that he explained my case very well and in detail. The judge listened and seemed to appreciate the finacial dilemma I was in and faced with. He made frequent eye contact with me and tried to do the same with the ex, but he seemed not to like what the judge was saying and contantly fidgeted and looked away..giving me daggers all the time. I didnt look once at him, it would have felt like meeting the gaze of the devil.
The judge proceeded to suggest a mesher order, which previously I had not considered. I had wanted a clean break from the ex. However, the judge explained as had my barrister, that he had to be fair to both parties and that although my needs and that of the children were considerable, the ex had to be considered in the fairness aspect of the divorce and matrimonial causes act.
All the time i was thinking why do I have to be fair, to a liar, a cheat and a swindler...who has paid nothing for his children, nothing towards his mortgage or marital debt for 13 months, has seen his children only once in 12 months and most recently ignored his eldest sons birthday...I hope my face didnt show this. It appears only the law knows the reasons why fairness is applied to someone who is an unresponsible parent??? Methinks its that broad brush again
However, Im starting to bore myself now...so, to summarise...we were the sent away to try and reach an agreement after the judges comments. I do believe the judge was really good with his directions, (why cant I have him at FH.?) so the FDR was useful to me in the respect that it provided me with a different solution to a needs "problem", which I had not previously considered. As a consequence, I made a good offer to the ex, which he promptly rejected. I then increased my offer, and he rejected that also...its very obvious he just needs cash for his addictions and probably debts to "friends." consideration for his children is not on his needs list. Therefore at approx 1.00 we were back in front of the judge and I am now on a journey which I have no control over. A judge will decide what happens for mine and my childrens financial future. Not what I had wanted or anticipated, the judge was quite correct in explaining it feels far better to control an outcome yourself, than to have one imposed. unortunately if ine party does not wish to negotiate, the FDR does not work.
So this will now be my second christmas where I have tammy wynettes song (you know the one!) rattling round in my head. It seems though at least, from todays discussion I have no more Carol Vorderman hard sums to do with regard to contributions. I have learnt today that it is needs of the present, not what happened in the past that count to the judge. May I suggest wiki peeps consider this if you feel your getting embroiled into complex arguements over who paid fot what. And i dont mean the weekly shopping, utility bills or other marital debts. In my case my contribution was a second property a caravan in the lakes and support of exs business. The judge really was not interested.
Hope this is of some use to someone.
FH..here I come, kicking an screaming, I might add.
Regards SG

sand,
thanks for putting up this post.
Do you think that it is going to be completly different at FH because then the judge have to read everything.
take care,keep us informed

Have sent you thanks for posting your experience.

I'm sure it will be very useful for others to read.

Good luck and let us know how you get on !

poppy
x

hic! after re reading this, think SG had drained the bottle of vino collapso the post reads a bit garbled?

Will try and post about FH more clearly.

Its now scheduled for one,rather than two days as I agreed to drop my "contribution issues"... as they seemed not to matter at all at the FDR?

Just two weeks though, to answer further questions from him. Im not sure whats costing me more, the solicitors bill to deal with all his requests for "evidence" (this time he thinks Im not getting my full en­title­ment to WTC/CTC...how, or why, I would do that????)...or the wine Im buying to try and allievate the stress from the AR proceedings?

Its a close one!
SG

hi ,
Thanks for letting us know about your FDR ,It has help me .as I will be going in two weeks for my FDR ,I already told my solicitor I don't want anything from Ex except half of the Family home and he can keep all his business A/C and pension and a land in return of half the family home and another property worth half of the pension I will get from x and After counting all the assets he will be a winner of 17 thousand pound .My soli said its very fair but only depend on my Ex as I don't want to go to final hearing. I'm hoping it will end at FDR. married for 26 years . Thanks again .God Bless

Just a quick response to this,,,strangely very similar circumstances to sandy, ex not seeing children, or paying maintenance, and we also had a rented property that had to be sold because he wouldnt take on the mortgage but would rather pay more in rent so we lost money, he had stolen the mortgage payment one month etc etc but when it came to court the only issue the barristers and judge were concerned with was also the here and now, how much extra on the mortgage could i take out to buy him out, i was happy with the outcome in the end agreed with negotiation at second hearing but was also shocked that it all came down to here and now, no consideration at all for the fact i bring up the children alone with no support of any means, would i have walked away with more if i hadnt coped, and gone and got a better job to support me and the kids, but my head is held high and i am happier than i have been in many years.

SGG,

Thank you for sharing your experience of FDR. Like busybees, I share a lot of similarities with your case.

Like you we could not agree at FDR - he started wanting 50% of the house and to keep his pension .. by the end we were 20k apart. In the event he was given at FH precisely what he had rejected at FDR. I, in effect, "saved" about 4-5k by not giving in to his demand at FDR. It cost him about 12k extra though .. so REALLY worth it then - silly man. If it had ended at FDR with him accepting my offer, we would both have been better off .... but the lawyers would have been poorer .

One thing I wish I had done post FDR was to put the FDR offer in writing as an open offer. I was not aware that the FDR offers are not written down anywhere. If it had been put to the other side as an Open Offer and rejected, I believe it could have been shown to the judge at FH and that, although costs are not worked out the same way as they used to be .. it may have helped my case for the judge to know it was him, not me, who was dragging this out.

It may be worth doing this .....

Hadenoughnow