does the court listen to 12+ year old children's wishes in case of divorce ?

[adhd]

just wondering, in case of divorce, does the court listen to 12 year old children's wishes to chose whom to live with  ?

 

my wife is a subclinical psychopath, imagine DEXTER without the killings

 

manipulating people, exploiting weaknesses, web of deceit, starting big arguments over nothing, always wanting to win an argument, threatening : no more visa extention, divorce, calling police over small arguments, 

threatening children not to translate the nasty things she says to them or there will be even worse consequences.

 

the children know their mother is a selfish psychopath... they have only one classmate that understands them as their mother is also wacked.

 

I hope be happy to divorce, but do not want the children to be unprotected with this psycho.

 

So what are the chances that the court would listen to them in case of a contested divorce ?

 

I would prefere to stay in the marriage, just for the kids sake, otherwise, who knows what that monster person might afflict to them, than to leave, which would be the quick & coward way to do, but life is HELL.

 

 

 

 

 

[happylarry]

Yes the court does listen to a child's wishes, but obviously the outcome takes into account all the evidence not just that.

Pm sent.

HL  

[MikeyIdea]

1 hour ago, adhd said:

does the court listen to 12 year old children's wishes to chose whom to live with  ?

 

Yes,

Children's' wishes means more in Thailand than in western countries.  Juvenile court also takes their wishes into account earlier than in western countries, I have seen court use the wishes of a 9 year old to put pressure on the other parent. The Thai thinking is a bit "You shouldn't force children / it is not good to force children", more than in western Juvenile Courts

 

In one way that is good as I certainly don't think that it is good for kids to be ordered to live with one parent one week and the other parent the next week if they don't want but it also creates a problem when parental alienation is involved.

 

I assume that you live in Thailand and that you are legally married here
Court will clearly listen to a 12 year old but there are many considerations:

 

1) Evidence is King: You use a lot of words to describe the mothers personality. If the mother is favoured in court, then none of that ever happened if you don't have evidence. It works the other way around too. If you are favoured, then court will use what you have to put pressure on the mother and ignore her ranting

 

1.5) Forgot: There is nothing that judges are more bored with than mothers and fathers fighting among themselves. You ranting about how bad the mother is not going to help the judges decide what is best for the childs' future. You need to present that you are the best parent for the future of the children and that you are happy to help your children to see their mother whenever they wants. If you're a good parent and she's a bad one, then they will clear the problem 

 

2) Either legal guardian can veto that the child leaves Thailand until reach majority

 

3) Beware of the power of the intimidation that a mother (parent) can put on a child, I have it at home with my own daughter (same age as yours) and I have been interpreting in court and was disappointed with that Thai Juvenile courts didn't pay as much attention to parental alienation as they should have

 

4) Thai Juvenile court will not be biased against a westerner, they are generally very fair in that sense. It is your Thai lawyer that you have to watch out with. I have seen the Fathers lawyer supporting the mother more than the father in court. The big question is why and answer to that lies in point 5 below

 

5) Thai Juvenile Courts want mutual agreement in custody cases and they really go to length negotiating one. If the judges want a negotiated solution that is not good for you, then your Thai lawyer ends up in a difficult solution, he is so small compared to the judges and he is losing face if he fights hard for you. Your Thai lawyer is very unlikely to do this so beware here. The best workaround that I have found is to make very clear from the beginning that you prefer court order, not mutual agreement and you will not accept any mutual agreement that does not include what you fight for. Tell him court order good, mutual agreement bad and watch his face :) Tell him, I have evidence, if it's not good for my children then we just appeal and watch his face

 

6) Feelings matter more in Thai courts. The court puts pressure on the father to accept a mutual agreement if the mother is at advantage and vice versa. You say the mother calls the police over small things. Beware if she makes police reports planning to use them in court. You write that the mother is manipulative. A person like that is thinking and is likely to find other things to use to her advantage in court. They shouldn't matter of course as they are one sided but trust me, they do

 

7) You are at great advantage if you really have the children on your side - if they really accept to takes side and dare to - not good for the kids to have to do. The Thai judges will interview the child / children without parents and what the children says really matters 

 

Don't believe your lawyer if he says that appeals take a long time in Thailand. They don't in Juvenile cases. You should be in the Appeals court within one year

 

Don't believe if your lawyer if he wants to postpone handing in formal evidence, witnesses - if the mother is favoured - . Yes, perhaps there is a more tactical time to hand in evidence / use witnesses but you can negate that by just forcing - You have seen my evidence / witnesses, order then. The judges have the evidence and will most likely choose to put pressure on the other party

 

I'd advise you to plan this carefully and don't rush. 6 to 12 months more won't matter in the long run. You can end up with 2 days for you 5 for the mother if she plays dirty. If you have good reasons then it shouldn't be too difficult for you to get 5/2. If a child is 12 years old, then it's sometimes possible to get that the child decides herself which parent he / she wants to be with.

 

Education and health costs for children is by default shared. Never give away that education cost should be shared without getting anything in return. If I decide school, sure I can pay, otherwise share cost...

 

Give them a secret diary and let them fill it in themselves.

 

The kids are 12, they will at the end of the day decide the outcome of this regardless of what the court says

 

All I can think of now, Good Luck

 

Mikey and Idea  

 

 

 

 

[Generalchaos]

MickeyIdea is 100% correct, though not having personal experience 1st hand, I do know of a few instances where foreigners (father) have been awarded custody of the children over that of the mother.

There was a case not too long back (I believe Chiang Mai) where during divorce proceedings that the judge was gobsmacked that the foreign father only wanted custody of the child and no financial settlement, he awarded custody without hesitation to the father.

 

Good luck! I hope it works out for you.

[SOTIRIOS]

...good in theory....

 

..but practically.....

 

...when the children are virtual prisoners...to the point that you cannot even communicate with them....

 

...and they have already be traumatized and frightened out of their minds by the wife.....and her clan...and gang...

 

...Your daddy will disappear"...'Your daddy will be gone'....'Something bad will happen to your daddy'.....

 

...'If you go to your daddy...no more house...car...school'.......

 

 

...and the first time around your own lawyer duped you in her favor.....even claiming ....'You won'......

 

(...translation...you lost even joint custody and will be lucky to get 5% of the joint assets...)

 

 

...I wish it were true...and could be done.....

 

...trying...hoping...praying.....

[MikeyIdea]

I do really agree with the power of parental alienation but I do absolutely not agree with the below

49 minutes ago, SOTIRIOS said:

you lost even joint custody and will be lucky to get 5% of the joint assets

 

Juvenile will not easily remove custody at all, it could be that the shared custody is useless because of parental alienation, yes, but that is a different matter. Family court is fair when it comes to sharing marriage assets 50 / 50

 

[louse1953]

This is only your opinion,she will have a different story to tell.

[adhd]

 

thanks all for your input

[alex8912]

What exactly was it that attracted you to Mrs Dexter?  

[blackcab]

12 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

 

Yes,

Children's' wishes means more in Thailand than in western countries.  Juvenile court also takes their wishes into account earlier than in western countries, I have seen court use the wishes of a 9 year old to put pressure on the other parent. The Thai thinking is a bit "You shouldn't force children / it is not good to force children", more than in western Juvenile Courts

 

In one way that is good as I certainly don't think that it is good for kids to be ordered to live with one parent one week and the other parent the next week if they don't want but it also creates a problem when parental alienation is involved.

