Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LF32 "need to see daughter" pt.2

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by arabian View Post
    This is an excerpt from the statscan article defining the stages of emergency sheltering which I just posted:

    Second-stage housing: Facility offering long-term (3 to 12 months) secure housing with support and referral services designed to assist women while they search for permanent housing.

    Other: Includes all other residential facilities offering services to abused women with or without children, not otherwise classified."
    Interesting. My ex took up emergency housing on false allegations of verbal abuse last august. This was in a town quite a distance from my house. The battle royal right now is where our child goes to school...my town or hers.

    Recently I have been told she was back in the neighbourhood for a day...spotted by several friends. I thought not much of it until now.

    Is it possible a year later her time in that townhouse is running out? Is it possible she is looking for housing (figuring if she has to move and there is a chance the OCL recommends our old area) then she might aswell look close to us.

    Wishful thinking at its best. But the social housing thing has been a big mystery for me. How did she get housing in another town, how long does it last for....

    She took up in the region of Halton. Does anyone know the rules/limits there?

    Comment


    • Good question Headwaters. I just met a guy who's going through the exact same thing. Verbal abuse, she got shelter, he no longer sees his child. This is Waaay more prevalent than I thought. God bless the shelters for helping those truly in need .. but something needs to be done here.

      Time for a new lawyer note. Today lawyer now knows I take zero drugs as he has now seen the hair follicle test. He knows he only offered 1 hour in an e-mail and sent a blitz attack on me the other day and found that Mr. LF32 was not phased (okay I was but he didn't see it). He knows supervised access going well (and STILL decreased access to 1 hour). He MUST know he just looks terrible right now. I'd like increased access. He knows im not high conflict at all and instigating nothing, not trying to reach MsLF32, etc. He should be scratching his head. "Hmm .. doesn't seem violent, doesn't take drugs, doesn't get mad. Doesn't drink? What the hell MsLF32"?

      Should I send this?

      Dear Mr. ____


      Due to confusion regarding e-mails, I would like to establish that all future Thursday access should be considered confirmed unless I notify you otherwise. Since access visits have been successful I propose 9:00am - 5:00pm Thursdays. Also a reminder that I am still awaiting your disclosure and Ms. _____'s 15 dates as per the July Calendar I sent on June 11th.
      I trust that you have received my voluntary hair follicle test. I am also conducting weekly urinalysis tests for alcohol. Is Ms. _____ still refusing access all days except Thursdays?

      Thank you,

      Comment


      • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
        Wow Arabian. I'll make my Latte and give that a thorough read. Thanks a million!
        Thanks Arabian. Although the report itself was a real downer. My ex has made a claim of verbal abuse which is inherently inconsistent...its so obviously false simply by looking at her own affidavits...just inconsistent. But we've been slowly winding our way through a 10 month process and as you know...there isn't anyone to make a judgement until...well until there is.

        So I when I started this thing I was always wistfully thinking that perhaps she'd get her just deserts in the end. And its beyond frustrating to come to terms with the fact...there are simply no consequences.

        No wonder the courts are full of firebombing he said she said....what a disincentive there is for telling the truth.

        In my case I have calmly been explaining that my ex is a good mother and I have no issue with her as a parent. The OCL said "hmm usually people dish more when they com here". She look disappointed.

        But I can see why...the system sets it up for a classic Jerry Springer.

        Comment


        • You're still too polite. Stop being so Canadian and lawyer it up. Err..Sorry about that last bit eh?
          --
          To prevent future confusion with regards to e-mails, all future Thursday access will be considered confirmed unless I notify you otherwise. All access visits have been successful and therefore I see no reason why Thursday visits shall not be expanded to 9:00am - 5:00pm, this shall be established commencing july x.

          To date I am still awaiting your disclosure and Ms. _____'s 15 dates as per the July Calendar I sent on June 11th.

          Confirm you have received my voluntary hair follicle test. I am also conducting weekly urinalysis tests for alcohol, these will be forward as they come available.

          In light of the confirmed negative test results Ms. _____ refusals of additional access time will be noted and only demonstrate a continued lack of co-operation.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
            He MUST know he just looks terrible right now. I'd like increased access. He knows im not high conflict at all and instigating nothing, not trying to reach MsLF32, etc. He should be scratching his head. "Hmm .. doesn't seem violent, doesn't take drugs, doesn't get mad. Doesn't drink? What the hell MsLF32"?
            He may very well be reacting like this. However, he's not a mediator. He's HER lawyer, and his job is to not let on to YOU.

            Originally posted by LovingFather32 View Post
            Should I send this?

