I am currently trying to sort out financial settlement with ex.He has tried every trick in the book to stop me getting my settlement.I have had to take him to court.He has now stopped me from selling house because he has his granddaughter living with him on a residence order. She lived with us both on this order since she was 2 but we didn't adopt her when social services asked us too. She was kept on a fostering order which she is still on with my ex.I was forced to leave him as he would not move out of house and made my life hell. I couldn't take the granddaughter with me. He is know using her against me to stop me getting my half of house. Someone pointed out to me that she is fostered not adopted and that she is no relation to me so he can't do this . I want to know if anyone knows whether this is true or can point out where there is any advice on this matter. Been up half the night trawling the internet for an answer. Can't ask solicitor yet as she is away on holiday. I know its a tricky one but i would be grateful of any answers thankyou
Although it's a narrow point, I have to disagree slightly with Fiona. She says the welfare of the child is paramount, but this is incorrect. That is a quote from s1(1) Children Act 1989. This case will not be considered under that Act, even if he invokes Schedule 1 of the CA 1989.
This is a matrimonial case, and all decisions will be made under Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 and in particular s25. Under that, the Court has to give "first" consideration to the needs of any child of the family (NB not child of the marriage)when deciding how to exercise its powers.
Under the Children act, the adults' wishes, needs etc do not get a look-in. Here they do, but the child's needs usually predominate.
What does the child need? A roof over her head. Does this have to be at your expense? No. There can be other perfectly viable outcomes involving privately rented or local authority housing.
So yes, he may still get to stay in the house but it's not a foregone conclusion. This sort of thing crops up rarely. You should speak to your solicitor, and Counsel's advice may be needed from an expert on these matters. Good luck.
thanks for that but i still think it is unfair as she spends most of her time at her mothers and he is just using her to prevent me from getting my share. He is in a far better position than me because he has a good job and i have very little income. He left me with nothing he took the house and all that was in it , even after it was i that had paid for it all. it should not be allowed to use children in this way it is not fair to the child has he treats her like dirt .He get money off social services for her but she has nothing , it was i recently that bought her some clothes as the ones she has are like rags. Her mother is in no position to look after her as she is a drug addict with proper means of income only benefits, he continuously lets her stay with her mother because he can't be bothered looking after her. but he's the one getting the money . It enrages me to think he can use a child in this way .
I'm not a legal person, but if the child spends 'more time at her mothers', maybe start by establishing this childs residence. Address she's registered at GP, dentist, schools, clinic, librarys, clubs etc. (That might strengthen your case if needed).
I'm just curious, if you've been to court already, why no outcome? Did they ask for further information?
How old is the child? (Sometimes, a court will recognise your share in the house, but not allow a sale until the child reaches 18). Your sol will know those issues.