Is it Lawful to exclude a McKenzie Friend from the Family Courts?

ivanataylor made this Freedom of Information request to Department for Children, Schools and Families

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

The request was refused by Department for Children, Schools and Families.

Dear Sir or Madam,

Under freedom of Information, please answer the following.

Is it a statutory breech of the Family Courts, for CAFCASS guardians, Social Workers and Childrens Solicitors, to intimidate a Mother with threats of Forced Adoption for her children, if she does not get rid of her McKenzie friend?

This happened at Barrow in Furness Family Court.

What action, if any, will be taken to stop this from happening again, NOW?

Yours faithfully

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor

Department for Children, Schools and Families

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Thank you for your recent email. A reply will be sent to you as soon as
possible. For information, the departmental standard for correspondence
received is that responses should be sent within 20 working days as you
are requesting information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Your correspondence has been allocated the reference number 2009/0080054

Thank you.

Central Allocation Team

Public Communications Team

Tel: 0870 0002288
www.dcsf.gov.uk

show quoted sections

Department for Children, Schools and Families

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    Correspondence Image FWFreedomofInformationrequest IsitLawfultoexcludeaMcKenzieFriendfromtheFamilyCourts.html

    3K Download

Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor,

Thank you for your correspondence. Please be aware that we have passed on
your comments to CAFCASS directly for them to provide a response. Please
contact them directly with any further queries relating to this matter.
Please see following contact details for your information.

CAFCASS National Office
8th Floor, Wyndham House
189 Marsh Wall
London
E14 9SH
Tel: 020 7510 7000
Email: [1][email address]

Regards

Kathy Roberts

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

For all interested parties,

This is what happens, when you inquire or complain.

You contact the Childrens Minister, in Parliament, and they refer it back to Department of Education and Skills, who then pass it back to the offending departments, whom you first inquired of, or complained about.

If you complain about a Social Worker, at higher levels, then they pass it to the Social worker you complained about, so the person you complain about answers the complaint. Not only does this put you at risk of further unfounded abuse at the hands of corrupt officials, some of whom can be very vindictive, punitive and malicious, it also means that professionals who behave badly are not taken to task and get the chance to smooth things over, hide files, form the Local Government Ombudsman and OFSTED , containing vital evidence, often involving destroying whole case files, and cover up.

In my opinion this is a prime example of buck passing and corrupt management of inquiries and complaints. Typical of Common Purpose management techniques.

Jassal, Jasvinder,

1 Attachment

<<CAF 261 - Ack 2nd October 2009 .pdf>>
Please find attached.
I notice you did not receive this on 2nd October.
Miss Jasvinder Jassal
Information Assurance & Data Handling Officer
Cafcass
6th Floor Sanctuary Buildings
Great Smith Street
London
SW1P 3BT

E-mail: [email address]

This email and any files and/or attachments transmitted with it are
confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed.

If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it and notify the sender immediately.

CAFCASS makes reasonable attempts to exclude from this e-mail and any
attachments viruses, or any other defect which might affect your computer
or IT system, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that
they are virus free and CAFCASS accepts no liability for any loss or
damage arising in any way from their receipt or use.

Jassal, Jasvinder,

1 Attachment

<<261 - Final October 2009 .pdf>>

Please find attached.
Miss Jasvinder Jassal
Information Assurance & Data Handling Officer
Cafcass
6th Floor Sanctuary Buildings
Great Smith Street
London
SW1P 3BT

E-mail: [email address]
Tel: 0844 353 3317
Fax 0844 353 3351

P Do you really need to print this email?

This email and any files and/or attachments transmitted with it are
confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed.

If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do
not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance
on it and notify the sender immediately.

CAFCASS makes reasonable attempts to exclude from this e-mail and any
attachments viruses, or any other defect which might affect your computer
or IT system, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that
they are virus free and CAFCASS accepts no liability for any loss or
damage arising in any way from their receipt or use.

Dear Jassal, Jasvinder,

It would be a complete waste of my time to complain to CAFCASS, as they have already been found to have no effective complaints procedure. I have learned this from personal experience and from many other parties with whom I work on these important matters. CAFCASS have also been reported in the media, as failing and not fit for purpose. It is now very clear to me that these civil servants are not answerable to any authority, other than their own corruption, which continues to harm innocent families, leaving behind a legacy of human misery and despair.

[Potentially Defamatory Material Removed]

The departments operating in the Barrow in Furness Court system are corrupt and unlawful. Yet who can stop them? Seemingly, no government authority has the power to bring into question the misconduct of two dishonest and self promoting men.

You have not provided me with any of the information I requested. As per normal, over a six year period of asking for clarification and complaining, I have been, yet again sent a full circle and arrived nowhere. other than back to square one.