 

I assume that you live in Thailand and that you are legally married here
Court will clearly listen to a 12 year old but there are many considerations:

 

1) Evidence is King: You use a lot of words to describe the mothers personality. If the mother is favoured in court, then none of that ever happened if you don't have evidence. It works the other way around too. If you are favoured, then court will use what you have to put pressure on the mother and ignore her ranting

 

1.5) Forgot: There is nothing that judges are more bored with than mothers and fathers fighting among themselves. You ranting about how bad the mother is not going to help the judges decide what is best for the childs' future. You need to present that you are the best parent for the future of the children and that you are happy to help your children to see their mother whenever they wants. If you're a good parent and she's a bad one, then they will clear the problem 

 

2) Either legal guardian can veto that the child leaves Thailand until reach majority

 

3) Beware of the power of the intimidation that a mother (parent) can put on a child, I have it at home with my own daughter (same age as yours) and I have been interpreting in court and was disappointed with that Thai Juvenile courts didn't pay as much attention to parental alienation as they should have

 

4) Thai Juvenile court will not be biased against a westerner, they are generally very fair in that sense. It is your Thai lawyer that you have to watch out with. I have seen the Fathers lawyer supporting the mother more than the father in court. The big question is why and answer to that lies in point 5 below

 

5) Thai Juvenile Courts want mutual agreement in custody cases and they really go to length negotiating one. If the judges want a negotiated solution that is not good for you, then your Thai lawyer ends up in a difficult solution, he is so small compared to the judges and he is losing face if he fights hard for you. Your Thai lawyer is very unlikely to do this so beware here. The best workaround that I have found is to make very clear from the beginning that you prefer court order, not mutual agreement and you will not accept any mutual agreement that does not include what you fight for. Tell him court order good, mutual agreement bad and watch his face :) Tell him, I have evidence, if it's not good for my children then we just appeal and watch his face

 

6) Feelings matter more in Thai courts. The court puts pressure on the father to accept a mutual agreement if the mother is at advantage and vice versa. You say the mother calls the police over small things. Beware if she makes police reports planning to use them in court. You write that the mother is manipulative. A person like that is thinking and is likely to find other things to use to her advantage in court. They shouldn't matter of course as they are one sided but trust me, they do

 

7) You are at great advantage if you really have the children on your side - if they really accept to takes side and dare to - not good for the kids to have to do. The Thai judges will interview the child / children without parents and what the children says really matters 

 

Don't believe your lawyer if he says that appeals take a long time in Thailand. They don't in Juvenile cases. You should be in the Appeals court within one year

 

Don't believe if your lawyer if he wants to postpone handing in formal evidence, witnesses - if the mother is favoured - . Yes, perhaps there is a more tactical time to hand in evidence / use witnesses but you can negate that by just forcing - You have seen my evidence / witnesses, order then. The judges have the evidence and will most likely choose to put pressure on the other party

 

I'd advise you to plan this carefully and don't rush. 6 to 12 months more won't matter in the long run. You can end up with 2 days for you 5 for the mother if she plays dirty. If you have good reasons then it shouldn't be too difficult for you to get 5/2. If a child is 12 years old, then it's sometimes possible to get that the child decides herself which parent he / she wants to be with.

 

Education and health costs for children is by default shared. Never give away that education cost should be shared without getting anything in return. If I decide school, sure I can pay, otherwise share cost...

 

Give them a secret diary and let them fill it in themselves.

 

The kids are 12, they will at the end of the day decide the outcome of this regardless of what the court says

 

All I can think of now, Good Luck

 

Mikey and Idea  

 

A superb post by Mikey and Idea. The best I have read for a long time.

[MikeyIdea]

Mikey is me, Michael, and Idea is my daughter.... MikeyIdea? 

 

[Deepinthailand]

Can't help on court bit never been divorced but good luck. I wonder what your wife is saying about you!!!

[sandemara]

Why do you presume your whacko wife would contest a divorce proposal from you? Her behaviour as described by you suggests deep unhappiness.  Use your wit and wiles to create a moment of your choice to make your proposal. I would quietly make arrangements with your personal funds, assets, properties etc so that you are protected as much as you can be before taking the step.  Be smart for your kids' sake, as well as yourself. Plenty of texts available on divorce requirements and processes in LOS. Also plenty of good lawyers. Do your research. Be as thorough in your planning as you would be with any worthwhile rescue mission. Is there some law in Thailand that prohibits farang blokes from being as cunning, deceitful and ruthless as the life partners they have chosen so unwisely?

[Autonuaq]

the right of a child is to be heard in court at age 12 and above as well choose where he wants to live with his father or his mother

international right

http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx

 

and 

https://treaties.un.org/doc/source/signature/2012/CTC_4-11d.pdf

 

and

http://www.kidsrights.org/About-Us

 

for more information and you see that Thailand has been accredited for doing so well in protecting the right of children. 

As well that the US not did sign this.

[SOTIRIOS]

....you do not have to agree with a stated fact....it will not change that fact....

 

...unless you have at least hundreds of thousands...if not a couple of million of baht to pay....that will be the outcome......

 

...and even if you pay....it guarantees nothing.....

 

...keep the idealistic illusion if you like....

 

...bottom line....'us'...and ....'them'.....

 

...and they stick together......

 

...I wish you could find a case where it is otherwise...then I would hire that lawyer.....

 

 

 

[adhd]

22 hours ago, sandemara said:

Why do you presume your whacko wife would contest a divorce proposal from you? Her behaviour as described by you suggests deep unhappiness.  Use your wit and wiles to create a moment of your choice to make your proposal. I would quietly make arrangements with your personal funds, assets, properties etc so that you are protected as much as you can be before taking the step.  Be smart for your kids' sake, as well as yourself. Plenty of texts available on divorce requirements and processes in LOS. Also plenty of good lawyers. Do your research. Be as thorough in your planning as you would be with any worthwhile rescue mission. Is there some law in Thailand that prohibits farang blokes from being as cunning, deceitful and ruthless as the life partners they have chosen so unwisely?

 

about 20 million baht reasons in property alone is one of the reasons and  2 children, not that she expresses love to them, but in the psycho mind or narcisstic person, it is all about WINNING, not about right, wrong, love, ...

 

people like that have no conscience or do not care for other people's disires, feelings, emotions ...

 

do you know the story of the frog thrown into hot boiling water versus the one that is slowly cooked and dies in the pan ?

 

I am the latter one

 

mrs dexter behaviour comes slowly as they study their pray, the suck up to management at work and everybody else, see who can be used, abused... same for family... if one whistleblower is about to call her out, she made sure that everybody will follow and believe what she says...

 

 

 

Edited October 23, 2016 by adhd

[Awk]

On 10/21/2016 at 1:09 PM, MikeyIdea said:

 

1) Evidence is King: You use a lot of words to describe the mothers personality. If the mother is favoured in court, then none of that ever happened if you don't have evidence. It works the other way around too. If you are favoured, then court will use what you have to put pressure on the mother and ignore her ranting

 

1.5) Forgot: There is nothing that judges are more bored with than mothers and fathers fighting among themselves. You ranting about how bad the mother is not going to help the judges decide what is best for the childs' future. You need to present that you are the best parent for the future of the children and that you are happy to help your children to see their mother whenever they wants. If you're a good parent and she's a bad one, then they will clear the problem 

 

2) Either legal guardian can veto that the child leaves Thailand until reach majority

 

3) Beware of the power of the intimidation that a mother (parent) can put on a child, I have it at home with my own daughter (same age as yours) and I have been interpreting in court and was disappointed with that Thai Juvenile courts didn't pay as much attention to parental alienation as they should have

 

4) Thai Juvenile court will not be biased against a westerner, they are generally very fair in that sense. It is your Thai lawyer that you have to watch out with. I have seen the Fathers lawyer supporting the mother more than the father in court. The big question is why and answer to that lies in point 5 below

 

5) Thai Juvenile Courts want mutual agreement in custody cases and they really go to length negotiating one. If the judges want a negotiated solution that is not good for you, then your Thai lawyer ends up in a difficult solution, he is so small compared to the judges and he is losing face if he fights hard for you. Your Thai lawyer is very unlikely to do this so beware here. The best workaround that I have found is to make very clear from the beginning that you prefer court order, not mutual agreement and you will not accept any mutual agreement that does not include what you fight for. Tell him court order good, mutual agreement bad and watch his face :) Tell him, I have evidence, if it's not good for my children then we just appeal and watch his face

