Page 2 | Not sure about new man

AceofPentacles · 16/09/2023 20:19

Could he be lying? And just has abandoned his kids? Either way doesn't sound good .

boomtickhouse · 16/09/2023 20:44

Ell003 · 16/09/2023 17:21

My new partner has 3 kids. He's been to court many times for contact. He's only allowed to write a letter every 2 weeks to his his children. Anyone any experience with this setup???

He's either a very bad man or he's lying (and therefore still a pretty bad man).

Either way, not the one for you.

littlebopeepp234 · 16/09/2023 21:14

I have been through court over my ex having access to the children and he was abusive but he was still granted contact with our children and has them at weekends.

For this man to have gone to court multiple times and still only allowed to write letters means he must have done something extremely bad, either to his children or his ex or both! Courts don’t completely stop access for no reason! Let me guess, he also slates his ex and claims she is ‘crazy’ or words to that effect!

Original poster

Ell003 · 16/09/2023 21:33

Yeah. He's said his ex was abusive and is making up lies about him. My gut is telling me otherwise. Thanks for the reply.

OP posts:

Mutters123 · 16/09/2023 21:39

Not sure, in the case of my DP it’s definitely the bitter ex wife. She’s told him he has to go through social services to see DS! We’ve been together for 9 years so I’ve seen the legal paperwork and know him well enough to know that there is no genuine reason for this other than her bitterness and attempts to punish him. I would do checks and be cautious at this stage.

littlebopeepp234 · 16/09/2023 21:51

Ell003 · 16/09/2023 21:33

Yeah. He's said his ex was abusive and is making up lies about him. My gut is telling me otherwise. Thanks for the reply.

If you do your research on abusers they always claim the victim was an abuser. Funny how the court granted her full access but him nothing apart from letters! Yeah she’s really abusive, so abusive that the court feels the kids are safe in her hands but not his!! Says it all really.
Sorry op but this man is bad news! His ex stopped contact with the children for a reason, he has been to court and still cannot get access. As I said, for a court to only grant letter writing and not even at least give him supervised access would tell me that he has done something seriously bad.
He sounds not only abusive but dangerous.

MagpiePi · 16/09/2023 21:54

I probably wouldn’t bother with a Clare’s law enquiry, I’d be running for the hills.

littlebopeepp234 · 16/09/2023 21:55

Mutters123 · 16/09/2023 21:39

Not sure, in the case of my DP it’s definitely the bitter ex wife. She’s told him he has to go through social services to see DS! We’ve been together for 9 years so I’ve seen the legal paperwork and know him well enough to know that there is no genuine reason for this other than her bitterness and attempts to punish him. I would do checks and be cautious at this stage.

Has your dp actually been to court over this though? And if so, what’s the reason the court ruled he still can’t see his children?

happygertie · 16/09/2023 21:56

You could could contact police and request a Claire's law to see if there's previous domestic abuse and Sarah's law to see if there's any previous sexual abuse.

He won't be informed that you made the application

AlwaysGinPlease · 16/09/2023 21:57

I'm surprised you can even see him through the fuck ton of red flags

misssunshine4040 · 16/09/2023 21:58

Why bother with Claire's Law? Your gut is you he's bad news just dump him.
Do you really want that drama

Motherofalittledragon · 16/09/2023 22:03

He sounds really bad news, dump and run.

LemonadePockets · 16/09/2023 22:03

My dad fought for years bro see his son, was only allowed to see him in a contact centre because of the vile lies made up by the child’s mother. It’s since been described as one of the worst cases of parental alienation the court had seen 😞

however only being able to write to them seems a bit heavy handed, a Claire’s law check will put your mind at ease. Please tread carefully OP.

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 16/09/2023 23:01

Pinkbonbon · 16/09/2023 17:36

I think if you want to continue things, certainly run a Claires law check on him. To see if there's been reported abuse in his past.

Don't get pregnant and don't move in with him.
And read up on how to spot abusers. Eg common abuser tactics such as love bombing, gaslighting, narcissistic triangulation (when they play you off against/compare you to other women such as their ex)

And a Sarah's law

Unexpectedlysinglemum · 16/09/2023 23:03

Ell003 · 16/09/2023 19:23

Thanks for the replies. I've just put in a request for a clares law check.

