Anyone been through a private FDR - what is it like?

[crummyusername]

Hello - after a long long period of attempted negotiation with my (narcissistic, emotionally abusive) ex, my solicitor has recommended a private FDR as a next stage, with barrister representation. I know the basics of how it works, but I would really like to understand what it's like in practice - eg who is in the room, are we all in the room the whole time or do people go in and out for private discussions, would I be speaking or does my barrister do it all for me... etc. If there is anyone who's been through it, can you share your experience?

I was advised by my solicitor to be very wary of a private FDR because what is recommended will depend heavily on who is conducting it. This is rather like court in a way (heavily discretionary) but it could also be conducted by people who are never likely to become judges themselves.

As a man, I was warned against it because of the high likelihood of the person conducting it being a paternalistic old has been (my words!) who would suggest an outcome from the old days when dad was banished to bedsit land and mum got the house, the kids and half his income. In other words, doing the opposite of what was intended (to get a recommended outcome reflective of a court outcome). Apparently retired judges from the bad old days are quite common at private FDR a.

Another "type" that would suit me very well is the female barrister who has no empathy with SAHMs but of course their own recommendations would be so unacceptable to my STBXW that the process would be similarly worthless. As a man myself, I honestly would never agree to a private FDR conducted by a man...

This is generalising but I would only commit to a private FDR if you are both confident in the person conducting it and willing to accept the outcome. Otherwise it is a waste of time and money.

thanks. My solicitor is recommending this route as it’s faster than the public courts, and being private we get to choose the judge, which helps with some of the risks you’re flagging I believe?

Potentially. The difficulty is agreeing on who it should be.

I've been given similar advice to @Bub1765.

It's true that you can choose your judge but how are you going to agree?

In addition as far as I understand it's harder to assess the 'leaning' of the judges who conduct private FDRs because they don't have the same chance to build a known reputation as a judge regularly seen in the regular court.

In my case I can't afford a private FDR so STBEX would have to cover it and that feels lobsided to me and worries me in terms of impartiality.

I know the court system has flaws but I feel I'd rather take my chance in an environment that is more 'me'- whereas everything about a private fdr feels like it belongs in STBEX's world and I think I'd feel intimated and out of place.

I also appreciate the potential benefits of being able to get the FDR much more quickly if it's done privately but you'd need to weigh the additional cost against the shorter wait time. In my case of ExH hadn't dragged everything out we would be nearer the finish line anyway so i feel the timescale is his fault.

I didn't have a private FDR, but went to Final Hearing. I had a female solicitor, and male barrister (I'm a woman). My exH had a male solicitor and a female barrister. The judge was female. My exH wasn't thrilled with the settlement. It was based on the facts and needs, not the fact that I'm a woman!

@BatshitCrazyWoman I've read about your case in the archives of the forum. It had unusual features to it which made your outcome pretty inevitable, but it wouldn't be the outcome in most cases.

I think this is quite poor advice (albeit repeating the advice received from the PP's lawyer). The essence of a private FDR, and indeed a private arbitration if it gets that far, is that the parties appoint their own "judge". This has to be agreed. Your lawyers will advise you on suitable candidates, who will be barristers your lawyers have previous experience of and will therefore know how they are likely to sway.

A significant factor is the recent changes to the Family Procedure Rules, which took effect 29 April 2024, which essentially mean that any case which can "afford" non-court dispute resolution (be that mediation, private FDR or arbitration) should go that route instead of court. In brief, if you go to court without engaging in non-court dispute resolution first, you are required to have reasons why not (which may be cost). If you don't have good enough reasons, you are at risk of an adverse costs order being made against you, and the court may adjourn the proceedings and direct you to engage in non-court dispute resolution before proceeding.

Also you don't HAVE to do a private FDR, you can go straight to an arbitration, which is the private equivalent of a final hearing. In most cases I'd expect that a private FDR would be persuasive and perhaps less costly, but if you've already gone through a proper mediation process (which may involve several sessions) with no agreement then there may be an argument that moving directly to arbitration would be a better use of resources.