 

6) Feelings matter more in Thai courts. The court puts pressure on the father to accept a mutual agreement if the mother is at advantage and vice versa. You say the mother calls the police over small things. Beware if she makes police reports planning to use them in court. You write that the mother is manipulative. A person like that is thinking and is likely to find other things to use to her advantage in court. They shouldn't matter of course as they are one sided but trust me, they do

 

7) You are at great advantage if you really have the children on your side - if they really accept to takes side and dare to - not good for the kids to have to do. The Thai judges will interview the child / children without parents and what the children says really matters 

 

Don't believe your lawyer if he says that appeals take a long time in Thailand. They don't in Juvenile cases. You should be in the Appeals court within one year

 

Don't believe if your lawyer if he wants to postpone handing in formal evidence, witnesses - if the mother is favoured - . Yes, perhaps there is a more tactical time to hand in evidence / use witnesses but you can negate that by just forcing - You have seen my evidence / witnesses, order then. The judges have the evidence and will most likely choose to put pressure on the other party

 

I'd advise you to plan this carefully and don't rush. 6 to 12 months more won't matter in the long run. You can end up with 2 days for you 5 for the mother if she plays dirty. If you have good reasons then it shouldn't be too difficult for you to get 5/2. If a child is 12 years old, then it's sometimes possible to get that the child decides herself which parent he / she wants to be with.

 

Education and health costs for children is by default shared. Never give away that education cost should be shared without getting anything in return. If I decide school, sure I can pay, otherwise share cost...

 

Give them a secret diary and let them fill it in themselves.

 

The kids are 12, they will at the end of the day decide the outcome of this regardless of what the court says

 

All I can think of now, Good Luck

 

Mikey and Idea  

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks MikeyIdea.  That is a great post.  Any other tips for the first hearing in court?   I.e., while still in the "negotiation" phase? 

 

My lawyer tells me this first meeting will be a more or less informal conversation where HP (mother of my children, who I want to divorce) and I will tell our stories, and the court representative (a retired judge in most cases, my lawyer) says, will try hard to make us mutually agree on something.  I'm sure HP will not agree to anything less than full custody and continued financial support for her (she does not want to get a job) and my children. The only thing I can imagine will change her mind about this is if HP's lawyer tells HP the judge is most likely to grant me full custody, and she will lose all.

 

The first day in court was actually a few weeks ago, but an assistant for HP's lawyer turned up in regards to a request from them for postponing the first meeting, which the judge unfortunately granted without my lawyer being able to object.  I would very much have liked to object because HP is refusing me to see my children, taking them away and becoming physically violent towards me when I attempt to be with them.  

 

My lawyer said that at the first meeting we would be able to ask for the judge to make a temporary ruling, saying I must be able to see the children, or even that the children are to stay with me some days every weeks, Hopefully the judge  would believe me when I describe HP's current behaviour (refusing to let me pick up the children from school, becoming violent towards me when I come to visit the children, screaming and shouting).  However, we did not have any chance to ask for anything, and the hearing was immediately postponed by a month.

 

My lawyer tells me that something similar cannot happen again.  That HP cannot postpone again, even should she claim sickness or whatever.  I am however not sure about that, as the one day in court was extremely disappointing to me, letting HP continue keeping the children away from me as before without being able to say anything.  

 

I have many recordings of HP's behaviour.  My lawyer tells me that at this point, we are only negotiating.  Hard evidence of anything is not to be argued over at this time (though we have submitted our police reports regarding violence from HP), but he advised I can bring with me my phone with the recordings.   Who knows he said, maybe the judge will become interested and want to take a look.  

 

My lawyer also advises me that I have a big problem with the lack of any witnesses, as all assaults happened in the home, where only my children were witnesses.  On a few occasions, relatives of HP were present too, but they will surely not witness against HP.  Even mutual friends who strongly disagree with HP's behaviour are unwilling to serve as witness for me.

 

Apart from video recordings like this, documenting HP's behaviour, I am re-reading my diary where I document how much time I am able to see the children every day (some days for just a few minutes), and preparing what to say in court.

 

So far I'm thinking this:
 

1) Do not bore the judge with describing how horrible HP is.  Even if I can show videos from my phone should the judge want to see it himself, concentrate on how strongly HP's behaviour affects the children, seeing their mother repeatedly assault their father in front of them, threatening to kill him even. How upset this makes the children, how bad it is for them to see this.

 

2) Try to describe how it will be better for the children to stay with their father, who is better suited to help them with school/homework, and who is the only one with a job.  How I have never tried to prevent HP from seeing the children, even though  she does her best to prevent me from seeing them.

 

 

Even though my post above is embarrassingly messy, If any members have advice to add, please do.  

 

[MikeyIdea]

On ‎3‎/‎31‎/‎2017 at 4:51 PM, Awk said:

Even though my post above is embarrassingly messy, If any members have advice to add, please do.  

 

- while still in the "negotiation" phase? 

The "real" judges coming next will often continue the negotiation, it doesn't have to end at all.

Lawyer preparation: Explain your expectations and clearly tell him what you will accept and not. This is a very important point as the first judge will hand over to the "real" judges and you will have to work uphill if they are told wrong

 

- I'm sure HP will not agree to anything less than full custody

That won't happen, she won't get full custody, neither will you

 

- and continued financial support for her (she does not want to get a job) and my children

Your job to control your lawyer. He will be happy to let the mother skin you to finish the case easier. The purpose of the law is to support and protect the child, not the wife = Instruct your lawyer to tell the judge that she will have to support herself, the judge will support that in Thailand, anything else is No, as per law or something in return

 

Also tell court how you are going to take care of the children while you work and request court to clarify how mother is going to care for the children while she is working - If you have no plan for how / possibility to take care of the children while you work, then how can a responsible father let you have the children that time? Then you should have Mon to Fri and she gets days when she can take care of them, Sat Sun. That sets you up for education nicely

 

- The only thing I can imagine will change her mind about this is if HP's lawyer tells HP the judge is most likely to grant me full custody, and she will lose all.

That won't happen

 

- The first day in court was actually a few weeks ago, but an assistant for HP's lawyer turned up in regards to a request from them for postponing the first meeting

That is normal, she has the kids so benefits from the delay, she will play that card more

 

- the one day in court was extremely disappointing to me, letting HP continue keeping the children away from me as before without being able to say anything

The mother will continue to keep the children away, the judges won't act as hard as you'd expect or want.

 

I'd advice you to buy a hidden camera like one of the pens with HD video and microphone they have at Pantip (can be bought on the internet too) and "set the mother up" = let her dig her own grave. Request access to the children and calmly say things in line with the law that will make her violent and video record everything. Don't even protect yourself if she hits you, just let her do it and say - I just want to see our children. Put your hands in your pockets and say that (not on video) and that you just want to see the children and try to pass her and let her forcefully stop you 10 times. The more the better. 

