Final FDR Cross Examination Questions

During my final FDR hearing in 9 days I am unable to directly ask questions to my wife.

I need to submit a list of cross examination questions to the court.

I am struggling to effectively word questions to be presented.

What, specifically am I trying to achieve in these questions?

What is the source of the questions? My assumption is the court bundle, her s25, financial disclosure, and ES1/ES2 forms? Am I correct? Am I missing anything?

Basically you ask her questions about anything you disagree over.

David Terry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Basically you ask her questions about anything you
> disagree over.

I get that. duh!

But what am I trying to prove?

am I trying to prove shes lying?
am I trying to prove she can work when she claims she cant?
am i trying to prove she intentionally prevented me earning a living?

What am i actually trying to prove with my questions?

>>What am i actually trying to prove with my questions?

Only you know the answer to that.

David Terry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>What am i actually trying to prove with my
> questions?
>
> Only you know the answer to that.


Thats just not true.

Only someone with experience of divorce court (and I will NEVER be here again) knows what the court is looking for in making decisions. I could easily oust her as having no physical evidence of the abuse claims. However I suspect this is not relevent to the case.

I can prove she states herself unable to work, yet in one attack video she is telling me she is starting a new job after christmas. another time she refused to let me sit in peace and watch TV because she as applying for work. Yet she maintains she CANT work.

I can show that she told the court she was homeless and needed to move back to the FMH. Then when I agreed readily, she stayed where she was, clearly was not homeless and never took residence in the house.

I can also show that when I asked for my personal possessions to be returned, she said she could not afford to retrieve them and I could only have them if I payed her storage costs. Two weeks ago when I took our son back for Uni, she readily provided his bicylce which was in the storage container, without issue. I still do not have my possessions.

So my question is just what direction should the cross examination take, in order to have the best possible chance of winning the favour of the court?

>>So my question is just what direction should the cross examination take, in order to have the best possible chance of winning the favour of the court? <<

How can anyone here possibly know? Only you and your wife (and your wife's solicitors) will know what the issues are. In every divorce the issues are different. There isn't a one size fits all guide for cross examination.

I am not a source of truth on the matter but what i can tell you is that I just spent an entire day at a private FDR. The judge did not seem overly concerned with anything other than - how much money there is, can either party work, and how to settle the matter and divide the assets. Any blame or mudslinging was not received well or paid much attention. My wife's barrister did rant some about me in an unsuccessful attempt to challenge my character and the pFDR judge was not impressed, basically shooting down much of what she ranted about.

My wife had run up so much debt I could yell for days at the unjustness of it but the judge is not interested. It's about here, now, and how to move forward and all that debt is factored into the division of assets and in this case me having to foot the tab no matter how 'fair' or not it is.

My wife also had spent 2 years trying to build a case of inability not to work due to ill health. Her doctors visits and mystery illnesses conveniently accelerated as the divorce outcome neared but to be honest despite my fear she may be successful with this, to date the judge didn't seem to be interested. Despite wife taking lots of time off, the bottom line is that she is actually working so he wasn't overly concerned that she will not be able to work moving forward.

catexon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am not a source of truth on the matter but what
> i can tell you is that I just spent an entire day
> at a private FDR. The judge did not seem overly
> concerned with anything other than - how much
> money there is, can either party work, and how to
> settle the matter and divide the assets. Any blame
> or mudslinging was not received well or paid much
> attention. My wife's barrister did rant some about
> me in an unsuccessful attempt to challenge my
> character and the pFDR judge was not impressed,
> basically shooting down much of what she ranted
> about.
>
> My wife had run up so much debt I could yell for
> days at the unjustness of it but the judge is not
> interested. It's about here, now, and how to move
> forward and all that debt is factored into the
> division of assets and in this case me having to
> foot the tab no matter how 'fair' or not it is.
>
> My wife also had spent 2 years trying to build a
> case of inability not to work due to ill health.
> Her doctors visits and mystery illnesses
> conveniently accelerated as the divorce outcome
> neared but to be honest despite my fear she may be
> successful with this, to date the judge didn't
> seem to be interested. Despite wife taking lots of
> time off, the bottom line is that she is actually
> working so he wasn't overly concerned that she
> will not be able to work moving forward.

That is a massive help. Thank you. It is a little upsetting, knowing that her over-use of legal services is going to be half my problem no matter what. However, your first hand contribution to this thread has given me a clear direction for next weeks hearing. And I shall avoid the mud slinging, and let her side have their day...hopefully the judge will see through it. Thank you.

