Child arrangements order- contact/ no contact

[sugarbea]

Hi guys
It's been a very long time since I used mumsnet, please forgive me if I've posed in the wrong category. It's also a very long post 🙈

I've been going through (dragged through) the court process for a child arrangements order (spend time with) for the last 8 months. My two DC have not seen or spent time with Their father in over a year. To keep it as brief as possible the relationship was continuously violent and abusive. The children maintained a relationship after we split 2 years prior to contact stopping. The abuse and violence was witnessed by the children (and after an interview with cafcass we discovered this was inflicted on them too while in his care after the split I wasn't aware of this at the time)
My ds12 and dd7 expressed not wanting to see him anymore and so I stopped contact. 6 months after contact stopped I received a court order. Exp requests every other weekend with dc. I expressed my concerns regarding the dc witnessing dv towards me and filled out an allegations of harm form (10 pages worth).
Ff to cafcass Interview both children are interviewed privately, both ds and dd broke down recalling incidents both witnessed and personal to them. Using police evidence (a number of arrests and 2 dv convictions - one on me, 6 non molestation orders- cafcass recommended no direct or indirect contact and suggest he is assessed for a dvip.
Court date arrives exp comes with a letter suggesting my children are "liars" and "rude" and "brainwashed" but agrees to be assessed for dvipp even though he claims no violence took
Place. (By this point I had produced the court with evidence bundles pics, emails etc as well as the court being in receipt of a letter from my ds)
Dvipp receives referral 2 days later and responds that due to the non recognition of violence they could never recommend either suitability for the course or safe direct or indirect contact.
Ff to next hearing where exp is still denying all abuse and suggests a fact finding hearing. I point out that previous convictions of dv as well as non mol and breach of non mol are statement of fact and the judges agree. An urgent hearing is scheduled in a month requesting cafcass be present as exp disagrees with everything so far.
I think we are just about to jump over the last hurdle. Without the recognition of needed help to become a non violent person the court will have no choice (I think) but to make a no contact order as the violence towards myself was life threatening and the children's versions of accounts are so servere.

Today I received a call from my sons school to say the exp has asked for ds report, attendance and any other intervention (I made the court aware that safeguarding officers at the school were aware of the situation as ds had broken down at school and was scared to walk home on his own)
Now, he has joint pr as he is on birth certificate so he has some rights, however I argued that the likelihood of conclusively no contact and the recommendation twice of no direct or indirect contact (due to it nobeing being safe) is evidence enough to seek advice from the court before giving any information. It's a grey area for me. I've self represented the whole way through. I understand that if an indirect contact order is finalised he will be able to access some things , will a no contact order prohibit this? (Thank you if you have read this far) grin

[DancingLedge]

Sorry, no useful advice, but bumping in the hope that someone else might have some.

My (extremely limited) understanding is that a parent with PR is entitled to info about their child, eg from a school, unless there is a court order preventing it. So , if what is desirable is that the school doesn't supply info, maybe this needs to be stated in the court order?

Sounds like you've had to battle through some hard times, hope this bit gets sorted

[MrsBertBibby]

If you want to restrict his PR by limiting his access to information you will need to apply for a Prohibited Steps order.

You may have an uphill struggle unless you can show that he will use information in a way that harms the children.