 

You can burn a CD and request to hand it in as evidence. The main point that you lawyer won't tell you is that you can just sit down and refuse any deal regardless of if they don't accept to look at it or not - OK, let's continue this in the Appeals court then -> pressure goes over to the mother

 

- we would be able to ask for the judge to make a temporary ruling, saying I must be able to see the children, or even that the children are to stay with me some days every weeks

Ask for it but don't expect it. More likely that you won't get time with the children until court case is over which leads to the question: Is the mother going to follow the court order then even? Build in safety rules if mutual agreement and don't accept if you can't - It is pretty useless to try to appeal a mutual agreement

 

- However, we did not have any chance to ask for anything, and the hearing was immediately postponed

Normal. Good too in this case, use time to get violent behavior on video

 

- That HP cannot postpone again

True but it means that it starts without her, not that it finishes without her. They will not order yet

 

- extremely disappointing to me, letting HP continue keeping the children away from me as before without being able to say anything

Sorry, expect more of that

 

- I have many recordings of HP's behaviour

Leave out only screaming if you have enough violent behavior on video and push violent. I believe in taking the opportunity if it is given to you. If the judge wants to see, then make it short and show violence and when she physically stops you from seeing the children - Impression doesn't get much stronger because it is much longer

 

- big problem with the lack of any witnesses

It will still matter IF she is favoured. Juvenile doesn't really see it like you do. Their goal is mutual agreement that both parties like that also is good for the kids, nothing more = punishment is not in their mind

 

- where only my children were witnesses

The judges will ask the children but alienation is strong. I don't know the kids age

 

- Even mutual friends who strongly disagree with HP's behaviour are unwilling to serve as witness for me.

Thais will normally never witness because it is bad to get involved in private business regardless here

 

I'd swap point 1 and point 2 around

- 2) Try to describe how it will be better for the children to stay with their father, who is better suited to help them with school/homework, and who is the only one with a job

------  who is the only one with a job ------ 

No, who will support the mother after you stop doing it? Both will work, right? :) You tell them your plan for who will take care of children when you work, who will the mother have when she works? Relatives advantage. You have nice house / apartment, what living will the mother offer the kids? You don't pay for that, only for the kids part. Better suited to help with homework yes, better suited to provide schooling yes. I don't know how old the kids are. 

 

Getting weekdays is a good way to truly and honestly win the childrens heart over time. Mummy can't keep up with that with only weekends in the long run. I don't know how old the kids are - the power of playing with them every day is very strong bonding until nearly teenager

 

Always give mummy access and your hard work trying to be a good father will persevere, close her out and the children will miss what they can't have. Important to tell the court how you want to help the mother to see the kids, the mother won't (not going to be in the court agreement but keep it anyway)

 

Good Luck

Michael

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by MikeyIdea

[Awk]

20 hours ago, MikeyIdea said:

< many interesting things>

 

> Also tell court how you are going to take care of the children while you work and request court to clarify how mother is going to care for the children while she is working - If you have no plan for how / possibility to take care of the children while you work, then how can a responsible father let you have the children that time? Then you should have Mon to Fri and she gets days when she can take care of them, Sat Sun. That sets you up for education nicely
 

Thank you.  That is a good idea.  My goal is to as a minimum have the children with me Monday to Thursday, as that's the days they will have homework from school for the next day.  From reading things posted by you and others, I however gather that is quite likely to happen anyway?

 

> - The only thing I can imagine will change her mind about this is if HP's lawyer tells HP the judge is most likely to grant me full custody, and she will lose all.
> That won't happen

 

If HP's lawyer tells HP that HP can agree to something like 50/50 regarding custody now, or wait for the judge to order 50/50 sometime in the distant future, I'm sure HP will chose the latter.  How could I change HP's lawyer or HP's feelings about this?

 

HP's status quo is great.  She stays in the house I recently bought with money from the bank (my last stupid attempt to part on favourable terms, when divorce was already certain), takes the children wherever she wants after school so I cannot see them.  Never telling me where or for how long the children will be away from the house with her, and much of the time makes it impossible for me to see the children.  She ignores my phone calls (has even blocked me) and messages, or replying the children will come back to the house
when I have left the house and are no longer waiting inside, or that the children are "hers only".

 

She also receives from me, as advised by my lawyer, "child support money" to her account every week, so she cannot later claim in the court that I do not support my children.

 

My status quo is quite the opposite as you can guess.  I spend much time driving around trying to see my children, using more than an hour going back and forth, only to be able to see my children for a few minutes, and sometimes not even that.  All depending on how HP feels that particular day, I may see my children after school for anything from zero minutes to some hours.

 

> - The first day in court was actually a few weeks ago, but an assistant for HP's lawyer turned up in regards to a request from them for postponing the first meeting
> That is normal, she has the kids so benefits from the delay, she will play that card more
 

What can I do to make HP's lawyer, and then presumably HP herself too, feel that it is not in her best interest to keep postponing things as long as they can?  Or if I cannot make her feel that, is there anything I can do that may reduce her opportunity for delaying things?
 

Is my only hope that the judge will, for some rare and unlikely reason I now understand, temporarily rule that the children will stay with me some days of the week?

 

> - the one day in court was extremely disappointing to me, letting HP continue keeping the children away from me as before without being able to say anything
> The mother will continue to keep the children away, the judges won't act as hard as you'd expect or want.
 

I'm very sad to hear that.  I will have to try to prepare myself mentally for this then.  Last time I was quite unprepared and broken hearted about the result, which consisted of the judge doing nothing more than granting HP's request to postpone.
 

> I'd advice you to buy a hidden camera like one of the pens with HD video and microphone they have at Pantip (can be bought on the internet too) and "set the mother up" = let her dig her own grave. Request access to the children and calmly say things in line with the law that will make her violent and video record everything. Don't even protect yourself if she hits you, just let her do it and say - I just want to see our children. Put your hands in your pockets and say that (not on video) and that you just want to see the children and try to pass her and let her forcefully stop you 10 times. The more the better. 
 

Thank you.  I already have several videos of that nature, even though she broke the first phone I used to record her attacks.
 

> You can burn a CD and request to hand it in as evidence. The main point that you lawyer won't tell you is that you can just sit down and refuse any deal regardless of if they don't accept to look at it or not - OK, let's continue this in the Appeals court then -> pressure goes over to the mother
 

Can you please clarify what you mean by refusing any deal regardless of whether they accept to look at it or not?

I've asked my lawyer to submit some videos as evidence now, before the postponed hearing.  I wanted to submit the videos now before the next meeting, so that the negotiator/judge would hopefully become aware of the videos, increasing the chance he will be interested in seeing them.
 

My lawyer however tells me we cannot submit it to the court now "because it is negotiated proceeding.  After, there will be the trials then we can submit everythings to the Court."   

 

I know you are not a lawyer, but is that your experience too?   In the initial request for divorce, police reports were submitted, but no videos, and while I still have a favourable impression of my lawyer, I have become a little concerned with his willingness to do enough.  Perhaps this is partly due to our financial agreement, where he gave me a fixed price for the work up to the first negotiation (half paid when he started, half to be paid after the first negotiation).
 

My lawyer advised me to prepare the video regardless of that however, in case the negotiator would become curious and want to see it.  "Who knows?", as he said.
 

I think the videos, as well as recordings of HP shouting/screaming at my children for going with me, will give a correct impression of how things are now.  I am thinking a lot on how to increase the chance that the negotiator/judge will want to see them at the first negotiation.
 

> - we would be able to ask for the judge to make a temporary ruling, saying I must be able to see the children, or even that the children are to stay with me some days every weeks
> Ask for it but don't expect it. More likely that you won't get time with the children until court case is over which leads to the question: Is the mother going to follow the court order then even? Build in safety rules if mutual agreement and don't accept if you can't - It is pretty useless to try to appeal a mutual agreement

 

I asked my lawyer before what I could do if the judge made a temporary ruling, but HP did not adhere to it.  My lawyer however did not answer anything except something along the lines of HP having to adhere to it, or the judge will not like it and things will become worse for her in the final ruling, which at the time made sense to me.  But if there is no interest from the court in "punishing" HP for doing bad things, including not adhering to the ruling, perhaps my lawyer was wrong.

 

I did not consider that HP would not adhere to the final ruling however, which would of course be even worse.  Can you think of any safety rules that could help discourage her from that?

Money seems the most obvious, but while HP likes to occasionally scream that she wants nothing from me; no money, no house, no land -  I can have it all, just I stay away from "her children", she does not mean that of course.  She knows I cannot let my children starve, go without clothes, school, etc.  