In the early stages of the divorce even I was under the impression that all the tit for tat would have some bearing on the process. My wife was exhausting herself trying to damage my character and creating stories that painted me in a bad light. All the communication was littered with he did this, he did that etc etc.. All just petty stuff that was clearly what I'd deem a 'woman on a war path' and intent to have revenge for me leaving her at any expense.

I didn't go down that path but did spend a level of unnecessary energy at some stages defending various comments, and feeling I needed to give my own two pence. My legal council was not interested and said she could say whatever she liked. My barrister at the time used a somewhat distasteful yet amusing example saying "you could literally beat your partner black and blue and it's unlikely to have any bearing on this process". That surprised me, but then nothing surprises me anymore about this process. Take that with a pinch of salt but you get the point she was trying to illustrate and for the record that example has no relation to my case whatsoever.

It may be different in other cases but this is my experience. Still going, and still trying to get a divorce but in England, it seems so backward, slow, and inefficient that I struggle to see how this thing is ever going to end until everything is gone. It's not what any guy wants to hear, but my other observation is that the system is wholly weighted toward the female party. Literally, I've been on the backfoot this entire process and if you earn more money forget it. You are viewed as the bank and they're going to want you to pick up the tab. It's unreal.

catexon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the early stages of the divorce even I was
> under the impression that all the tit for tat
> would have some bearing on the process. My wife
> was exhausting herself trying to damage my
> character and creating stories that painted me in
> a bad light. All the communication was littered
> with he did this, he did that etc etc.. All just
> petty stuff that was clearly what I'd deem a
> 'woman on a war path' and intent to have revenge
> for me leaving her at any expense.
>
> I didn't go down that path but did spend a level
> of unnecessary energy at some stages defending
> various comments, and feeling I needed to give my
> own two pence. My legal council was not interested
> and said she could say whatever she liked. My
> barrister at the time used a somewhat distasteful
> yet amusing example saying "you could literally
> beat your partner black and blue and it's unlikely
> to have any bearing on this process". That
> surprised me, but then nothing surprises me
> anymore about this process. Take that with a pinch
> of salt but you get the point she was trying to
> illustrate and for the record that example has no
> relation to my case whatsoever.
>
> It may be different in other cases but this is my
> experience. Still going, and still trying to get a
> divorce but in England, it seems so backward,
> slow, and inefficient that I struggle to see how
> this thing is ever going to end until everything
> is gone. It's not what any guy wants to hear, but
> my other observation is that the system is wholly
> weighted toward the female party. Literally, I've
> been on the backfoot this entire process and if
> you earn more money forget it. You are viewed as
> the bank and they're going to want you to pick up
> the tab. It's unreal.

Pretty much what I've found so far. Lets see how my two day long hearing goes in 4 days time.

catexon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In the early stages of the divorce even I was
> under the impression that all the tit for tat
> would have some bearing on the process. My wife
> was exhausting herself trying to damage my
> character and creating stories that painted me in
> a bad light. All the communication was littered
> with he did this, he did that etc etc.. All just
> petty stuff that was clearly what I'd deem a
> 'woman on a war path' and intent to have revenge
> for me leaving her at any expense.
>
> I didn't go down that path but did spend a level
> of unnecessary energy at some stages defending
> various comments, and feeling I needed to give my
> own two pence. My legal council was not interested
> and said she could say whatever she liked. My
> barrister at the time used a somewhat distasteful
> yet amusing example saying "you could literally
> beat your partner black and blue and it's unlikely
> to have any bearing on this process". That
> surprised me, but then nothing surprises me
> anymore about this process. Take that with a pinch
> of salt but you get the point she was trying to
> illustrate and for the record that example has no
> relation to my case whatsoever.
>
> It may be different in other cases but this is my
> experience. Still going, and still trying to get a
> divorce but in England, it seems so backward,
> slow, and inefficient that I struggle to see how
> this thing is ever going to end until everything
> is gone. It's not what any guy wants to hear, but
> my other observation is that the system is wholly
> weighted toward the female party. Literally, I've
> been on the backfoot this entire process and if
> you earn more money forget it. You are viewed as
> the bank and they're going to want you to pick up
> the tab. It's unreal.


here is a question then....Is it worth me producing an unbiased fair settlement thar the court should enforce? OR should I weight any settlement agreement in my direction, knowing that there will be an element of negotiation involved?

I am more than happy to be unbiased. However I know her side will not me. Her barrister is very much producing arguments which go above and beyond a financial argument and attempt to disparage my character. They will no doubt not put forward an unbiased settlement offer.

Should I submit to the court a true fsir settlement ? or should I weiught it toward me knowing I will need to negotiate?

