• Initial Hearing: 20th November 2017
• Cafcass Report 1: 24th January 2018
• Hearing: 7th February 2018
• Cafcass Report 2: 19th April 2018
• Hearing: 3rd May 2018
• Final Hearing: 21st August 2018 (as you can tell it wasn’t final)
• Cafcass Report 3: 13th November 2018
• Hearing: 5th December 2018
• Hearing: 27th February 2019 (scheduled)

So far I did not have a single chance to dispute the statements in the Cafcass report - I was putting in writing my objections, however Cafcass representative was never present and the Court never addressed disagreements.

This is the request for the CAFCASS officer to attend the court hearing.

This is to allow and facilitate a discussion.

This is in accordance with the statement from the CAFCASS report:

“Any concerns about other aspects of the report (for example, the extent of enquiries, the opinions expressed in it or matters disputed by the parties) must be addressed in court.”

I would like to admit lack of knowledge on my end - previously I did not initiate communication with the CAFCASS officer. In my understanding that would be interpreted as “undue influence”.

(just like contacting Clerks, Justices and any other personnel working for MoJ outside the courtroom)

Only yesterday when I called the CAFCASS office (to request the attendance) I was told I should communicate directly with the officer.

Today after spending more than 20 minutes on the phone we realised there are multiple matters that are not in agreement (subject to interpretation) and the Court is the only place to address that.

While on the phone I was told to put such disagreements in the position statement. I will do that, however it is better if the CAFCASS representative is present so that it is possible to have discussions.

I believe it is better to resolve such disagreements ASAP (in the coming hearing on 5th December), as opposed to waiting for another hearing (statistically speaking 4 months intervals).

I understand that CAFCASS has not been directed to attend the hearing and it is not the final hearing.

Regardless the name of the hearing (first, initial, adjourned, final, fact finding, direction, dispute resolution) - hearing is a hearing, disagreement is a disagreement, the Court remains the only place to address that.

•••••

To summarise: please provide a direction for CAFCASS to attend the Court hearing so that it is possible to address and resolve disagreements.

Reminder

This is a reminder about the direction for CAFCASS to attend the court hearing.

“Any concerns about other aspects of the report (for example, the extent of enquiries, the opinions expressed in it or matters disputed by the parties) must be addressed in court.”

“Balance of convenience” and TIME - here we have a convenient opportunity, as opposed to multiple months of wait for another hearing (that may happen or not).

a) representative of CAFCASS is attending - the concerns can be easily addressed and disputed
b) representative of CAFCASS not attending - the concerns will be raised anyway and Court will have a more difficult job to establish what is true, what is in the best interest of the children

Therefore, to make the job of the Court easier it is advised for CAFCASS representative to be present - I suggest a direction for CAFCASS representative to attend should be issued.

On a personal level (me as an individual) I recommend CAFCASS representative to attend. A few days ago we had a discussion on the phone, where 20+ minutes yielded many disagreements (that must be addressed in court).