Is this normal behaviour by a Judge?

On Thursday I went for the first hearing in relation to the financial settlement, there was myself, my solicitor, my soon to be ex, his solicitor and a barrister (he has legal aid as he has lied about his financial worth).

His solicitor had not sent the response to form E, so we were presented with this a few minutes before be went in to court.

My solicitor asked the judge if we could delay as he had just received the questions - the judges response was ' It has taken me ten minutes to review the paperwork in this case, you should be able to do the same with the response to form e'

The judge then spoke for at least 10 minutes, saying that we should come to a settlement today, it would only cost us more in the long run if we did not as we would run up huge bills with solicitors (this is a condensed version) we were then all told to go out, come to a settlement and then come back in when we had reached agreement - unfortunately we could not come to a settlement - the soon to be ex is going for as much as he can get.

Back into court we go, Judge has a pop at my solicitor,will not accept that we would like an FDR appointment so sends us back out again, still no sensible discussion with the ex, wants the house, but kind soul that he is I can keep my pension.

Well we went in and out a few times, the judge stated ' a good settlement in divorce is when both parties can taste ashes'

So this man decided in 10 minutes what the outcome would be, stated that we should both taste ashes, made us spend most of the day at court, running up huge costs.

Is this the usual stance taken by Judges? that they can decide in 10 minutes what the outcome should be,(my form e was very comprehensive) that we should both taste ashes? I felt bullied, I expected it from the other side, but not from the Judge - perhaps if I was not a victim of domestic abuse over many years (my stbx was arrested and charged,found guilty when I eventually found the courage to call the police, but had drained us financially as he did not work for over 15 years but demanded a high standard of living)I may have capitulated and just given the house to him, but I am just finding myself and am determined not to be brow beaten by any person, be it my stbx or a Judge)


So it is off to trial I will go, but, with trepidation, I am losing faith in the justice system, I will see it as part of the healing process, yes it will be expensive, but I will have done the best I can to stand up to my bullying ex and I know that I will feel much the better for it.

At my final hearing I was warned by the judge clearly that if he is forced into the position of making a decision then neither party would be happy.

Neither party was but my ex more so particularly as she'd been the one who refused to negotiate and even increased what she wanted.

T

Where the issues are straightforward and outstanding documents received by all parties according to the set timetable, the First Appointment, which is normally a directions hearing, can be turned into an FDR on the instructions of the judge on the day.

However, he/she has to take into account what you said on Form G as to whether you agreed or objected to the FA being turned into an FDR.

As you quite clearly didn't have the paperwork until you arrived at court, I can't see how the judge could have overridden your solicitors wishes for a direction for FDR.

Maybe the case was simple, not many assets apart from the house?

What did you put on Form G and what does you solicitor have to say about what happened in court?

You say that the judge decided what the outcome would be. Was it good or bad for you?

By the way, expect to receive better treatment at the Final Hearing. You won't get the same judge.

Thanks for that, our form G did state that we would not be able to proceed as we had not received the paperwork from the other side - but the judge had said my solicitor should be able to answer that in 10 mins - my solicitor was shocked from his reaction, actual wording on form g is:
The respondent will not be in a position to proceed on that occasion wth an fdr appointment for the following reason: Applicant is required to reply to a request for information and documents


So nice and clear!

It is the house, my pension, plus shares that I hold - so perhaps not complicated from that angle - but I had made sure to put the arrest and conviction for domestic abuse - plus detailed how I (and my son) were under a constant threat of violence for the last 20 odd years if the stbx did not get what he wanted, which meant we were always in debt even though I earned a very good salary and got nice annual bonus every year - so his behavior had a major impact on the family, welfare and financial - I only got the courage to stand up to him as he not only threatened to beat me up, but my son, who had just had his first session of chemotherapy after finding a couple of weeks ealier that he had cancer - I now realise that I should have started the divorce proceedings right away, but my lad was so ill I just could not deal with, I hoped my stbx would give us time, but he went straight for divorce due to my unreasonable behavior, but that is in the past, my son has got through chemo and radiotherapy, he is happy at the moment, waiting to hear if he has beaten the cancer - I must say the court were very good and I did get the hearing delayed by six months.

I just got the feeling that this judge had skimmed a few pages and dealt with us by rote.

He wasted about £750 of my money by making us stay to try and get a settlement, I must admit I do feel like making a complaint - could I get the trial held in a different court?

The problem you have is that judges for the financials do not look at behaviour or feelings etc only what assets there are and what split based on needs first.

It works out as total assets minus total debts minus legal fees (classed as a debt) leaves a balance and that is split accordingly between both parties.

To give you an idea in my case the judge based his decision on each parent and child having a 20% split. I have one child my ex has the two others and I have contact with one child.

The split was 45/55 to my ex. The full equity in the house and 50% of my pension was taken into account.

Sometimes when there are little assets it can be quite quick however my ex is not happy as she ran up £50k's worth of legal fees getting to final hearing which she could not disclose and now has to sell the house to pay it off. This equates to half the equity in the house.

T

G,

So sorry to hear all this but as I said, you won't get the same judge at the Final Hearing.

What did the FDR judge say about the outcome? Have there been any offers?

I know you spent xtra money because the judge turned the FA to an FDR without your consent but you would have spent this money if the FDR had been done separately anyway.

Hope it turns out well at the Final Hearing.

I'm sorry the first hearing did not go as you had hoped but conduct is rarely a factor in the outcomes of Ancillary Relief cases. As said above the finances are just a number crunching exercise. In most cases the 'needs' of the parties are near the top of the list of factors taken into account when sharing assets. A judge has a duty to ensure costs are proportionate and not spent on unnecessary hearings.

The important thing to take on board is the judge's view of how the assets should be split, bearing in mind that a judge at a FH will go into more detail before making a ruling.