I am currently dissecting my wife's S25 statement, which is bssdically an emotional account of her opinion towards me. She makes statements such as....(direct copy and paste)

Quote
There are days when I am unable to leave the house, see anyone or engage in normal
day to day activities. Infrequently, but increasingly more recently, I am able to go shopping
or enjoy time with my family on days out. I am still unable to socialise in public spaces and
have limited and infrequent contact with my friends, most of whom I no longer see in
person.

In her evidence, she has included photographs of her medication, however there is no disclosed fit note.
I have provided a fit note until te end of October.

The quote above, to me, would seem irreevant. However failing to provide a fit note from her GP would not. I want to suggest to the court that BOTH her and I, following the conclusion of these proceedings should be capable of working and independence.

How do I, when her barrister undoubtedly reads this out in court, shut this down, without annoying the judge?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/24/2023 11:13PM by spartacus.

This is something I was speaking to David about and am going to discuss further with my own solicitor this week.

So far as I understand, you would need to put forward a proposal 'without prejudice'. The pFDR I had, the entire purpose of the day is to be able to negotiate without any of the proposals being used as 'evidence' later down the line. Also, any proposal in this manner is likely to make far more concessions in an effort to reach a settlement. If this goes to a final hearing I don't want any such proposals that aren't heavily weighted in my favour so its an entirely different dynamic.

My example is this - we did not reach an agreement at the pFDR despite numerous proposals back and forth. In the coming weeks, I am hoping to be able to put forward more proposals 'without prejudice' hoping that we can settle. Her solicitors may be thinking of doing the same because the costs are already out of control. If however, this goes to a final hearing and we can not align, then very soon we will need to make an 'open offer'. I believe (I need to confirm with my solicitor) that the 'open letter' will be less lenient, less concessions made and weighted as much in my favour as possible. This is because the courts will have this document and use is as a reference point in future. So there is absolutely no point to use our lowest bargaining position as you set a precedent.

Honestly, I and my representation feel adamant that we have be overly fair in this entire process. We have put forward practical and realistic proposals that support both sides financially even though I've always weighted in in the W's favour because I know the reality is the court is going to lean that way in any settlement particularly as I'm a much bigger earner.

My wife on the other hand is not operating within the confines of reality. Their proposals are literally 'we want most everything'. Even when the pFDR judge has said it is highly unlikely to be accepted at a final hearing. They don't seem to care and are sticking with their guns about taking everything but I expect it's just a negotiation tactic to try and get me to concede as much as possible which I'm close to doing tbh.

And yes I had the same as you - wife's solicitor running more of an emotionally driven, poor me defensive position. My barrister didn't feel the need for any of this but I don't know what is better. I trust their advice but we're all human at the end of the day, even the judge and maybe they'll buy into it. Look at the world we're in line, it's a pathetic victim mentality supporting the weak losers who don't want to do anything while hard workers pick up the tab...

I will let you know how my conversations with my solicitor about about any further offers we make shortly.

@spartacus - my wife has been to a dozen specialists, visiting doctors probably 100 times since my divorce process started. She will do anything not to work despite being perfectly fine.

David has previously said this to me and my solicitor and barrister agreed that the bottom line is if she is working and has a history of working, the expectation is she will continue to earn. Judges must deal with this all the time and it's only proven facts that they will consider not over-the-top emotional pleas. I believe it may have been David who said unless she's been hit by a bus then they will expect you to work. My council supports this.

If you are representing yourself my only suggestion based on my experience to date is don't play their game or rise to it. My council did not and have said the judge is more likely to be annoyed at what your wife is saying above. State facts only. My wife was claiming far more serious illnesses than yours is and ran around for 2 years trying to get evidence from medical specialists to substantiate her case but has not been successful. The best she got was a GP letter which doesn't count for a lot to be honest.

Perhaps you simply and politely disagree, state there is no evidence to support or substantiate any of your wife's claims and that she is perfectly able to work and her track record supports this. Nice and to the point. For the record at my FDR, my barrister did not even respond to the wife's barrister rant. The judge did not ask for us to respond, and my council said this is because there was nothing to argue. The judge can already see what is going on.

Thank you. I'm starting to understand the process now....Annoyingly this has come 3 days before the final hearing.

I am going to maintain composure. I am going to stick to fact. If the judge permits their rants to continue, I will politely request it be stopped. I know I won't come out of this as I had hoped, especially with the awareness that despite her malicious litigation, I will still need to contribute. Thats not fair. But I need it to end! And I am confident I can take her barrister on as litigant in person

I'm almost tempted to study family law after this!