            Dear Mr. ____


            Due to confusion regarding e-mails, I would like to establish that all future Thursday access should be considered confirmed unless I notify you otherwise. Since access visits have been successful I propose 9:00am - 5:00pm Thursdays. Also a reminder that I am still awaiting your disclosure and Ms. _____'s 15 dates as per the July Calendar I sent on June 11th.
            I trust that you have received my voluntary hair follicle test result, which was negative. I am also conducting weekly urinalysis tests for alcohol, which have also all been negative. Is Ms. _____ still refusing access all days except Thursdays?

            Thank you,
            I'd include a blatant reminder that these tests have all been negative.

            Don't forget to keep track of these tests too, so you can include them in a potential claim for costs. I hope you have a log book going of every cost you incur, from time off work, to photocopying, to postage, etc.

            And you know, the longer this drags on, the less her allegations of your substance use would hold water even if they were true. You've demonstrated that you gave up substances for access to your child.
            Last edited by Rioe; 06-30-2014, 12:36 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Headwaters1 View Post
              You're still too polite. Stop being so Canadian and lawyer it up. Err..Sorry about that last bit eh?
              --
              To prevent future confusion with regards to e-mails, all future Thursday access will be considered confirmed unless I notify you otherwise. All access visits have been successful and therefore I see no reason why Thursday visits shall not be expanded to 9:00am - 5:00pm, this shall be established commencing july x.

              To date I am still awaiting your disclosure and Ms. _____'s 15 dates as per the July Calendar I sent on June 11th.

              Confirm you have received my voluntary hair follicle test. I am also conducting weekly urinalysis tests for alcohol, these will be forward as they come available.

              In light of the confirmed negative test results Ms. _____ refusals of additional access time will be noted and only demonstrate a continued lack of co-operation.
              Headwaters .. I like it. Opinions of other posters regarding Headwater's edit/additions to the e-mail?

              Rioe - Yes, I have a zip lock baggy full of receipts, (parking, hair follicle, police record check, photo copies). A log book as well. My hourly rate is also $200.00 (research on rules after certain e-mails lawyer sent me, prep of materials, time spent at courthouse ... this stuff Im still not quite sure if I can prove or get but Ill damn well try. If Im forced to act like a lawyer I intend on being paid like one.

              I was thinking about that as well Rioe, how hair follicle's go back 3 months and ex's lawyer will just say "he did it during the relationship your honor and obviously quit after she left for the courts". But you're right, still a win for me b/c it shows even if I was a substance abuser (BS) I quit for D3 after.
              Last edited by LovingFather32; 06-30-2014, 12:54 PM.

              Comment


              • I like headwater's response (should be "become" available...) and I also think Rioe's input is correct and agree about your tracking expenses.

                I wonder if it would be feasible to put something in there to the effect that It would therefore be prudent that you forward Mrs. LF32's drug and alcohol screening tests to me by xxxx ???

                Comment


                • Originally posted by arabian View Post
                  I like headwater's response (should be "become" available...) and I also think Rioe's input is correct and agree about your tracking expenses.

                  I wonder if it would be feasible to put something in there to the effect that It would therefore be prudent that you forward Mrs. LF32's drug and alcohol screening tests to me by xxxx ???
                  Yes .. I was thinking about asking for hers as well. Although I didn't accuse her of any of that its the "couples usually do things together" phenomena and the judge even said .. usually how it work is both get tested, each pay their own expenses. I did mine. Only right that she does hers.

                  Comment


                  • I would give the OC a directive that he forward the testing results forthwith (don't ask, demand). You don't have to justify yourself here. If judge looks at transcripts he will see that he mentioned that it is customary for both parties to submit to testing..... Another proverbial nail in the coffin for the OC I would think.

                    Comment


                    • A nice way to end the letter would be to quote something from the law regarding - best interests of the child... to have equal unfettered access to both parents. Perhaps the dickhead OC needs to be reminded of this from time to time.

                      Comment


                      • Something to consider, LF32. You're going to be getting help from a lawyer now, but have you defined exactly what that help will be going forward? Will it continue to be as support, or will it be at the level of the lawyer representing you at your motion?

                        Depending on how much you plan to have your lawyer engaged on this will dictate some of the 'little things' day-to-day for you. For example, perhaps your lawyer should be the one sending correspondence to your ex's lawyer? Perhaps some of the details that you are pulling together may need to be handed off to your lawyer?

                        I know that you're not quite there yet, but a member previously posted that you will want to pick a path and then consistently stick to it, and soon.

                        Regardless of which path you're on, the more I read about the drug and alcohol testing, the more that I think you should focus on it less in your documents. By paying a certain level of attention to it, it may create a false sense that it 'used to be an issue', as opposed to the reality that you want conveyed, which is 'that it never was an issue, period'.

