Representing yourself in court for custody - 'Litigants in Person'

[AnonymousDaddy]

Hello,

Following my ex wife withdrawing from mediation I have now been issued with a signed C100. I really didn't want to have to go to court for a number of reasons but I guess these things can't be helped.

I have had to take a wage cut and reduced hours so I can pick my kids up and drop them off to school 50% of the week, which means my income is not at it's best right now. I have done some research and it seems it's quite common for someone to represent themselves when it comes to court but on other websites it makes it seem quite scary and obviously.

So my question is, has anyone had any experience and/or has advice when it comes to reperesenting yourself in court.

(for the record I have begged for it to not go down this route but have been told it is the only way. My ex is represented with free legal aid and my earnings are just above the threshold for funding - I am NOT trying to file for full custody, I am only looking for 50%, however, my ex only wants me to have them 1 day during the week and every other weekend)

Be very careful. My partner was a litigant in person and is not good with public speaking etc. He ended up with a few hours a week with the children and no overnights. He was made out to be a monster and the mum an angel and he had no defence. The kids begged cafcass to see more of their dad but the mum's barrister was brilliant, whereas my partner (who is neuro diverse) really struggled. Judges hate litigants in person and will have lots of conversations with the other side's legal team, ignoring the litigant in person. Before you know it, it's all been agreed and you are tied up in knots. Sorry not to be more positive.

Questions, you keep mentioning you have reduced your hours by 25% in order to do pick up/drop off. Has that been since the separation? If so, who did it prior? Secondly, your youngest is only 2, do you feel that at that age being away from either parent for that length of time is in that child's interest?

Judges hate litigants in person and will have lots of conversations with the other side's legal team, ignoring the litigant in person. Before you know it, it's all been agreed and you are tied up in knots. Sorry not to be more positive

I'm not sure thats accurate in every case?
My partner died, we were not married and the the mums parents went for custody, using a very expensive legal team, i represented myself and won full custody and parental responsibility.
Appreciate its a different set of circumstances & i also had the help of my cousin, an ex family court barrister (for advice) but she said the courts do like people who can represent themselves.

FWIW We all get on extremely well now, they'd just lost their daughter, i can understand why they did what they did.

My observations are that judges want to do the right thing by all litigants as that reflects their judicial oath: they also don't want their time wasted. Again, I note, I'm not UK but I can't imagine things are very different.

The better way to think about this is to consider what a lawyer does. Advocacy in the courtroom is hard. Lawyers know what to get into evidence and what isn't. They know what the court needs to hear and what it doesn't. They know how to turn the evidence into a narrative that makes sense and present that narrative to the court. They also know how to pick apart an opponent's case and reframe it negatively using cross-examination etc. It's what they're trained to do.

It isn't just a matter of telling your story, or telling the court how it is. Judges know that there are as many sides to a story as there are people involved, and they want to do justice, but in the end their responsibility is to pick the winner.

Can a lay litigant beat a lawyer? Absolutely, given a smart lay litigant versus a lawyer having a bad day with a weak case. But is that case yours?

I'd suggest the OP at least consults a lawyer. That's not going to mean he has to engage that lawyer to represent him.

@GPOTech I'm glad it worked out for you. It sounds like a different scenario, nor between parents but a parent and grandparents. The parent will always be at an advantage, even if you're the dad. When I commented on a previous thread that judges were anti LIP a lawyer came on to say yes it's true, they are because they want to deal with people who understand the complexities of the law and are like them. My partner didn't stand a chance. It was frightening. For example, mum got a day at the fact finding, he got 15 minutes at the end, mum was able to make baseless accusations and was believed, when he raised concerns about her violence which was reported by the children, it was suggested the children had made it up to please him. Very distressing and the children are deeply traumatised by the whole process.