Yours sincerely,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Cafcass

6th Floor Sanctuary Buildings
Your ref:CAF261
Great Smith Street
London
Our ref: JJ/CAF261
SW1P 3BT
Date: 2nd October 2009

Tel: 0844 353 3317

Fax 0844 353 3398
Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Re: Freedom of Information Request

Thank you for your recent request, which was passed on to Cafcass from the DCSF on 28th
September 2009 and passed onto myself, requesting the following:

Is it a statutory breech of the Family Courts, for CAFCASS guardians, Social Workers and
Childrens Solicitors, to intimidate a Mother with threats of Forced Adoption for her
children, if she does not get rid of her McKenzie friend? This happened at Barrow in
Furness Family Court.

This letter serves to acknowledge that Cafcass received your request on 28th September
2009 and I will be dealing with it the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Your reference number is CAF 261

Under the Act, Cafcass is required to notify you as to the final decision made regarding your
request 20 working days from receipt of your request. You will receive a response on or
before 26th October 2009.

Yours sincerely,

Miss Jasvinder Jassal
Information Assurance & Data Handling Officer
[email address]

Baroness Valerie Howarth Chair
Anthony Douglas CBE Chief Executive

Cafcass, The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service, is a non-departmental public body of the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)

Dear Jassal, Jasvinder,

http://www.youtube.com/user/thelostpacke...

Yours sincerely,

ivanataylor

Dear Sir or Madam,
http://www.youtube.com/user/thelostpacke...

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

ivanataylor [mailto:request-18262-
[email address]]

Cafcass

6th Floor Sanctuary Buildings
Your ref:CAF261
Great Smith Street
London
Our ref: JJ/CAF261
SW1P 3BT
Date: 8th October 2009

Tel: 0844 353 3317

Fax 0844 353 3398
Dear Ms Stewart-Taylor

Re: Freedom of Information Request

Thank you for your recent request, which was passed on to Cafcass from the DCSF on 28th
September 2009 and passed onto myself, requesting the following:

Is it a statutory breech of the Family Courts, for CAFCASS guardians, Social Workers and
Childrens Solicitors, to intimidate a Mother with threats of Forced Adoption for her
children, if she does not get rid of her McKenzie friend? This happened at Barrow in
Furness Family Court.

Looking into you request further it is not a request for information we hold as Cafcass does
not have any guidance as suggested above. It is however apparent that you have a complaint
to make about a Cafcass practitioner. I suggest you contact the Service Manager of the
practitioner involved and register a complaint. The Cafcass complaints leaflet can be found at
the following web address: http://www.cafcass.gov.uk/publications/l...

This is the Carlise Cafcass office address for any correspondence:
Carlisle
Capital Building
Hilltop Heights
Carlisle
Cumbria
CA1 2NS

Yours sincerely,

Miss Jasvinder Jassal
Information Assurance & Data Handling Officer
[email address]

Baroness Valerie Howarth Chair
Anthony Douglas CBE Chief Executive

Cafcass, The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service, is a non-departmental public body of the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF)

Department for Children, Schools and Families

1 Attachment

  • Attachment

    Correspondence Image FWFreedomofInformationrequest IsitLawfultoexcludeaMcKenzieFriendfromtheFamilyCourts linda.html

    4K Download

Dear Ms Yvonne Stewart-Taylor,

Thank you for your correspondence. Our policy officials have advised that
your enquiry does not fall within the scope of the FOI Act. The issues you
raise fall within the remit of the Ministry of Justice. I have forwarded
your email to them so that they can reply to you directly.

Regards

Linda Ellis

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

general.queries,

1 Attachment

This appears to be a question of general procedure and may be easiest to
direct the correspondent to the guidance on the HMCS website, issued by
the President of the Family Division on 11/04/08, which sets out that it
is at the courts discretion as to whether they are allowed to assist a
litigant. If the appointment is refused the litigant can appeal such a
decision but the MF has not such right.

If you wanted something more. This guidance was issued to court staff by
the team which is now currently lead by John Bowman
[1]http://libra.lcd.gsi.gov.uk/courtswork/g...

show quoted sections

Dear Sir or Madam,

For information.

My reply from David Cameron MP. I have already spoken to the shadow Childrens Minister about the ongoing fraud and corruption in Government departments.

Dear Mrs Stewart-Taylor,

I am writing on behalf of David Cameron to thank you for your e-mail. I am sorry
for the delay in my reply.

We are grateful to you for getting in touch and for making us aware of your
concerns about the family courts system. I am passing your message on to the
Shadow Justice Minister, Henry Bellingham, so that he can look into the points
you raise.

Yours sincerely,

Lara Moreno Perez
Office of the Leader of the Opposition
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA

Yours faithfully,

ivanataylor

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

This FOI request has been forwarded to the Ministry of Injustice.

Customer Services (CSHQ),

1 Attachment

Dear Ivana Taylor,

Thank you for your email. You ask if Is it Lawful to exclude a McKenzie
Friend from the Family Courts? It's entirely a matter for the judge
hearing the case.

Regards
HMCS, Customer Service Unit

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the
addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not
permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be
intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when
deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read
at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when
composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

Stone, Benny,

1 Attachment

<<ReissuedMcKenzieFriendGuidance (2).doc>>
Thank you for your email. Please see the attached reissued guidance in
respect of MacKenzie Friends.