 

Currently HP, while not working, has recently managed to  refinance the car I bought in her name on down payment, getting a considerable amount of cash in exchange for increasing the car loan which I had almost paid of.
 

HP does not know that I know this and have evidence of it.  I want to  show it to the court at the coming meeting.  The result is however that HP has enough cash to pay her lawyer (presumably more expensive than my lawyer, since her lawyer is arriving by air), and school for her daughter - from a previous relationship -

 for the time being.  So at the moment, while pleading poverty and hunger (since she does not know I know she got the cash from the car finance company), she probably has plenty of money.
 

HP does have a child from before however (three years older than your daughter), which I have provided for financially (but not emotionally) for 10 years, and which has lived with us in Thailand.  She receives no money or support from her father who, as far as I know, is doing quite well financially.
 

After HP started to become violent and physically try to prevent me from seeing my children about half a year ago, I told her I would no longer pay for her daughter (and explained this to her daughter too, who while no longer doing much to stop HP from attacking me in front of my children, perhaps due having given up on her mother in this regard,  also seems to think HP is an idiot for doing what she does) unless HP stopped behaving like that.
 

I can not however prevent HP from spending the money I transfer her every week equally on her daughter, herself, and on my daughters, even if the money is intended for my children.  I cannot blame HP for this either I guess,  as this daughter of her is of course just as much her daughter as the children we share.
 

Not sure if I can somehow to use this - financial support of HP's daughter, or HP herself - to make HP stop delaying the final verdict, and then adhering to the final verdict.   Surely I would have to offer to continue to pay for her daughter (which I, when I still had hopes of parting on good terms, told HP I would be happy to do) before I could use threat of not paying for anything.  

 

Since the judge will not rule that I have to support HP or her daughter in any way, perhaps there's some way I can use this during the negotiations? Offer to pay school for HP's daughter during negotiations, and continue to pay for extra-curricular activities for HP's daughter if they are activities where my own children also participate?  (E.g., music and art lessons, as now).

 

If HP can be made to understand that this is an offer she receives from me now during negotiations, but which she will for sure not receive if the judge will have to order things, perhaps it can make HP more interested in agreeing to a negotiated agreement?

 

> - However, we did not have any chance to ask for anything, and the hearing was immediately postponed
> Normal. Good too in this case, use time to get violent behavior on video
 

 

Thank you.  Unfortunately I already have many videos and several police reports too, but did record both a new video and police report using the extra time now. 

> - I have many recordings of HP's behaviour
> Leave out only screaming if you have enough violent behavior on video and push violent. I believe in taking the opportunity if it is given to you. If the judge wants to see, then make it short and show violence and when she physically stops you from seeing the children - Impression doesn't get much stronger because it is much longer
 

Thank you.  I will then concentrate on the video where HP does exactly that.

 

> - big problem with the lack of any witnesses
> It will still matter IF she is favoured. Juvenile doesn't really see it like you do. Their goal is mutual agreement that both parties like that also is good for the kids, nothing more = punishment is not in their mind
>  
> - where only my children were witnesses
> The judges will ask the children but alienation is strong. I don't know the kids age
 

About four years younger and 8 years younger than your Idea.  HP has told them the judge wants to put mommy in jail, and probably other things too.
 

> - Even mutual friends who strongly disagree with HP's behaviour are unwilling to serve as witness for me.
> Thais will normally never witness because it is bad to get involved in private business regardless here
>  
> I'd swap point 1 and point 2 around
> - 2) Try to describe how it will be better for the children to stay with their father, who is better suited to help them with school/homework, and who is the only one with a job
> ------  who is the only one with a job ------ 
> No, who will support the mother after you stop doing it? Both will work, right? :) You tell them your plan for who will take care of children when you work, who will the mother have when she works? Relatives advantage. You have nice house / apartment, what living will the mother offer the kids? You don't pay for that, only for the kids part. Better suited to help with homework yes, better suited to provide schooling yes. I don't know how old the kids are. 
 

While I rent a decent apartment now (partly due to my children), it cannot compare to the house I bought for HP half a year back, where she and my children stay.  The house has a superfice in my name, though not sure if/when that will become relevant.  So perhaps this will not be a strong point for me, assuming HP will get the house?

 Perhaps I will get a separate piece of land,  also bought during marriage and which has no superfice, but which I cannot do much with except sell to help pay for loan I've taken out (in farangland) on the house.
 

If I were to get the house and live there with my children on the days the children are with me, I'm sure  HP would just keep waltzing in to the house as before, pretending she is my wife, and refuse to leave.  Also if the children are to be with HP part of the week, probably alone and without a man to protect them, at least initially,  I would like them to stay in a safe and nice place, where HP already knows everyone.   That is the main reason I bought the house (we rented in the same moo baan before); it's in a safe and nice place, and was the best I could afford (though I had to borrow all the money).

 

> Getting weekdays is a good way to truly and honestly win the childrens heart over time. Mummy can't keep up with that with only weekends in the long run. I don't know how old the kids are - the power of playing with them every day is very strong bonding until nearly teenager
>  
> Always give mummy access and your hard work trying to be a good father will persevere, close her out and the children will miss what they can't have. Important to tell the court how you want to help the mother to see the kids, the mother won't (not going to be in the court agreement but keep it anyway)

 

 

Thank you.  I plan to do that and do not want to deprive the children of contact with their mother.
 

I saw in another post you mentioned being briefed by your lawyer on how to act in court.  I asked my lawyer about this before, but he said to just relax and dress nicely.  He said things will not be so formal at the negotiations, but mostly informal talking.  Perhaps he feels my demeanor is so calm, polite, and appropriate for court that there is nothing to improve on, but I'm not absolutely sure about that.

 

Many thanks you for your advice. 

 

With kind regards, Awk.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Awk

[happylarry]

I just wanted to clarify what the negotiation hearing is about for you , because you keep mentioning showing the judge video's etc.

You will be in a room with your wife and your respective lawyers and an interpreter if you don't speak Thai fluently. (you must know what is being said!) Also a judge will be present to act as mediator and that is all. He will not be making any judgements whatsoever except if he can see the meeting is going nowhere then he finishes it and then you get given a date for the main hearing.

The meeting is simply for the lawyers to talk to each other on your behalf and try to come to a mutually acceptable agreement to both of you.

Once it moves on to the main hearing in court you get a totally different and more senior judge who then looks at all evidence and gives his judgement.

Hope this snippet helps mate.

HL

[MikeyIdea]

1 hour ago, Awk said:

 

With kind regards, Awk.

Thank you.  That is a good idea.  My goal is to as a minimum have the children with me Monday to Thursday, as that's the days they will have homework from school for the next day.  From reading things posted by you and others, I however gather that is quite likely to happen anyway?

Yes, Juvenile will normally push for x/x days = translated to week days by the way. It can be anything like 3/4, 4/3, 5/2 unless the kids specifically want different. You're in a pretty good position to get 4/3 at the end of the day unless mummy gets the kids to speak against you.

 

I would expect your and mummy's lawyer to talk to each other and sort of "have an understanding" that your money can make the case easier to solve = your lawyer won't make that too difficult to happen but will fight better for your days with the kids. This sounds horrible when I write it but I don't mean it that way, not "with criminal intent sort of". I saw clear indications that lawyers from opposite sides talk to each other, It'll happen in this case too.  

 

- How could I change HP's lawyer or HP's feelings about this?

