To ask that people STOP giving incorrect Legal advice!!!

[PoisonMaple]

I see this time and time again.

Stop it. Especially in family matters.

I get it, some information is generic and helpful, but seriously, the details!!! Stop it. These are people who are struggling and looking for understanding, give it, but stop giving Legal advice unless you're qualified to do so.

No, you are not garaunteed spousal maintenance.

No, you cannot name the OM/OW in Proceedings.

No, you cannot delay your divorce to force the other side into financial disclosure.

No, you are not going to get to keep the house because you've been at home with children. Even if you do get the house, it'll be for a set period of time until the Courts deem that you need to sell or find an agreement which allows the other sides longterm housing needs to also be met.

No, you cannot just 'get his payslips,' get your 'ducks' in a row, screenshot the messages, and then assume that you'll get a better settlement with all this evidence. You won't.

'Custody' is not a thing. Your child(ren) will live with and spend time with.

No, you cannot ensure PR remains only yours. A Declaration of Parentage is simple and straightforward, as is the process to prove you're a parent and get PR, even abusers are entitled to that. It does not guarantee contact, but you can't stop PR by not adding to a birth certificate. Especially if the other side is persistent and wants that right.

I understand more than most how emotive a marriage/relationship breakdown is, both the human and legal aspect of it.

The bottom line is this, every matter is different. The process may start off the same, but the outcome is not the same each time and never garaunteed. A settlement that I can get for 1 client is absolutely not going to be the case for another client, even if their circumstances are the same.

Right but it's like going to the drs with a weird rash and saying look this is what I'm worried about and showing them a screenshot of a sepsis rash. And then the Dr knows what's on their mind and can go ah no its just the washing up liquid

The poster was joking!

I think was a joke @AgnesX ... 👀

Just for balance, I am going through a difficult time due to my wife's health and I have received some excellent advice in relation to a complex hospital discharge from people who have been through similar circumstances.

I think you have to be selective and apply some common sense and intelligence when using anonymous Internet forums.

YANBU, often you see people posting
'Don't worry, you can stay in the house, oh and you'll get half his pension, and of course you can stay part time earning low wages, he'll have to support you financially'

Yes of course people should be responsible and understand Mumsnet is not a reliable source of information but I'm staggered by just how crap some of the 'advice' is. I'm sure many people just post what they would like to believe rather than even doing the most basic research

I'd go a bit further and say there are people on here who are (or at least claim to be) legally qualified and then go around providing terrible advice on which they know people will rely and base decisions. These posters do it because they've built a bit of a following on certain boards and get off on the praise they receive. I think it's super dangerous (as a lawyer myself) because they've done no compliance before advising, run no conflicts and have taken no proper instructions.

I once saw a thread where one of these characters was advising a man on educational law around school admissions in circumstances where it was red flags galore for DV, and blindingly obvious that the man asking would use what he was being told to try to exert coercive control of his spouse and daughter. The ex wanted to move in with her mum in a nearby town and register for school there (reception year). The OP said it was about 20 minutes away and he wanted to keep them in his town. The OP was blatantly looking for ways to scupper the schools admission process. It was just awful. It got to a point where three the OP had admitted that his ex was unwilling to be in the house with him and slept in a locked room, and on and on the "advisor" went, taking real umbridge at the fact anyone would question him and his credentials. And refusing to acknowledge the issues with what he was doing.

Well said.

I totally get what you're saying OP but everyone thinks they're an expert. I'm not a lawyer but I do know quite a bit about (for example) the ins and outs of being self-employed, and the ins and outs of DBS checks.

The amount of incorrect advice given is amazing, usually from people who have read something once, or think they know the score and confidently state that it is ILLEGAL not to have a DBS check to be a parent helper on a school trip, or that legally you have to pay your self-employed cleaner when she's off sick.

To be fair though, anyone who takes advice from randomers online on a serious issue such as dealings in the family court or disputes with HMRC is naive at best, downright stupid at worst.

I saw what you did there :)

Planning is another area where completely incorrect information is given. People got PP for a conservatory 20 years ago and think they know everything. Most don't even understand the difference between PP and Building Regs. Very few seem to know that professional chartered town planners exist and advise speaking to architects, surveyors etc. Are adamant on issues that that can't be considered in objections, usually incorrect again.

