Coercive control to force a variation of consent order

[Dacquoise]

Hi there,

I am looking for any legal minds to consider/advise me about my ex husband's behaviour regarding a variation case he has brought against me for spousal maintenance.

Basically he hired a third party to write to me claiming he had financial difficulties, that he needed to alter the spousal maintenance payments and wanted me to attend mediation to avoid an application for a variation. The letter asked me to come up with a proposal. I was advised to ignore the letter.

I received two more communications saying my payments would be altered and he would apply for the variation and for me to come up with a proposal. I ignored them again and he did alter the payments and apply for the variation.

I met him to get to the bottom of it and he continued to play games, refusing to give me any information, pressing me for a proposal and intimating he had a very strong case and that my house was at risk.

I got up and left and engaged a solicitor to deal with it. In the meantime the third party wrote to me again, revealing he had a law degree, and offering a round table for a settlement to avoid court. I was advised by the solicitor to go to court to ensure proper financial disclosure.

So I have now seen the financials, his income has increased by £35k since the divorce but his outgoings gone up substantially due to purchase of new house and non working second wife.

I have gone through six months of psychological hell to this point worrying about this. Turns out he doesn't have a case and has deliberately put me under financial pressure as a result. The third party have promoted the breach of the consent order. He has continued to pay me this way despite receiving a summons for it.

I believe coercion is now a criminal offence as domestic violence. What can I do about this? This is the second time he has tried to undermine the consent order by claiming financial difficulties.

Just to add the reason I ignored it initially was I knew he had moved house but had hidden it from our child. Also I believe one half of the third party, a partnership, is a work colleague of his whom I met at a work do years ago.

So the courticaria ruled he had to keep payments the same? As his circumstances had changed he does have the right to apply for variation so I can't see where any law has been bropened.

Hi, I think you are missing the point or perhaps I haven't explained it very well. His financial circumstances haven't declined, they have increased, not generally a reason to vary. It is his choice to support a non working wife and increase his mortgage. He has tried to get me to renegotiate the consent order pre financial disclosure by using a third party to put pressure on me. He has used them to breach the consent order by altering the payments for no viable reason. I don't think he intended me to defend it at court. He was pressing for me to come up with a proposal without financial disclosure. I have called his bluff by pressing forward with court. However he has put me through six months of mental torture with these mind games.

Not a chance you can take him to task for his litigation strategy. It's not coercive control. He wanted to vary. You refused. He applied to court and was unsuccessful. Meanwhile he reduced maintenance. He is perfectly entitled to do that. His income increased but so did his expenses. He was never going to get his way at court, but he's entitled to have a go. You no doubt will consider using various methods of enforcement to recover arrears. That, too, is not coercive control.

Hi Collaborate, it hasn't gone through court yet, first hearing coming up. My point is he tried to get me to settle beforehand using coercive methods. Got a third party to write to me, changed the maintenance unnecessarily and was pressurising me to come up with a proposal without seeing any evidence of his claims. I don't think he was expecting me to defend the variation application.

A litigant who tries to pressure the other side to settle without disclosure often has something to hide.

Thank you Collaborate. You must see this behaviour all the time. It just seems to me to quite abusive to use litigation or the threat of litigation in this way without consequence. I wonder how many people cave in out of fear.

Not all the time, but it's not uncommon. This is where it helps to have legal representation that can give you the calm reassurance you need not to cave in.

Getting a third party to write to you isn't coercive. After all, it's what people do every time they use a solicitor.

Hi Bash, there's a big difference between an accredited solicitor writing to you and your ex husband's work colleague who just happens to have a 'company' that deals in divorce matters. Unregistered, completely bogus and dodgy and promoting a breach of the consent order. Like the milkman asking to get into your private finances!

And Collaborate, you are absolutely right. I would have caved in if it wasn't for my solicitor. I am fortunate in being able to raise finance. Others aren't.

Surely your ex has the right to hire whoever he wants to represent him? If he chooses the milkman as his representative so be it.

You can only use proper legal representation in court. You are not obliged to communicate with the milkman regarding your divorce matters which makes it a bit suspect and pointless at the end of the day. Why go to all that trouble if it's not for shifty purposes?

You can be represented by anyone in court as long as the judge/mag agrees. (Mackenzie friend.)

The court will take into account the fact he now has a new dependent even though it is choice and it is grounds for variation. However as he is also earning more it should even itself out!

Be smug you won. And smug he is someone else's problem now!!

His wife counts as a dependent so his expenses have gone up. Legally he is entitled to support his own household.

If he has a mortgage then that will also count as expenditure.

What are the terms of your spousal maintenance order? Is it for a fixed period or for life? Are you working yourself?

Have your circumstances changed since the order?

I would focus on the upcoming court case rather than chasing coercive control. You'll just burn through more legal fees with little chance.

A Mackenzie friend isn't a legal representative, they are not allowed to advise. They are there to offer moral support only.

I haven't won yet but I do feel dreadfully sorry for the new wife. Totally financially dependent on an emotionally abusive piece of work. God help her.

A McKenzie friend cannot represent you in court. They can accompany you and offer advice and support.

You are not obliged to communicate with a solicitor regarding your divorce matters either. If he wants someone other than a solicitor to represent him in his dealings with you that is his choice. It is not coercive. Nor is it coercive to try and negotiate a change in the consent order.

You can have non-lawyers to represent you before you get to court. The fact that a communication comes from a friend or colleague doesn't automatically make it more intimidating than if it came from your ex himself or a lawyer. If the individual concerned asked for information about your private finances, you're perfectly entitled to ignore him. In fact, I think I would find a lawyer's letter more worrying as it would confirm that your ex meant business.

Yes I agree, a solicitor's letter is more intimidating. It's the lack of transparency about his reasons for a variation, arbitrary alteration of the maintenance (which turns out to be unnecessary) and insistence on my offering a proposal with zero information that I felt was coercive from these people.

I tried to sort it out with him face to face and he continued to play games whilst insisting I make a proposal.

It's taken a lot of time, worry and solicitor's fees to find out there's no financial reason to vary. It will go to court as I am applying for capitialisation. This is the second time he's tried this on. I just want an end to it.

The marriage was emotionally abusive, mind games, passive aggressive. Feels like a continuation of this, dressed up as his right to apply for a variation.

This is the downside to relying on spousal maintenance. You still have all the court hassle. Clean break settlements and it's over straight away.

Yes totally agree. Would have gone for more assets if I had known this could happen. Hopefully the capitalisation will be successful and I never have to speak to, hear from or ever see this piece of work again. I have done my best to get back to work, maximise my income. Just down to the court to decide my future. I just want to be left in peace.

Yes I agree but not always possible. I would have gone for more assets if I had known this could happen and not allowed myself to be so vulnerable. I am earning the maximum full time salary I am able to. I just want to live in peace.

Oops sorry, trigger finger!