VIC Court Order Wording Clarification

[cinnamon]

Our interim court order states the following:

"The children spend time with and communicate with the father as agreed in writing, but failing agreement as follows:
a. In week 1, from Thursday at 6:00pm until Monday at 6:00pm;
b. In week 2, from Thursday at 6:00pm until Friday at 6:00pm;"

What does "as agreed in writing" exactly stipulate? An agreement signed by both parents? An agreement that was misunderstood and misused?

I would like to get some clarification on this "loophole" I call it please.

 

[Atticus]

What does "as agreed in writing" exactly stipulate?

In this instance, an agreement in writing between both parents (signed by both & dated) that sets out when the child/ren are to communicate with & spend time with dad... In the absence of an agreement, the default position is to be as set out at points a & b above.

It's not a loophole. If you both agree to an alternative to the times set out in a & b, then as an interim order, the court is happy to allow it.... I would assume though that the times as set out in a & b are what the court would consider a minimum of time that should be spent with dad.

 

[sammy01]

So my ex is a nutter... I had the same sort of wording in my first set of court orders... She wrote to me and said from now on I will no longer be seeing the children because she no longer agreed. ... That is not the intention of the wording and don't dare go there. It will not end well for you.

Can you give us an explanation as to why you're asking what common sense suggests is the bleeding obvious. Bascially orders (a) and (b) are adhered too unless both parents agree to vary from those orders... That would require an email / text or leeter from one parent asking for a variation as either a one off OR a permenent change and a letter from the other parent confirming they agree to the proposed change. Like I said common sense... So Why do you ask?

 

[Rob Legat - SBPL]

It’s important to recognise in these types of orders that the court doesn’t want you running back to them every time someone upsets the apple cart, and they realise that if parents can find a way to ‘get along’ then it’s much bette for everyone involved. So, the orders are designed to get the two of you to agree to something between you - in more than just verbal communication. Written can mean a document signed by you both, an email exchange where it is clear that there is a consensus reached, or even an exchange of solicitors’ letters with the same effect. If either of you misconstrue that arrangement, or try to ’game’ it and the other party disagrees, then you go back to the default position in the order. Consider it a ‘fallback position’.

 

[cinnamon]

In this instance, an agreement in writing between both parents (signed by both & dated) that sets out when the child/ren are to communicate with & spend time with dad... In the absence of an agreement, the default position is to be as set out at points a & b above.

It's not a loophole. If you both agree to an alternative to the times set out in a & b, then as an interim order, the court is happy to allow it.... I would assume though that the times as set out in a & b are what the court would consider a minimum of time that should be spent with dad.

We had communications via our lawyers in which I suggested to the changes below in which he agreed to. The schools requested that we set-up a parenting plan which states the change in parenting signed and dated by both parents in order for him to collect the children from school. This created a back and forth email communication between us since we proposed vary different parenting orders and could not come to an agreement. To my understanding, this was a failure to come to an agreement?

The children spent time with the father:

Week 1: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects the children from school/care and on Monday afternoon, our client collect the children from
school/care.

Week 2: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects children from school/care and on Friday afternoon, our client collect children from school/care.

 

[cinnamon]

So my ex is a nutter... I had the same sort of wording in my first set of court orders... She wrote to me and said from now on I will no longer be seeing the children because she no longer agreed. ... That is not the intention of the wording and don't dare go there. It will not end well for you.

Can you give us an explanation as to why you're asking what common sense suggests is the bleeding obvious. Bascially orders (a) and (b) are adhered too unless both parents agree to vary from those orders... That would require an email / text or leeter from one parent asking for a variation as either a one off OR a permenent change and a letter from the other parent confirming they agree to the proposed change. Like I said common sense... So Why do you ask?

We had communications via our lawyers in which I suggested to the changes below in which he agreed to. The schools requested that we set-up a parenting plan which states the change in parenting signed and dated by both parents in order for him to collect the children from school. This created a back and forth email communication between us since we proposed vary different parenting orders and could not come to an agreement. To my understanding, this was a failure to come to an agreement?

The children spent time with the father:

Week 1: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects the children from school/care and on Monday afternoon, our client collect the children from
school/care.

Week 2: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects children from school/care and on Friday afternoon, our client collect children from school/care.

 

[cinnamon]

It’s important to recognise in these types of orders that the court doesn’t want you running back to them every time someone upsets the apple cart, and they realise that if parents can find a way to ‘get along’ then it’s much bette for everyone involved. So, the orders are designed to get the two of you to agree to something between you - in more than just verbal communication. Written can mean a document signed by you both, an email exchange where it is clear that there is a consensus reached, or even an exchange of solicitors’ letters with the same effect. If either of you misconstrue that arrangement, or try to ’game’ it and the other party disagrees, then you go back to the default position in the order. Consider it a ‘fallback position’.

This was exactly what I thought. My ex wants to make the orders and so-called agreements up as it suits him and I am doing all the running around, in order to avoid the children from getting confused. I have communicated via text, email and lawyers to him a million times that we revert/ default back to the court orders, but this not something he wants to hear or adhere to. I stick to the court orders and then just journal the events as we go, since we are back in court in December. He wants for example me to collect one child from school (on his parenting time) and then 3 hours later my other two children from his home. I have been uncomfortable with this due to an IVO against him, though if I want to see my children according to him, I would need to collect them from where he stipulates. This has not been agreed to and clearly communicated to him that it is not agreed to. He does not simply care.

We had communications via our lawyers in which I suggested to the changes below in which he agreed to. The schools requested that we set-up a parenting plan which states the change in parenting signed and dated by both parents in order for him to collect the children from school. This created a back and forth email communication between us since we proposed vary different parenting orders and could not come to an agreement. To my understanding, this was a failure to come to an agreement?

The children spent time with the father:

Week 1: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects the children from school/care and on Monday afternoon, our client collect the children from
school/care.

Week 2: On Thursday afternoon, your client collects children from school/care and on Friday afternoon, our client collect children from school/care.

 

[sammy01]

suggestion. Just stick with the orders... See sometimes with all the stress of all of this we find ourselves so caught up in 'HE said this' - 'She said that'. He is being unreasonable, she wont make compromises and it becomes way too big. Solution - Just stick to the orders. Nice easy solution

 

[Atticus]

@cinnamon ....

It looks to me like this is just a problem with how to facilitate the contact as per orders, ie, pick up drop offs rather than time spent with dad

Is the order silent about how pick up & drop offs are to take place?
What are the conditions on the IVO?

If he is restricted by the IVO from pick up drop off at your place or from approaching within xx distance of you, that may mean you have to do more running around or do changeovers at school .... Is he even able to get to school at those times (the orders say 6PM after all) .... Then there is the problem of communicating to you (particularly at short notice if necessary) if he is prohibited from contacting you.

Sometimes an IVO can create many more problems than they are worth... Would things be easier without it?

 

[sammy01]

yeah and if the kids are protected persons on the AVO then you need to approve for the kids to be picked up from school. I agree with Atticus, sometimes an AVO is a hassle. Hard to believe BUT I liked having an avo against me... for 12 whole months I was restrained by law from talking to my ex. Most peaceful 12 months I've had in ages...