DONT TELL HIM

Pinkbonbon · 17/09/2023 00:11

The thing is they don't just stop fathers seeing their children on the word of the mother. There needs to be record of criminal offence towqrds her or them or proof in some way that he is a serious risk to them. So even if she was a manipulative, controlling nightmare...his access wouldn't be stopped by a court.

RantyAnty · 17/09/2023 00:26

It means he's a bad man.
Just get rid.

Mutters123 · 17/09/2023 01:34

Without going into too much detail, no he hasn’t. He can see his DC at other times when they are not with the mother so he didn’t feel it was necessary to fight it at the moment. This might change depending on living arrangements in the future so it might still need to be fought in court. This isn’t a court ruling but the request came from the ex’s solicitor during the divorce. It said that he had to take her to court if he wanted to see them. I was just trying to illustrate that there isn’t always a reason other than the bitterness of the mother. I would still be cautious with a new man though!

CheekyHobson · 17/09/2023 01:55

user1471518104 · 16/09/2023 18:34

Or his ex was bitter and used the kids against him maybe ?

Very unlikely.

She would have to be making extremely strong allegations against him for contact to be restricted to letter-writing, and the court - who have heard this case multiple times now - would have wanted to see clear evidence in support of these accusations before they would make such an extreme ruling.

OP I notice you call him your "new partner"... I'm not sure if you're using the word "partner" as a synonym for "boyfriend" but if he really is your partner (ie someone you've been seeing for quite a long time and have made a decision to build a future together, it's a massive red flag that you don't know the full details of his custody battle by now.

If you're using the word "partner" to mean the same thing as "boyfriend" or even "person I'm dating", maybe take a step back and reflect on whether you have a tendency to rush into relationships and mentally/emotionally commit to someone before you have really put the time in to get to know him properly.

littlebopeepp234 · 17/09/2023 05:04

Mutters123 · 17/09/2023 01:34

Without going into too much detail, no he hasn’t. He can see his DC at other times when they are not with the mother so he didn’t feel it was necessary to fight it at the moment. This might change depending on living arrangements in the future so it might still need to be fought in court. This isn’t a court ruling but the request came from the ex’s solicitor during the divorce. It said that he had to take her to court if he wanted to see them. I was just trying to illustrate that there isn’t always a reason other than the bitterness of the mother. I would still be cautious with a new man though!

But in the op’s case the man has been to court and has been stopped contact. Courts do not stop contact for no reason. There HAS to be a reason backed up by evidence as to why they have not granted contact. It is extremely unusual for a court not to grant access, even if it’s at a contact centre so for a court to rule that he has NO contact apart from letter writing tells us that this man is seriously dangerous. So trying to illustrate there isn’t always a reason when it’s very clear this man has been to court and has been told NO he cannot see his children means there obviously is a reason why he cannot see them and it boils down to far more than just ‘bitterness’ from the ex. The court won’t just take the ‘ex’s’ word for it, there has to be evidence showing that he would be a danger to the children. As I said, it is extremely rare for a court to say ‘no access whatsoever’ so this guy must have done something pretty bad.

Olika · 17/09/2023 07:36

Always listen to your gut feeling.

AtalantaX · 17/09/2023 08:18

Please don’t be naive.
My exH was allowed a once-a-month letter only to my daughter (he doesn’t bother though), and social work made clear to me and school we were to not let her have any direct contact until aged sixteen. 999 immediately if he came anywhere near. I won’t go in to details why, but the police had to be involved multiple times regarding his abuse of her.

alwaysmovingforwards · 17/09/2023 08:56

Sounds like drama to me. Do you need drama?

TucSandwich · 17/09/2023 09:00

Your "partner"?

IdealisticCynic · 17/09/2023 09:03

I think your gut is correct. The courts do not order only indirect contact on the basis of allegations alone. It is astonishingly difficult for women who have been abused (even with evidence) to prevent any direct contact with the children. The family courts must have deemed him genuinely dangerous to not even allow supervised contact. It is a very, very, rare outcome. He probably went to the court many times as a way to extend abuse via family proceedings - it’s a very common tactic by abusers these days.

Swerve him. Immediately.