I'm looking at a private FDR- we had a court date for this month nd exchanged form E's and then had the STBXH gloat that he had raised loads of questions on my disclosure and I wouldn't be ready in time. Well, the questions were trivial and were answered 24 hours after I receievd them, it's actually HIM who isn't ready as he still hasn't magic'd up a way to buy me out of the house.

Next court date is likely to be just before Christmas which would mean a 2 year long divorce still under the same roof and christmas number 3 here which kills me.

I echo @Elektra1 . Private FDRs are really effective, much more so than court-based ones. You and your ex choose your PFDR evaluator from lists provided for you by your lawyers. They are usually part time or retired judges as well as being barristers or retired barristers and are specialist financial remedy practitioners (unlike many court-based judges, although they will now have had training). They will have a whole day or more to read your case carefully and think about it, rather than in court where the judge might not have any time other than to read position statements and the schedule of assets and case summary. They will give you a considered indication of what is likely to happen at a final hearing. Then you go out and negotiate and reach a settlement you can live with and that isn’t imposed on you. It takes place in chambers / solicitors offices with food and drink provided (you’ll be there all day). You have your own conference room with your legal team to sort through the detail and not have to do it all in public court corridors. And because you each pay for it you’re invested in trying to settle. It’s the best way to settle financial remedy cases. And it can be set up and completed in weeks, rather than waiting 6 months or more for a court hearing.

Thanks for your perspective @Muffintop101. May I ask if you are a lawyer or a barrister or have had a private FDR yourself? I ask because my barrister was less sure that a private fdr was a good option for me.....

@Elektra1 I am confused as to how both parties choose a judge for their fdr that they feel is appropriate if you're suggesting that a person's lawyer can advise them which way a particular one is "likely to sway"?

I work in the field and have done for decades so I’ve seen how it is both before and after the advent of PFDRs. I cannot fathom how they can be less advantageous to anyone other than if one party wants to build in delay, in which case they’d wait for a court FDR, but that’s to the detriment of the other and to any children and, in my view, to that party too as delay prevents them from getting on with their lives and starting again. And I say that as someone going through their own divorce too. I personally just want to get it done.

My experience is that solicitors who don’t like PFDRs are either entirely unfamiliar with them or may (cynically) be wanting to make more money by dragging things out. The more the delay, the more expensive letters get written and the more profit costs are earned. Make no mistake, your lawyers are businesses and you are an ongoing source of income until it’s over, and they can be concerned about that as well as wanting to support you through the process.

I have also found that PFDRs are far more prevalent in London and the South East rather than in other areas of the country and so some areas haven’t caught up with how really good they are for the litigant.

It’s just the best way of getting an informed and considered indication of the relative strengths and weaknesses of your case and how it will be viewed if you go to a final hearing.

All PFDR evaluators will have loads of experience and, as I said, most also sit as judges, so do it in court too. As to finding a suitable evaluator / judge, your lawyers should be able to tell you who would be appropriate for your case - what any particular PFDR judge’s attitude might be to the issues and how fair and balanced they will be, plus their price and availability.

Always remember that you don’t HAVE to settle at PFDR and you can still negotiate while progressing to a final hearing but there should be pressure on you to settle on or shortly after the day.

i know nothing about your case or why your barrister says PFDR might not be right for you, but I think they’re great. The other thing I like about them is that the litigant can have with them any person to support them they think they might need - not in the room with the PFDR judge, but in the conference room with one’s lawyers. That’s so useful if you need a second set of eyes and ears to take it all in and to fill in any gaps.

Good luck!

Thank you very much. The most helpful post I've ever had.

We've adjourned the upcoming FDA as his sodebare refusing to use it as a FDR. We've suggested a private FDR but they've refused to agree to that too "yet." Certainly feels like it's a case of dragging things out and keeping him in the house (lowest cost accomodation as privately renting would be more and he can't buy on his own) or his solicitor is after getting some more cash from him!

Very helpful thanks. Hoping to settle before a hearing but it’s reassuring to hear it can be a good process. Fees are scary but my ex’s proposal is so way off what’s fair that it May be worth doing if he won’t budge.