Good question :) How's mummy's and her relatives financial situation? If mummy needs money, then money is clearly a weapon, child allowance you pay now sets a standard for the future so minimum already now. Minimum acceptable used to be 100 baht per day and child (as advised by court officer), perhaps more now but not more than 130 baht a day I think. 2 kids * 30 * 130 = 7,800 per month. How much did your lawyer advice? If money is a weapon that can be used, then I'd go straight down to 7,800 or less now and fill up the refrigerator instead, keep the receipts and add them down to the last Baht to what you transfer. It's enough to prove that you support your children - but mummy wants money. You will of course always be happy to help, pay some extra when mummy wants to take the kids to see her grand parents, goes on holiday with the kids... Not formal though

 

HP's status quo is great.... Yes, she has the kids

I'd still make clear from the beginning that there will be zero money for mummy's living costs - oh, she will hate that :) I'd upset her (and always be ready to video film when she cracks, that's why I like the spy pen). The house was bought while you were legally married so it must of course be sold, half of any debt left when loans for the house is paid off is her debt, stop paying for the car if she has one, always only pay school by direct transfer and nothing else. Let her lawyer know that you will be hard demanding your right, what is best for the children and you will just let court order if you don't get it. 

 

It will make her want to stay in the house longer of course but anything you finally formally give extra on the court order in 9 months time will be worth more to her

 

My status quo is quite the opposite as you can guess.  I spend much time driving around trying to see my children, using more than an hour going back and forth, only to be able to see my children for a few minutes, and sometimes not even that.  All depending on how HP feels that particular day, I may see my children after school for anything from zero minutes to some hours

 

That's why I stopped posting and go to court, it makes me so sad to read :(  Don't stop, your perseverance will be rewarded in the long run

 

As Larry says: Negotiation is just negotiation, don't hope anything. Still if yo get to show, it then do it

 

I must go home now but I'll continue with the rest later

 

Michael

[Awk]

1 hour ago, happylarry said:

I just wanted to clarify what the negotiation hearing is about for you , because you keep mentioning showing the judge video's etc.

You will be in a room with your wife and your respective lawyers and an interpreter if you don't speak Thai fluently. (you must know what is being said!) Also a judge will be present to act as mediator and that is all. He will not be making any judgements whatsoever except if he can see the meeting is going nowhere then he finishes it and then you get given a date for the main hearing.

The meeting is simply for the lawyers to talk to each other on your behalf and try to come to a mutually acceptable agreement to both of you.

Once it moves on to the main hearing in court you get a totally different and more senior judge who then looks at all evidence and gives his judgement.

Hope this snippet helps mate.

HL

 

Thank you.  As I have understood it from my lawyer, the mediator (usually a retired judge I'm told) would have power to help issue a temporary ruling that could remain valid until the divorce is complete.  So if HP is now preventing me from seeing my children, the mediator could, if he so wishes, issue an order that the children are to e.g. stay with me some days of the week.  In this regard, he may (or may not) be interested in seeing a video of HP refusing to let me enter the house, kicking and punching me, while the children cry and try to keep the door open for me.

 

I now however understand it quite unlikely to happen that the mediator/judge will issue such an order in the negotiation phase. :-/

 

Only if the mediator feels there is no way whatsoever that the two parties will reach any mutual understanding will the negotiation phase finish and we will progress to the next step, with a "real" judge who will evaluate evidence and make a ruling.   Normally, there will be several negotiation meetings, so after the first meeting, we will meet again in a month or two, and then again after that perhaps, before the mediator gives up and sends the case up to the "real" judge.

 

 

Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

[Awk]

11 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

- How could I change HP's lawyer or HP's feelings about this?

Good question :) How's mummy's and her relatives financial situation? If mummy needs money, then money is clearly a weapon, child allowance you pay now sets a standard for the future so minimum already now. Minimum acceptable used to be 100 baht per day and child (as advised by court officer), perhaps more now but not more than 130 baht a day I think. 2 kids * 30 * 130 = 7,800 per month. How much did your lawyer advice? If money is a weapon that can be used, then I'd go straight down to 7,800 or less now and fill up the refrigerator instead, keep the receipts and add them down to the last Baht to what you transfer. It's enough to prove that you support your children - but mummy wants money. You will of course always be happy to help, pay some extra when mummy wants to take the kids to see her grand parents, goes on holiday with the kids... Not formal though

 

At the moment her financial status is quite good I think, due to her (illegally?) refinancing the car, which is part of our shared property.  My lawyer says she will be forced to pay me back half of the money she got at the end of the case,  but I doubt that will happen in practice.  It's enough money for her daughter's school fees, lawyer, etc.   I of course no longer pay of the car (but have not told her exactly why), so she will either have to start paying of that herself with the money she stole in the refinancing deal, or they will take the car I guess.  Unfortunately, she says she will then drive my two children to school on her small motorbike.   So I am not sure what to do.  If I again start paying of the (now much larger car loan), she can of course refinance it again in some months, and get new cash.   I hope the judge/mediator can help me.  If HP is forced to return the money she got via refinance now, I could pay of the rest of the car loan (not much was left, but it was an interest-free loan sponsored by the car company) and have the book transferred to my name.  But I cannot force this. :-/

 

At the moment I pay 3,000 per week, transferred to her account.  She constantly complains that is too little, and the first month I was taking the children to the grocery store every second day after school to buy whatever was needed for food and household items (yes, I kept the receipts thank you), before going to the house and cooking dinner for everyone (HP and her daughter too).  Now HP no longer "allows" me to pick up the children however, so I no longer do that, though sometimes I have to join her to buy food and things for the children at the cheaper Thai markets where no receipt is usually given.   That does not happen after she secured her horde of cash via the refinancing almost two months ago however.

 

 

11 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

HP's status quo is great.... Yes, she has the kids

I'd still make clear from the beginning that there will be zero money for mummy's living costs - oh, she will hate that :) I'd upset her (and always be ready to video film when she cracks, that's why I like the spy pen). The house was bought while you were legally married so it must of course be sold, half of any debt left when loans for the house is paid off is her debt, stop paying for the car if she has one, always only pay school by direct transfer and nothing else. Let her lawyer know that you will be hard demanding your right, what is best for the children and you will just let court order if you don't get it. 

 

Unfortunately the debt on the house is in farangland (a neighbouring country of yours, as it happens), so my lawyer tells me it will not be of any interest to the judges here in Thailand.  It is mine alone.

 

If the final verdict is that the children are to stay with HP half the week, I would for the children's sake prefer they stay at the house I bought, to be safe and have a pleasant environment to live in.  More pleasant than I can offer with my apartment unfortunately  (though that is also decent enough), but if the children stay with me on weekdays mostly, they will be in school and kindergarten most of the day anyway.

 

11 minutes ago, MikeyIdea said:

I must go home now but I'll continue with the rest later

 

 

Thank you very much.  Looking forward to it.

[happylarry]

2 hours ago, Awk said:

 

Thank you.  As I have understood it from my lawyer, the mediator (usually a retired judge I'm told) would have power to help issue a temporary ruling that could remain valid until the divorce is complete.  So if HP is now preventing me from seeing my children, the mediator could, if he so wishes, issue an order that the children are to e.g. stay with me some days of the week.  In this regard, he may (or may not) be interested in seeing a video of HP refusing to let me enter the house, kicking and punching me, while the children cry and try to keep the door open for me.

 

I now however understand it quite unlikely to happen that the mediator/judge will issue such an order in the negotiation phase. :-/

 

Only if the mediator feels there is no way whatsoever that the two parties will reach any mutual understanding will the negotiation phase finish and we will progress to the next step, with a "real" judge who will evaluate evidence and make a ruling.   Normally, there will be several negotiation meetings, so after the first meeting, we will meet again in a month or two, and then again after that perhaps, before the mediator gives up and sends the case up to the "real" judge.

 

 

Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

The judge will only take it to a second negotiation if he sees hope and improvement in the first meeting, but from your descriptions it does not seem likely, so he wont want to waste his and everybodys time I would have thought.

HL

[Awk]

37 minutes ago, happylarry said:

The judge will only take it to a second negotiation if he sees hope and improvement in the first meeting, but from your descriptions it does not seem likely, so he wont want to waste his and everybodys time I would have thought.

