Divorce has taken almost 3 years

Jessiegirl1 · 2014-08-17T06:46:00+00:00

My solicitor put absolute in a few weeks back but it came back saying need to explain the delay. Will the solicitor need me to sign the reason for delay or will she just send it in?

vickylu1 · 17/08/2014 08:42

I think you need to speak with your solicitor to confirm this one. :) wow, 3 years! Yikes, hope you're ok.

Lonecatwithkitten · 17/08/2014 08:54

I'm in a similar position. My solicitor has kept records of when she sent things to ExH and when he finally replied.

Original poster

Jessiegirl1 · 17/08/2014 09:06

Ah thats good lonecat, i think my solicitors done the same. Its just been delayed because of ex amending things and waiting for him to pay his solicitors sothongs could move along.
Pretty basic reasons.

Just wasn't sure whether it can go in without my signature. Will ask my solicitors assistant on tuesday when shes back in the office.

Its been 4 years since we separated be glad when its done as im in a happy relationship and want to the knot.

OP posts:

Original poster

Jessiegirl1 · 17/08/2014 09:08

Apologies early mornings.

Sothongs meaning so things

Want to knot meaning tie the knot

OP posts:

Lonecatwithkitten · 17/08/2014 09:42

Don't tie yourself in a knit my solicitor assured me that judges see this kind of procrastination regularly.

EarthWindFire · 17/08/2014 12:56

I can see that it easily take that long if you've had to go through court etc to sort out finances and childcare arrangements.

I'm sure judges see it all the time.

WellWhoKnew · 18/08/2014 01:56

You simply need to explain why it's taken so long.

In reality, the petitioner can get the absolute within six weeks (ish) and the respondent within 3/4 months. It is often the case that the Absolute does not get issued until the Final Order (finances) and Childcare Arrangements are agreed.

If these have delayed it - then there are questions to answer.

No divorce should take three years.

It may also be 'neither of us could agree who should pay the absolute fee' so we've fought over £60 ish quid for three years. Yes, STBXH I'm looking at you and your first wife, and your best friend and his wife.

I paid both (for the record!).

EarthWindFire · 18/08/2014 07:22

No divorce should take three years

Yes they can if you go right through the system. There is a big back log in some courts.

My partners divorce took longer. Going through court for for finances as a consent order couldn't be agreed ment at least 4-5 months between appointments and at one point 7 months.

Lonecatwithkitten · 18/08/2014 10:15

WellWhoKnew you would be astounded how divorces can drag out nothing to do with paying fees. ExH left me for other woman. He has taken between 4 and 6 months to reply to every single letter from my solicitor. I am paying for the whole divorce. So it took 9 months to get a DN, so far we are at a staggering 11 months on financial consent order - he has disagreed with virtually nothing just doesn't reply. Don't even get me started on children.
When faced with total inactivity you have two choices go to court and get a time table wasting huge amounts of money or wait it out - much cheaper.

WellWhoKnew · 18/08/2014 11:10

I can assure you I won't be astounded how divorces can drag out.

I merely stated that no divorce should take three years. The fact that they do does not astound me - divorces can be bitterly contested! It doesn't sound like the OP's issue is that it's bitterly contested but procedural.

If it's not timetabled then that's why it takes so long - there is nothing to compel the other person to the negotiation table.

I didn't assume the only reason was paying the fees - I just happen to know two people who forced it to happen that way! Yes, the judge was unimpressed.

Yes, timetabling is expensive - but it does get things set in motion and force the other party to co-operate with the divorce, meaning you can both get on with your lives again. However, waiting it out can be advantageous and disadvantageous - depending on your individual circumstances.

The judge, however, will want to know, in the absence of a timetable why it has taken so long, and whether this is reasonable.

I say again - no divorce should take three years, and it's possible to apply for an absolute without the financial order in place (indeed this is what will happen to me as I'm the respondent).

EarthWindFire · 18/08/2014 12:32

Yes it is possible to apply for the absolute without the financials however judges have and do refuse to grant it without having a consent/court order for financial relief and child arrangements in place. It is also not advisable to do so.

The divorce itself is fairly straightforward and it isn't that which is contested. Solicitors advise not to contest the divorce as it costly and a waste of time. The part that is contested is the finances and child arrangements.

EarthWindFire · 18/08/2014 12:37

Oh and if you go all the way to a final hearing through the court system then yes it can take 3 years.

Courts in many areas have huge backlogs as I've said. Even the FDA first appointment which is usually scheduled to last about an hour, courts are issuing dates 4 months in advance. Add in FDR, direction hearings, ang postponements and then a one, two day or even more final hearing and you are heading into years.

WellWhoKnew · 18/08/2014 13:04

It may not be advisable, but it is possible to divorce without agreement on ancillary matters. The Anc. Relief is separate to the divorce decree. They are not assumed to be joint, it's just they often are made joint in order to prevent things dragging on for years, and to force the participants to resolve their differences. Delaying a divorce can be an effective way of doing that, and one that judges don't hesitate to use if they believe it will work.

