Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tips for dealing with OCL and Private Assessors

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • involveddad75
    replied
    Well I would start by starting a new thread at this point.
    Take this conversation off this thread and on to a new one.

    You can PM me if you like as I need more information such as ages, history current access, distance you live apart, etc. etc. etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Ok, I just received a SC Brief from the OCL Lawyer (had no idea they did one) and he is asking for our trial management conference in Dec and our sitting for trial of Feb next year to be adjourned so that OCL can finish their investigation shoult they get approved to involve a social worker.... Help!

    I do not want the trial management conference and trial pushed back at this stage, especially since nobody has yet agreed to social worker involvement.

    The statue quo is already 5 yrs and counting and if trial is delayed I won't be able to successfully get some additional access time through motion as wouldn't a judge most likely not even want to make an interim order on some increased access until OCL position is available? So how do I then change the status quo and slowly increase my access? Any insight would be appreciated on how best to proceed.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    I'm not sure what happened then. She won her order so I don't know why she'd make it up that the judge awarded it at SC, no trial and telling me to be careful because that is what just happened in her case. An order like that should come froma trial and trial judge. Weird. It made me reconsider going through with the 2nd SC but I am, brief is done with a new offer to settle. Thanks to those who gave insights and suggestions.

    Leave a comment:


  • involveddad75
    replied
    Originally posted by Mess View Post
    The order should have been made due to facts presented and in accordance with the law. Not because someone lost their temper.
    I agree mess with that summary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mess
    replied
    The order should have been made due to facts presented and in accordance with the law. Not because someone lost their temper.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Thank you Mess.

    I did find it weird. It was directly from the mouth of a single Mom I know and she won custody through this court order apparently ordered at the SC conference after the OCL Lawyer attended and produced their position on this best interests and wishes of the children.

    Perhaps this happened because the Father was already not allowed to see the children and the children didn't want to see him and the father lashed out at the OCL lawyer's position in court and then the judge decided in rare case to make the order?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mess
    replied
    Originally posted by DontGiveUp View Post
    The reason for my concern was talking to a single Mom I know yesterday and this just happened in her case, they already had an agreement, OCL Lawyer was appointed for the children, had a SC, OCL Lawyer showed up and told the judge she was ready to present her position on what would be in the best interests of the children and the judge ordered it on the spot at the SC. That scared me a bit being that I asked for the SC after trial date has been set, and OCL lawyer is pushing aggressively on his interviews.
    In a nutshell, a judge is not permitted to make an order if a party is blindsided. If you do not receive advance notice that an order will be requested, and you do not know in advance what the order is, and you do not have time to prepare beforehand, then a judge should not be making an order. This would absolutely be thrown out on appeal.

    As well, final orders should only be made on consent at a SC. Exceptions to this are very rare, and would be extreme situations in order to be justified.

    I am not saying it didn't happen, but it is far-fetched, and I would not personally rely on information that is this far-fetched coming third-hand from an anonymous source.

    Psychologically, when we don't get what we want from court, it happens that we distort our memories and perceptions when we tell our stories. We don't want to look like fools or losers, so we portray the situation as though we were helpless martyrs. This happens to us all. I would feel more confident about this story if there were case law cited. Unfortunately that is not possible with a SC.

    Please read this thread http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...arified-15545/ for a discussion that includes case law.

    That case deals with case conference, not settlement conference, and the expectation may be slightly different, but the issues of procedural fairness, the family law rules, and notice still apply.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Thank you InvolvedDad,

    I wish there were some Ontario examples of gradual plans to 5-5-2-2.

    This settlement conference brief is due now and I don't know how to suggest I take my current access schedule and suggest in a reasonable gradual way to get me to 5-5-2-2 (I was thinking 6 months?)

    Leave a comment:


  • involveddad75
    replied
    Don't give up, equal shared parenting is a reachable goal. Look up the orange county of California parenting guidelines on Google for parenting plans and how to fast track gradual access to equal shared (gradual as in 8 weeks from nothing to equal shared).

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Thanks I thought so. I've been tempted to go in with an offer to settle which is less than equal time. I offered that last week without prejudice as a last step resort to prevent the children from having to be dragged into this even more and go for a first interview with the OCL lawyer but neither my ex or her lawyer acknowledged the offer until yesterday a.m. too late. I will go back into the SC with an offer with a gradual 2-2-5-5.

    The reason for my concern was talking to a single Mom I know yesterday and this just happened in her case, they already had an agreement, OCL Lawyer was appointed for the children, had a SC, OCL Lawyer showed up and told the judge she was ready to present her position on what would be in the best interests of the children and the judge ordered it on the spot at the SC. That scared me a bit being that I asked for the SC after trial date has been set, and OCL lawyer is pushing aggressively on his interviews.

    Leave a comment:


  • baldclub
    replied
    Nothing should happen at settlement conference unless on consent. Simply go there trying to move closer on those issues you can, showing the judge you really want to act in the best interest of the children. Of course, in my opinion, that should only be with a view for equal parenting.

    A judge will listen to evidence at trial and deal with your issues then if both parties cannot compromise.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Does anyone know whether there is a real risk or not of an OCL lawyer at a settlement conference telling the judge they have determined what the children want / best interests of the children, tell the judge, and the SC judge makes an order on it at the SC even though you are set for trial and this SC was just requested (by myself) in hopes that the judge encourages the other party to hear and consider negotiating a settlement based upon my latest offer?

    I am just concerned that having this SC that I requested and the other lawyer did not want to consent to backfires now that I have an OCL lawyer aggressively getting through interviews and wanting to attend the SC. I am running out of time as my brief is due tomorrow and the conference is in just over a week if I need to look and asking for it to be cancelled out of concern. I want a trial judge if we can't settle to hear and rule on our case and thought that SC judges cannot but a friend suggested it happened in their case.

    Leave a comment:


  • BitHunter
    replied
    Yes, it is a broad brush, but it would be unrealistic to believe anything else, and this is what the OCL factors in.

    Leave a comment:


  • DontGiveUp
    replied
    Both parents are lying?! Isn't that a broad brush you're painting all parents with?

    Leave a comment:


  • BitHunter
    replied
    The OCL investigator knows very well that both parents are lying and both of them will try to manipulate the child. They will factor this in.

    Leave a comment:

Our Divorce Forums
Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
Working...
X