There is a duty not to mislead the public though under both the SRA CoC and CILEX regulation. Theoretically either can take action against members (or law firm employees who aren’t registered) who call themselves a lawyer without being a barrister, qualified solicitor or CILEX chartered executive. I know firms I’ve worked for wouldn’t allow anyone non qualified to call themselves a lawyer.

I work in employment law though and we all tend to call ourselves “employment lawyers” not “employment solicitors”. I’m not really sure why!

But anyway OP YANBU. The amount of poor advice spouted on the work board is shocking.

“Record the meeting!” being a particular favourite. Along with “it won’t be admissible in court!” plus “speak to ACAS” - no, they’re unqualified call centre workers who read from a script.

The not putting an unmarried father on a birth certificate can work if you know he would not really be arsed. So put a few barriers in his way that are easily overcome and he will give up.

Ohhh yes, I feel you and agree wholeheartedly!

I deeply cringe when I see replies on mumsnet "I'm a lawyer" and then proceed to give 'legal advice', which I know is totally incorrect...but I have to bite my tongue/sit on my hands.

It will not stop though.

Missed that completely 😞

Missed it completely, only one coffee this morning 😔

IME most bad advice on Mumsnet gets contradicted fairly quickly.

It's a bit misleading to go off a single post that says something like "change the locks" and ignore all the posts that come after saying, "no, you can't change the locks".

Well yes, but that’s true of medical advice also, it’s just how forums are.

Most advice does end with see a solicitor, so I think it gets sorted quickly

Get your ducks in a row just means make a plan, which is sensible

I’m a lawyer, but it’s the medical advice on MN that worries me much more.

There was a thread recently where the OP’s daughter was still unwell after being on antibiotics (I think, might be misremembering). In any event, everyone told her to go to A&E and that it must be sepsis. Her daughter was tested and it came back fine but then everyone said no, the doctors are wrong, it’s sepsis so get a second opinion.

She was refusing to be discharged because Mumsnet told her it’s sepsis. It’s absolutely bonkers on here sometimes.

They'd also be able to spell "guarantee".

It’s “guaranteed”

Exactly this. The OP seems to think because they haven't seen it, then it must not be true but lots of professional firms will give a free one hour consultation; it's simply a form of marketing.

It is the same with employment issues, as someone who works in HR I cringe when I see some of the crap dished out on here. It is setting people up with the wrong expectations.

For a lawyer, the typos, spelling and grammar actually make me a little wary of this poster. Edited to add, I can see other people have picked up on this. Surely the word "guarantee" is one that is commonplace in a lawyer's office? As is pro bono and not pro-bono.

Well I did wonder to be honest.

I agree with you to a certain degree. Having worked with solicitors who deal in divorce and family matters, every case is different.

However, I've known of 2 men recently (one is an old friend, one I went on a date with), both of whom let their wives have their houses, not being sold any time soon in the future. Both DH's have told me, they're simply giving up the rights to the houses. In both cases, 1 man has 2 younger teenage DD's so they need to be housed, but their house is NOT being sold at a later date so he can buy.

The second man has a child who's a teenager living at home and at college, again, house NOT being sold at a later date so he can buy.

No idea why they came to this arrangement. Maybe the ex-wives both bought their ex-husbands' shares of the property, maybe that was the agreement, I didn't push further for info as not my business. If I'd wanted to know about divorce/matrimony cases I'd have trained as a lawyer in this area but I can't stand /don't have the patience to listen to people whinge on about their exes (my ex-colleague who worked in this area, half his time was spent listening to ex-DH's/DW's whinge on about the exes, but he billed them for this time, so...) especially when sometimes they're doing this to stall on actual action.

Maybe in both cases, the husbands both had affairs (I think so, from my point of view, what I heard) and behaved badly, so decided to let their ex-wives keep the houses then to be fair.

I would always say, go to see a solicitor about this and not rely on MN advice, but there's nothing wrong in people giving their experiences here. You would have to be spectacularly stupid though, to believe everything you read on MN, especially re legal advice!