So I am being taken to court (again) as apparently I obstruct contact between the children and their dad.
Ex is currently living quite far away from the former marital home (his choice), around 3.5-4 hours driving or 5-6 on public transport (depending on trains). The children are young primary age. There has been limited contact so far (voluntarily from his side, he's been busy).
His proposal is that I make the first leg of the journey to drop off the children every other weekend. It will have to start at 6.30pm on Friday (the earliest I can get from work to the childminder), and then a long journey with minimum four changes to drop them off around midnight at the father's place. There are no trains back after midnight, so I will have to find somewhere to stay in that town until the next day - and then spend half of Saturday getting back home.
I said no to the above and it has been declared as preventing meaningful contact. Surely if you're the one choosing to live far away, you should do the trips yourself? He is quite well off financially and has a rented out property near where the children live, it is not that he had to go for a more affordable option.
Do you think the court will be inclined to agree with him? Really don't want to spend £10000s on counsel again, it is not the first and not the second litigation, just can't face it.