There are a few occasions when it is better to divorce quickly and deal with the AR after. Not many, though because of the pension issue.

I will be divorced in 2014. The AR may drag on for years. I will still be divorced.

I stand by my view no divorce should take three years, the fact that they do needs to be explained, which is what the judge in this instance has asked the OP to do.

I suspect we are arguing the same side of the same coin.

Original poster

Jessiegirl1 · 18/08/2014 13:09

It is shocking the length of time.
I just hope this us the final stage and get the absolute through.
I will be free from all his negativity and will only have to deal with him through my daughters arrangements.

Thanks for all the advice and info all taken on board :)

OP posts:

EarthWindFire · 18/08/2014 13:58

The judge as I have said can refuse to grant the absolute until finances are sorted. This has and is happening.

As I have said I know they are not joint but it hasn't stopped and doesn't stop judges refusing to grant an absolute until finances are sorted.

TeapotDictator · 18/08/2014 19:18

At the moment WellWhoKnew the wait at the Central Family Court for a
Final Hearing date is about 10 months - a friend had hers listed for March 2015 whilst at her May FDR.

Saying no divorce should take three years is rather academic really. They often do, and far longer, for a variety of reasons.

We separated Jan 2013, I petitioned the following month, and we're yet to have our FDR. It's most tedious.

WellWhoKnew · 18/08/2014 19:59

I know all this first hand.

The fact that 'should' is not equal to 'does' is what is causing some confusion here.

The judge just wants to know why. If they are having a timetabled divorce, the judge knows why!

It's clear they are not so he just wants to know why.

It's truly not my fault we are all getting divorced, having endless problems reaching settlement and clogging up the courts - I merely commenting on the fact it should not take 3 years to get divorced.

I am not saying it doesn't!

If the wait for Final Hearing is ten months, then it is clearly 26 months shorter than three years. Unless I've missed something.

I agree it's tedious. I would like to negotiate my divorce settlement but STBXH refuses to fill in a Form E. So I've timetabled it. He got awarded my costs for his behaviour - a very rare thing indeed. I am utterly and totally aware of the process. I know that if he keeps refusing to co-operate he will get a penal notice. If he then refuses to comply, he may well get sent to prison.

Ergo, I may end up with a three year divorce.

Most people realise that the sooner you sort out your settlements and agree childcare, the sooner you get divorced.

Ergo, I have to wait along with everyone else for court hearings.

Around 6 months is average for a 'quick divorce'. But it won't take 3 years with a timetabled divorce unless it goes all the way to the High Court because we've discovered a grey area of law that needs clarifying, or you husband is a twat of the highest order, or we have so much of a grudge that we refuse to budge on anything. Those are the exception not the rule.

Most people manage to get divorced within 6/8 months because both parties co-operate with the process and get it sorted out.

Ergo I will have a longer divorce. It is highly unlikely to last three years even if I lived in central London and relied on the timetabling.

That's why a divorce should not last three years. If it does, something has gone very wrong. That's what the judge wants to know....

What's gone wrong?

TeapotDictator · 18/08/2014 20:10

Well - I've read your posts before and know where you are at with your journey. You are not alone. I am in court on Thursday with my own penal notice application against my husband. I have to date spent over £25,000 on legal fees with a man my lawyer describes as "the worst husband I have yet to encounter".

I do think the tone of your messages is edging on haughty and superior, as though by dint of your own experience you have the ability to cut through all other people's comments.

You are correct with your arithmetic in that 36 minus 10 does indeed equal 26. Congratulations As I'm sure you are aware, if it takes 10 months for a FH appointment the first appointment and FDR will also have taken several months each. In my case the first appointment was cancelled due to lack of disclosure, and prior to even getting a first appointment the court lost my file for six months, along with a whole host of other issues.

I can see that you are pushing the difference of 'should' and 'does', but please try not to patronise. Clearly the judge is asking for an explanation of why this has happened. You clarifying by saying that the judge has the right to ask that because in theory it should not take three years really doesn't help anybody on this thread, nor answer the question to hand.

TeapotDictator · 18/08/2014 20:12

PS I apologise for my grumpy post. I have just found out about court attendance on Thursday and it's yet another thing in a long line of utter shite that I'm having to deal with in this divorce. My apologies.

EarthWindFire · 18/08/2014 23:14

You are correct with your arithmetic in that 36 minus 10 does indeed equal 26. Congratulations As I'm sure you are aware, if it takes 10 months for a FH appointment the first appointment and FDR will also have taken several months each. In my case the first appointment was cancelled due to lack of disclosure, and prior to even getting a first appointment the court lost my file for six months, along with a whole host of other issues.

DPs case was similar to this and it DID take over three years.

WellWhoKnew Whether or not it should is irrelevant because it did!

There's was a ' timetabled' divorce as you put it and it still took that long and I am aware of others that have too and no it didn't go to High Court either!

Even the sealed consent order from the FH took way over two months to be received.

The reality is that courts are getting blocked so even if people are sorting out finances themselves and just sending in consent orders to be sealed, they are taking longer than they used to.