                        I guess I'm just stuck on the phrase "In light of the confirmed negative test results Ms. _____ refusals of additional access time will be noted and only demonstrate a continued lack of co-operation", since it presumes that you ever consented to your access to be so meagre due to a lack of existing negative test results in the first place. You agreed to the supervised access because you didn't feel like you had a choice due to the unreasonable behaviour of your ex, NOT because you ever agreed that you had a substance abuse problem. You are not some drug addled alcoholic who reluctantly gave up imbibing substances for time with your daughter, you are a competent father who had nothing to hide in the first place. I would suggest the following wording:

                        "Ms. _____ consistent refusals of additional access time will be noted and only demonstrate a continued lack of co-operation."

                        Comment


                        • Duties a Lawyer has to the Court (not just his client) (I condensed to relevant stuff)

                          APPENDIX A

                          THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA'S RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
                          EXCERPTS OF RULE 4 – RELATIONSHIP TO THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
                          Advocacy
                          4.01 (2) When acting as an advocate, a lawyer shall not

                          (a) abuse the process of the tribunal by instituting or prosecuting proceedings which,
                          although legal in themselves, are clearly motivated by malice on the part of the client and
                          are brought solely for the purpose of injuring the other party,

                          (b) knowingly assist or permit the client to do anything that the lawyer considers to be
                          dishonest or dishonourable
                          ,
                          (e) knowingly attempt to deceive a tribunal or influence the course of justice by offering
                          false evidence, misstating facts or law, presenting or relying upon a false or deceptive
                          affidavit, suppressing what ought to be disclosed, or otherwise assisting in any fraud,
                          crime, or illegal conduct,

                          (g) knowingly assert as true a fact when its truth cannot reasonably be supported by the
                          evidence or as a matter of which notice may be taken by the tribunal,

                          (l) when representing a complainant or potential complainant, attempt to gain a benefit for
                          the complainant by threatening the laying of a criminal charge or by offering to seek or to
                          procure the withdrawal of a criminal charge, and

                          Courtesy
                          4.01 (6) A lawyer shall be courteous, civil, and act in good faith to the tribunal and with all
                          persons with whom the lawyer has dealings in the course of litigation.


                          Discovery Obligations
                          15. Where the rules of a court or tribunal require the parties to produce documents or attend on examinations for discovery, a lawyer, when acting as an advocate, shall explain to the client the necessity of making full disclosure of all documents relating to any matter in issue, and the duty to answer to the best of the client's knowledge, information, and belief, any proper question relating to any issue in the action or made discoverable by the rules of court or the rules of the tribunal; shall assist the client in fulfilling the obligation to make full disclosure, and shall not make frivolous requests for the production of documents or make frivolous demands for information at the examination for discovery.
                          Last edited by MrToronto; 06-30-2014, 02:11 PM.

                          Comment


                          • I think the ex knew if she made allegations she'd get "short term" housing and a free lawyer.

                            I think she was very open and frank with the LAO lawyer that she was taking off to another province

                            The lawyer is NOT disclosing the documents because he doesn't want to defend them and be responsible for them "later", not only because the EVIDENCE is weak but to enable "removing himself from the matter cleanly".

                            ...after his client goes against "his wishes" (pre-planned) and takes off.

                            It's only a matter of time before the ex won't be able to find a car to go to LF32's town for the 3 hour access.

                            Of course the motivation to even make a long drive for "3 hour access" will be a factor.

                            Luckily for LF32 the Court Process is already started where he lives, so the ex can run but can't hide and if she doesn't appear in Court, LF32 can do Motions without her.

                            FRO needs her address
                            OCL needs her address
                            Settlement Conference upcoming
                            ..other Conference (TMC)
                            Trial
                            and ACCESS is Consent Ordered

                            anyways I think everything the ex and lawyer have done was a bluff to this point, but LF32 has made it a longer grind for them, his ex has zero intention of sitting in low income housing (3 months probably most she could stand).

                            I was thinking sublte reminders LF32 of lawyers duty to the court would be a nice ...written nicely...

                            As Ms So-So lawyer please confirm her residence in (city) that her address hasn't changed.
                            Last edited by MrToronto; 06-30-2014, 02:50 PM.

                            Comment


                            • StraitToHell:
                              Yes, I'll be seeing a lawyer next week for 1 hour consult. She'll decide if its too complicated to join in...if so I may have her stand on the sidelines and pay her for knowledge/advice.
                              The "in light of" part of the phrase may need to be rethought. That test shoukdnt even be a factor in determining access.

                              Arabian: yes, the judge even told ex's lawyer that how it usually worked (she gets one too). I already mentioned that to lawyer but he just ignores. Regarding best interests...absolutelty I should add that although lawyer coyld care less. I'll do it for judges eyes.

                              Mr. Toronto:
                              I know .. he violates all of those. But how do apply those besides my complaint letter ?

                              Comment


                              • Exactly Mr. T.

                                I never thought about it that way. Hes not disclosing to cover his ass. Hmm.

                                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