HL

 

Thank you for the information.  I cannot imagine HP would offer me anything more than the children staying with me half the time, and even that only if her lawyer convinces her that is what I will get as a minimum when the judge rules anyway.  

In that case I am starting to wonder whether, unless HP should, after a year of terror, suddenly get a change of heart and want to maintain a normal, polite, relationship with her children's father, a ruling by the judge would be in both the children's and my own best interest then.  Extra money/assets I would otherwise have to offer HP,  to support HP and her own daughter in exchange for a mutual agreement I could then instead save for my own children.  

My lawyer has warned me that a ruling from the judge would not be good for anyone. There would be no room for HP and me to adapt it to what we felt would be better for both of us, and that more worrying, in cases where there are two children, the judge will often rule that one child will stay with each parent.  The latter would be horrible for the children, and I was very surprised and saddened to hear that.  I am not sure if that is true or not however.  Hopefully not.

 

I'm wondering what the risk would be that the judge would not rule that the children will stay with me (a normal man with a respectable job and no adverse history/record of any kind) at least half the week?  Before I thought that I may risk ending up with just visitation rights (horrible),  or with just one of my daughters "all" of the time, and depend on HP for seeing my other daughter even just sometimes, but perhaps my fear is unfounded?

[wprime]

As someone who grew up with a crazy Thai mother please try to get full custody. I don't know much about legal stuff so I'm not sure if it'll help but if you can, try to get some statements of people who know the two of you to demonstrate that her character would be a dangerous influence on the children.

[MikeyIdea]

On 2017-4-12 at 5:22 PM, Awk said:

 

Thank you.  As I have understood it from my lawyer, the mediator (usually a retired judge I'm told) would have power to help issue a temporary ruling that could remain valid until the divorce is complete.  So if HP is now preventing me from seeing my children, the mediator could, if he so wishes, issue an order that the children are to e.g. stay with me some days of the week.  In this regard, he may (or may not) be interested in seeing a video of HP refusing to let me enter the house, kicking and punching me, while the children cry and try to keep the door open for me.

 

I now however understand it quite unlikely to happen that the mediator/judge will issue such an order in the negotiation phase. :-/

 

Only if the mediator feels there is no way whatsoever that the two parties will reach any mutual understanding will the negotiation phase finish and we will progress to the next step, with a "real" judge who will evaluate evidence and make a ruling.   Normally, there will be several negotiation meetings, so after the first meeting, we will meet again in a month or two, and then again after that perhaps, before the mediator gives up and sends the case up to the "real" judge.

 

 

Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

 

The negotiation session can also be handled by a court officer (normally a lawyer attached to the court), doesn't have to be a judge at all. A Thai friend of mine (Thai Thai case) had a court officer who took down mummy directly when she came in demanding 20,000 baht per month and child (not married, shouldn't matter). He must have disliked her style quite a bit. He set the standard 100 baht per day and child and it stuck all the way to the court order (mutual agreement), this was 6-7 years ago or so

 

One thing I noticed was that the pain is higher when expectations are too high and the disappointment comes, I am therefore a bit blunt almost but I think it is better than hoping for something that is so unlikely to happen. 

 

It won't happen, there will be no temporary court order, the chance is minuscule. My advice is to get the fundamentals in, mother is using violence to stop you from seeing the children, mummy tells the children to not go to daddy, not like Daddy (want to see video evidence?), there will be no agreement until you already have 50% time with the kids, this is about the kids future so education must be part of any court order / deal and only daddy has been interested in that in the past or whatever is suitable for your situation, you will be an active father always being there for the kids so no more than minimum money is necessary and you will help and fill up the refrigerator every week (1 second show the receipts then on), you will pay when mummy brings kids to see her grand parents anyway (just shoot back Why? if that is challenged). That you will be an active always present father is an important fundamental. 

 

-- Only if the mediator feels there is no way whatsoever that the two parties will reach any mutual understanding will the negotiation phase finish and we will progress to the next step

No, It will progress regardless, the "rule", run by feeling and ear of course, is if there is no quick solution possible then on to the real court session. Negotiation often continues but it's all up to the judges and mainly the head judge. There are different styles, some accept haggle to death and will go down the path of pushing (forcing almost) the non favoured part to accept a negotiated agreement (this is what I call The wind of the Court, it is very important in Thailand), some order faster

 

Was just thinking - Think in terms of: OK, what's the alternative then? The court is fundamentally fair, it really is. You wrote: Court will not accept the debt of the house because it is in a foreign bank, true, if they do that then everything abroad will also have to be included and they don't want that

 

But: The court is still fundamentally fair. What does that mean? Mummy has an asset in Thailand (assuming that title is in her name) and it will still have to be split 50/50 (have to because you demand that), it will be included in the "assets section" and the question is only: What should it be? How can the court make this fair? Ask the court. The default is that it is sold and split 50/50, if they can't advice anything better then that is what it will be. Don't be fooled by lawyers (and court) saying that mummy and Daddy can't make an agreement after court order about - OK, let's not sell even though the court order says so. The point is: No one will punish anyone  

 

Have you thought of solving this by putting the house in the kids name? Mummy will refuse of course, court likes if you say - There is nothing that a father wants more than to secure the future for the kids => makes mummy look bad. Can't give debt to child, true, so transfer cannot be made until debt is paid off but Juvenile courts in Thailand have pushed for mutual agreement that asset with debt registered at the back of the Chanote shall be transferred to child before. Land department and the bank couldn't implement it but that's a totally different matter and so what? Point is 1) Still good for the child, once it's is in the court order, then you can easily make it a criminal offence if mummy sells 2) fair split of assets in the divorce

 

If the back of the Chanote is blank (as you guarantee the debt abroad) then it's an absolutely perfect solution. Note that the court cannot order  (well they can do anything of course but they will not) order leaving out a house in the wife's name in a divorce. A Thai citizen is allowed to own land full stop. That's the main dominant rule. Court disregards debt because it is foreign. Are they going to include some foreign things but not others now? I'll send you  a copy of Idea's Chanote and a copy of her Swedish passport to you after Songkran. That was done in Huaykwang in Bangkok 2002

 

I do think that you should leave this out of the negotiating session though. Fundamental 50/50 and house must be sold is enough (especially for mummy), further distraction is just diluting the message at this stage. Transfer to children is definitely a viable solution for the main court case, no need to offer solution to that in the negotiating session. No need to worry about that you want mummy to have a nice environment to bring up the kids in now, plenty of time to change that later 

 

Leaving out the house is simply not an option regardless of what the court threatens with. I don't know where you go to court (it matters), if it's Pattaya / Chonburi then you may be a bit disadvantaged but doesn't matter either, you'll be in the Appeals court within a year and it's a different matter there. House is safe until  

 

Michael

[MikeyIdea]

On 2017-4-12 at 8:59 PM, Awk said:

 

Thank you for the information.  I cannot imagine HP would offer me anything more than the children staying with me half the time, and even that only if her lawyer convinces her that is what I will get as a minimum when the judge rules anyway.  

In that case I am starting to wonder whether, unless HP should, after a year of terror, suddenly get a change of heart and want to maintain a normal, polite, relationship with her children's father, a ruling by the judge would be in both the children's and my own best interest then.  Extra money/assets I would otherwise have to offer HP,  to support HP and her own daughter in exchange for a mutual agreement I could then instead save for my own children.  

My lawyer has warned me that a ruling from the judge would not be good for anyone. There would be no room for HP and me to adapt it to what we felt would be better for both of us, and that more worrying, in cases where there are two children, the judge will often rule that one child will stay with each parent.  The latter would be horrible for the children, and I was very surprised and saddened to hear that.  I am not sure if that is true or not however.  Hopefully not.

 

I'm wondering what the risk would be that the judge would not rule that the children will stay with me (a normal man with a respectable job and no adverse history/record of any kind) at least half the week?  Before I thought that I may risk ending up with just visitation rights (horrible),  or with just one of my daughters "all" of the time, and depend on HP for seeing my other daughter even just sometimes, but perhaps my fear is unfounded?

