Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to warn against unwise MN advice that could harm you in divorce cases?

84 replies

Seven7s · 26/04/2026 15:37

I’m posting on AIBU because this is where the most recent wild suggestions were made. Please ladies be careful at some of the suggestions made here. I’ve seen some posters giving advice on another thread. Let’s not egg people on to destroy their own standing. I spend time working with women rebuilding themselves and have assisted/ am assisting several who are in the midst of their divorces as litigants in person. I’ve been to court some 30odd times in the last year. Many women don’t qualify for legal aid because they co-own their home but have no cash and can’t afford lawyers having been homemakers. And the first thing the man does is cut them off financially making it more difficult for them to even seek advice on how to obtain litigation loans or apply for LSPO. (Legal services payment order)
Here’s what I can tell you for free. The men’s lawyers typically find it easy to establish a case of irrationality against the women because of things they did whilst upset which no one had told them would damage their case. Pulling some examples from a recent trending thread let me show you some of these:

  • Changing the locks to exclude a badly behaved spouse /Locking a co-owner out of their home = Unlawful eviction / interference with right to occupy. Whilst this is frequently done in movies and around the country, it is the quickest way to show the judge you are controlling. (Caveat unless the man is a physical danger to you and/or the children but even in that case, lack of any police records of you having called the police in the past means the man can dismiss it. That’s why the first time anyone hits or threatens to hit you, or behaves aggressively or spits at you; call the police, this creates an external record which will be invaluable. If your spouse is causing you stress and anxiety (3+ bad nights of sleep, tell your GP, also creates a record. Your GP wont judge, they’ve seen it all)
  • Filming your drink hubby when he’s passed out/ incapacitated in a private home without consent = Misuse of private information / breach of privacy (the courts take a very dim view and won’t even allow whatever evidence you think this is)
  • Filming him beside vomit for evidence and using footage = Controlling or coercive behaviour (Serious Crime Act 2015) [funny enough the law is different if you have indoor cctv and it catches this- the latter is incidental, the former is intentional]
  • Seizing or withholding someone’s passport = Theft / controlling or coercive behaviour
  • Defacing or destroying someone’s passport or ticket = Criminal damage / theft
  • Going through your spouse’s stuff to find tickets or other such documents = breach of privacy, you can no longer introduce documents into legal proceedings if they are documents you found which your spouse had hidden. The court expects that if they were hidden, he has a reasonable right to expect privacy. Even if said documents show he has millions of £ stashed away.
  • I could go on.
Whilst these can feel good at the time to do, will have huge consequences in a divorce. Please do not do anything like this. If contemplating a divorce your best course of action is to be whiter than white, if you feel you might need video evidence, install indoor CCTV in your home and pay for 6 month footage back up plan and download as soon as anything happens. Ring is better, Tapo is okay too but some models are not great. Believe me the difference matters it in court; Document everything and take protective steps before you file anything. I am not saying people should go round filing for divorces but it’s deeply frustrating to see what rings are run round a woman who has been a trusting wife and mother because they are not legal savvy and don’t have representation. As above maybe the same happens to men too so I don’t want to generalise. I’m only speaking from the experiences I know.

I’m not posting this to attract comments. Just a psa from a woman to women/ or anyone who is genuinely not an abuser and is enduring a bad marriage and considering doing any of the above. Don’t.

OP posts:
Theseventhmagpie · 26/04/2026 20:24

I would warn anyone considering paying for a Mackenzie Friend to think long and hard. Save your money and pay for an actual family law solicitor who is regulated and insured.
By all means investigate legal aid- it’s unlikely you’ll get it- and also consider a loan to pay for legal advice (but only as a last resort and only one recommended by your solicitor).
Also be aware that most family law solicitors offer a free initial consultation.
Stay away from pseudo “legal professionals” and divorce coaches- unless you have more money than sense.

Pitythefool · 26/04/2026 20:25

Itsmetheflamingo · 26/04/2026 20:23

This may be ideal but with legal fees to get in front of a judge easily judging £70,£80k, many people are choosing to be LIP with AI support, often only employing a direct access barrister at the end, or not even then in some cases.

and yes the free 30 mins is another MN myth. But if you can navigate your divorce using mediators etc you can minimise legal fees to a couple of consultations.

I know that. But the op has just written a post that suggests a litigant can get effective advice in a half hour free appointment. That simply will not happen.

Itsmetheflamingo · 26/04/2026 20:26

Error404FucksNotFound · 26/04/2026 19:57

Irrationality? Does it even matter now with no fault divorces?

And when it comes to the financial split of assets do people get cash knocked off of their legal entitlement if they went through their ex's post?

Well, madam, you were entitled to 50% of the house but I see here that you went through his pockets and pulled out a ticket so I'm going to have to deduct 5% for that.

I’m on a divorce group and have seen people walk away with poor settlements because they’ve pissed the judge off. It’s not about deducting points for conduct, just the general impression you give can sometimes impact their thought process

Pitythefool · 26/04/2026 20:28

As an example, what experience have you of Scots law @Seven7s? What experience of Northern Ireland?

you said you’d attended court at all levels except for appeal and Supreme Court. So you’ve been to Northern Ireland and attended there? Youve been in front of a Sheriff? Been in the Court of Session?

Itsmetheflamingo · 26/04/2026 20:32

Pitythefool · 26/04/2026 20:28

As an example, what experience have you of Scots law @Seven7s? What experience of Northern Ireland?

you said you’d attended court at all levels except for appeal and Supreme Court. So you’ve been to Northern Ireland and attended there? Youve been in front of a Sheriff? Been in the Court of Session?

Edited

Why are you asking this? She’s clearly said she has none?

also in response to the above- my point is people are using AI in lieu of legal fees, it maybe not be ideal but it’s cheap. I personally won a small claim 6 months ago against a company who were using a solicitor usin mg entirely AI. Now, you can argue small claims isn’t complex law, but divorce isn’t particularly either. If you are smart about it and use it appropriately it can be a useful alternative along with carefully budgeted legal advice

Sensiblesal · 26/04/2026 20:37

ApplebyArrows · 26/04/2026 17:13

OK, maybe post on that thread then because it must be a weird outlier, I haven't seen any of it either.

She did post it on the thread. Majority of them are often mentioned on AIBU where the hubby has done something silly.

the particular thread had someone suggesting throwing bleach on the hubby

Hallamule · 26/04/2026 20:46

MikeRafone · 26/04/2026 16:37

Ive never seen these suggestions on mn until now on this post.

I've seen most of them, the "hide the passort" one only today.

jetlag92 · 26/04/2026 20:51

Seven7s · 26/04/2026 18:05

Absolutely @KimuraTan you’re right. But the scope has in my direct experience been successfully applied even within the home to include things normally locked and used by one person. It was successfully used to argue that it should be applied to a normally locked drawer in the shared home successfully by H’s lawyer. The wife did find material that suggested sizeable assets and the judge refused to view it or admit it.

Edit ps: sorry just seen you already clarified that if it’s their private (not joint) documents it’s tricky.

Edited

But you just claim it wasn't locked.

I'm sorry, but your thread is very odd. Women need to protect themselves and should absolutely obtain evidence if their spouses are behaving badly.

MeetMeOnTheCorner · 26/04/2026 20:52

@TracyBeakerSoYeah Yes that’s interesting. My dd is a family law barrister and in one case, the DH “admitted” to having £2 million. The wife thought that was too low for various reasons. In fact he had £20 million. Yes, forensic accountants. Yes, he tried to hide it. As DD was a very junior (baby barrister) at the time, it went up to a QC (now would be KC) as clearly it was going to be a complex case!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page