Gransnet forums

Legal, pensions and money

Legal wrangle suddenly complicated

(35 Posts)
AlieOxon Wed 07-Oct-15 10:58:22

I need to bounce this off someone. I don't know if anyone has been following my recent bereavement and the things happening after, but - my would-have-been son-in-law K is trying to get parental responsibility for my 14-year-old grandson KN whose father he isn't. KN does not want to go to his actual father who has neglected any responsibility for him for years.

K is at the court at the moment and the father L has suddenly (today) decided to arrive there, he wasn't expected to come.
L has not been investigated by the social services and did not come to the mediation appointment a few weeks ago.

I've told K to point out these two things and to ask for an adjournment.
Is this the right thing to say?

Nelliemoser Wed 07-Oct-15 17:46:30

Allie Well done for fighting your corner here. Keep strong. flowers

AlieOxon Wed 07-Oct-15 18:06:38

Thanks all. I am going to bed early - even if I have to miss the Bake-off!

Iam64 Wed 07-Oct-15 21:17:51

It's good that you were at the end of a phone Allie and excellent news that K now has PR for KL.

Does the birth father already have PR, if he was ever married to KL's mother, he automatically has PR and that may explain why he has a copy of the sw report (if indeed he does, seems very odd to me). As K now has parental responsibility and must be a party to the proceedings (legally that is) he should get copies of reports.

If private law matters become complex, the court sometimes appoints a Children's Guardian to represent the child/young person. The CG appoints a solicitor to act on behalf of the child and given your grandson's age, I'd expect his wishes and feelings to be acted on, unless there is very good reason for them not to be. Most of the family Judges are very experienced, balanced, fair and child centred in their work.

Incidentally on Nonnie's point about reports not be altered even if found to be incorrect, it's true that reports can't be altered. THey can and should be subjected to an addendum report that corrects any previous inaccuracies.

Best of luck with this Allie.

AlieOxon Thu 08-Oct-15 08:49:36

No, KN's mum and L were not married, so he didn't have automatic PR.

If she and K had married (was planned in July) a lot of family problems could have been avoided. But.....

However, the outcome yesterday was ok.

Iam64 Thu 08-Oct-15 09:32:02

It occurred to me after Id posted Allie, that if KL's birth father's name is on the birth certificate, that also ensures he has PR. Having PR gives certain rights but is no guarantee any court would force his son to live with him.

Your point about how marriage would have simplified the legal wranglings is well made. It seems crazy given how many people choose not to marry but don't realise the legal implications.

Nelliemoser Thu 08-Oct-15 09:58:09

Iam64 I am right in thinking that automatic PR only came in in Dec2003 in England.
This lad is only 14.Unless my maths are wrong this lad was born in 2001.
before that so no automatic PR.

www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities/who-has-parental-responsibility

"A mother automatically has parental responsibility for her child from birth.
A father usually has parental responsibility if he’s:

married to the child’s mother
listed on the birth certificate (after a certain date, depending on which part of the UK the child was born in)"

Nelliemoser Thu 08-Oct-15 10:04:20

I am so glad I am no longer working. I used to know this stuff straight off.

www.oneplusone.org.uk/content_topic/married-or-not/children/

From 1st December 2003, fathers who register a child’s birth with the mother automatically gained Parental Responsibility. However this only applies to children who are registered after 1st December 2003.

Where is Iam64 when you need her?

Nelliemoser Thu 08-Oct-15 10:45:03

Should have read Iam64Am I right in thinking.......

Iam64 Thu 08-Oct-15 21:04:36

Nelliemoser is right, apologies for posting without checking the relevant dates.