 

-- Thank you for the information.  I cannot imagine HP would offer me anything more than the children staying with me half the time, and even that only if her lawyer convinces her that is what I will get as a minimum when the judge rules anyway.  

That can happen. The judges can convince too, 50/50

 

You will get 50/50 and minimum 3/4 access, don't worry about that. You describe mummy as hard, you must be hard too or you get disadvantaged. Support mummy and her own daughter is just if you get something in return, otherwise zero. Don't see it as "extra that I'd have to offer in exchange for mutual agreement". Note what the lawyer said about letting the court order - Everybody wants mutual agreement regardless of if you support ummy and her own daughter too. Don't forget that

 

-- My lawyer has warned me that a ruling from the judge would not be good for anyone

Especially not for him. Lawyers are politicians. What he didn't say is that the mutual agreement could be worse for you in the long run. Don't buy it

 

-- There would be no room for HP and me to adapt it to what we felt would be better for both of us

Why? Not correct at all. No one will punish either of you two for doing something that is better for the child. You can still adapt any way both of you want, just get what you and mummy agree on down on a paper, date sign and witness it and you have a legal agreement that legal guardians have the right to make that supersede the court order for that specific thing. Be careful what you put in!

 

If the layer refuse to accept. Are you saying that mummy and Daddy must take that to Juvenile and get a mutual agreement there on what is better for the child? OK, that's so easy, why didn't you say so? Parents can always open up a case in Juvenile and they are always assessed from what is the best for the child according to the current circumstances. Something must have changed, then better for the child, that's all. I'd advise - Brush his scare tactics off   

 

 -- in cases where there are two children, the judge will often rule that one child will stay with each parent

True in many cases in Thailand, but remember that it is only for a year, then you'll be in the Appeals court. Mummy will be without money by the end of the court case, just wait another couple of months when she can't care for her other daughter, then go

 

-- one child will stay with each parent.  The latter would be horrible for the children, and I was very surprised and saddened to hear that

Bad yes but not horrible and not forever

 

-- I'm wondering what the risk would be that the judge would not rule that the children will stay with me (a normal man with a respectable job and no adverse history/record of any kind) at least half the week?  

Split is quite possible if order, don't see it as all negative, that ensure 50/50 to you (which you practically may not get regardless of what a mutual court agreement says) and sets you up nicely for having more when they become teenagers anyway. Both kids with mummy more than 4/3? Small, very small

 

-- Before I thought that I may risk ending up with just visitation rights (horrible)

Visitation rights only would be very unlikely 

-- with just one of my daughters "all" of the time,

one of my daughters all the time (without quotation marks) could be possible. Mummy will probably get the 4 year old and you the 8 year old. Expect mummy to alienate the older and then it gets more difficult for the court, they don't really want to order a 9 year old to be with someone "they don't want to be with"

 

-- Depend on depend on HP for seeing my other daughter even just sometimes

I would take that for granted actually but it should wear off with time. I have said it before and some disagreed but I'll say it again anyway: Mothers are more for revenge, men get on with what is best for the child faster, women are usually harder than men and they benefit from it 

 

Michael

[MikeyIdea]

1 hour ago, MikeyIdea said:

 

...  Sorry

Edited April 14, 2017 by MikeyIdea

[MikeyIdea]

On 2017-4-12 at 5:42 PM, Awk said:

 

In the text

 

-- At the moment her financial status is quite good I think, due to her (illegally?) refinancing the car, which is part of our shared property.  

Yes it is indeed illegally and you can even push criminal charges (at a later stage after Juvenile court case is finished). I think that you should get your lawyer to send a short registered letter to the mother letting her know that you have stopped paying as she has done this behind your back and while you fulfil requirements for child support, nothing else. Wake up mummy, requirements for child support doesn't include car

 

-- My lawyer says she will be forced to pay me back half of the money she got at the end of the case,  but I doubt that will happen in practice

Yes, she will and she won't pay. Controls so that doesn't happen? Difficult, the money is probably lost but your possibility to bend the mother because of what she did is not. Fundamentals say that it is shared property. Both cases court order and mutual agreement should be 50/50 excluding what she refinanced. Tell your lawyer to try to get it worded so that car value to be split is excluding her refinancing without mentioning that she did it and it could be considered perjury when she signs it. Perjury is a non-compoundable offence and easiest way to go to jail in Thailand. Tell your lawyer to appeal any asset split not considering what she did behind your back and he will help to get amount minus refinancing in. 

 

-- I hope the judge/mediator can help me

Unlikely,  worth a try in the real session

 

-- At the moment I pay 3,000 per week, transferred to her account.  

My opinion: Too much, I would reduce to 2,000 and fill up the rest of the money with food = still pay the same at the end of the day. Nothing saying that you have to pay weekly, can just as well be monthly if you think that it can benefit you if she runs out of money in the middle of the month and need you to put in 300 baht in the tank of the car, - only if I get the kids this weekend and I would not pay if I don't

 

-- Now HP no longer "allows" me to pick up the children however, so I no longer do that, though sometimes I have to join her to buy food and things for the children at the cheaper Thai markets where no receipt is usually given.  

It's likely to get worse when her life gets tougher, keeping the kids from you is her weapon. Throwing money on her will only escalate though so not an option either 

 

-- That does not happen after she secured her horde of cash via the refinancing almost two months ago however.

Money disappears quickly without income, 300,000 is gone in less than a year also without lawyers fees

 

-- Unfortunately the debt on the house is in farangland (a neighbouring country of yours, as it happens), so my lawyer tells me it will not be of any interest to the judges here in Thailand.  It is mine alone. Michael - OK, the debt yes, but not the house and the land

Does this mean that Chanote is free of debt? => Childrens name, no other way, otherwise must still be sold. If Chanote is free, then she will refinance anyway otherwise or kill you slowly economically over time. If she threatens with refinance the house, then get lawyer to send recorded delivery letter stating that it is marital asset, you do not allow it and you fulfil support duties as per law (8,000 + 4,000 non money is enough for her too). You can get a criminal offence on her it she still proceeds

 

-- If the final verdict is that the children are to stay with HP half the week, I would for the children's sake prefer they stay at the house I bought, to be safe and have a pleasant environment to live in.  

Pleasant environment is way overstated. Many Thais and Thai kids are much happier in their shacks then they ever would be in a nice apartment. I don't agree because I live in a bit of a shack and my daughter is very happy and where would that lead you? She's in a power situation forever. That can only work if she turns around and truly shows a pleasant attitude to you two sharing the kids

 

-- More pleasant than I can offer with my apartment unfortunately  (though that is also decent enough), but if the children stay with me on weekdays mostly, they will be in school and kindergarten most of the day anyway.

Do you work and live decently close to where the house is? You say that you drive around for hours trying to see the kids. Would skip the apartment and move into the house permanently be possible for 7 - 12 months, until court case is over? Commuting time could be the same as you waste driving around. She will perhaps not accept but will she deny you or move with the kids? Just brain storming

 

A few things: Your plans and your future working here the next 10 years? Your financial situation OK to take the fight? Do you have your own interpretor or do you understand Thai?  Super important

 

The car: I have been driving motor cycle in Thailand for 26 years, I have a car (again  after I paid off the loan that mummy took behind my back and forced her to accept transferring it to my name, I deducted every single baht I paid from her allowance). We as in I and Idea still use the motor cycle all the time, I have taken her to school every morning since kindergarten on it and she loves it. We're going swimming now and she wants us to take the bike. I see nothing wrong in mummy having to take your kids to school on a bike after they repossess the car, I really don't

 

Off Swimming with Idea, on Schompoo, a pink Honda Scoopy

 

Talk to you later

Michael

 

Edited April 14, 2017 by MikeyIdea