Regards
HMCS, Customer Service Unit

This e-mail (and any attachment) is intended only for the attention of the
addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not
permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all
copies and inform the sender by return e-mail.

Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be
intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when
deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail.

This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be
monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. E-mail
monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read
at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when
composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

J Webb (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

Families are having their children stolen by the state for forced adoption

http://justiceforukfamilies.ning.com/pho...

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

A letter has just come to me, dated the 12 November 2009 from Bridget Prentice MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.

It is a response to my lobbying MP's re corruption in the Secret Family Court System. She is responding to David Gauke MP the Ref is MC257983

The letter reads as follows.

Dear David

Yvonne Stewart-Taylor , my address is here omitted.

thank you for your letter of 14 October to Jack Straw, about social services and openness in the family courts. I am replying as the Minister responsible for the family justice system in England and Wales. You refer to an earlier letter which my officials have not been able to trace, but I apologise for the delay in responding to you nonetheless.

I am very sorry for the experience that Mrs Stewart-Taylor has had with social services and the family courts regarding her grandchild. In order to preserve the principle of judicial independence, I cannot give opinion on a specific case but I hope that she will find the following general comments helpful.

It has, since 1991, been the policy of successive governments, as set out in legislation, that children should live with their parents wherever possible and that services should be provided to children in need and their families to enable this to happen.

The child protection system is designed to identify families who may be vulnerable and seeks to offer help at an early stage in order to enable children to remain in their family. Social workers must work closely with parents to identify and evidence where change or improvement is necessary in order to enable a family to stay together.

I assure Mrs Stewart-Taylor that local authorities are not given financial incentives to increase the number of children in care or remove children from care of their parents in order for them to be adopted. The decision to take a child into care is never an easy one, and the decision to make a care order is taken by the courts. In every case where a child is taken into care on a care order, the courts will have considered all the evidence and taken the view that the child has been significantly harmed, or would be if they were not taken into care.

where the court makes an order placing a child in the care of a local authority, the authority will continue to work with the family with a view to the child returning home. Happily, the vast majority of children are returned to their parents. for those children who cannot return home to their parents, they have the right to have alternative plans considered to provide them with a permanent home; adoption is only one of the available options of providing this.

The final decision on whether a child should be adopted rests with the courts. Before a court makes such an important decision it must be convinced on the basis of the evidence that this is the best way to meet the child's needs on a long term basis. where the parents/guardians have not given their consent, but it may only do so in limited circumstances. The court would have to be satisfied that the parent could not be found or is incapable of giving consent, or that the welfare of the child requires the consent to be dispensed with.

The Government does not have, and has never had, a national target to increase the number of children being taken into care. the target on adoption reflected the Government's desire to reverse a long-term decline in the number of children already in care finding a permanent home through adoption. The adoption target ended in March 2006. Similarly, the Government does not set adoption targets for local authorities, although authorities themselves may choose to develop targets with central Government through the Local area Agreement/Local Public service agreement process.

Mrs Stewart-Taylor is also concerned about the ability of parents or families to speak out about their case. The extent to which a parent, child or the media can publish information about individual children is complex and determined by a number of different aspects of legislation. The issue is the need to balance the rights of children to privacy, with the rights of other parties, and those of the media, in relation to freedom of expression.

The government has already taken some action to make family proceedings more open- the media can attend most proceedings, and the rules about disclosure of information have been amended to make it easier for people to seek the help and support they need.

these changes do not yet apply to adoption cases.Adoption is the most difficult and life changing decision a family court can make and needs special consideration. There are concerns that the identity of children and adoptive parents might be exposed, particularly in small rural populations or ethnic community areas. we are therefore considering, along with people most involved in adoption work, how best that these proceedings can be made more open but alongside legislation to ensure that identities are protected.

We will also introduce new legislation that will put the reporting and admission regime for all tiers of family court on the same foundation as that for youth courts. This will allow the media to report the substance of what they witness, but not any information that would lead to revealing the identity of the families involved. The Government will revise the law on reporting restrictions as soon as parliamentary time allows.

I hope that this letter is helpful. I am enclosing a copy for you to forward to Mrs Stewart-Taylor, should you wish to do so.

Kind regards

Bridget

BRIDGET PRENTICE

I would be interested in what anyone thinks about this. It has taken 6 years to get to here. I have been lobbying every MP for many years, repeatedly and finally we get this response.??

LS Palmer (Account suspended) left an annotation ()

http://www.mediafire.com/?igb0f758y7ed677

Download a real life case study on how children are kinapped by CAFCASS through the secret family courts.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-w...

Open this link and come on mass to this event. this site will give you full instruction as to how to present your evidence.

Now is our chance to bring the monsters down and reclaim our Common law rights, expel corrupt officialdom and expose this mass corruption, treason and tyranny in the UK. Lawful, peaceful, non violent mass non compliance is our weapon against all those responsible for destroying innocent families and abusing OUR CHILDREN. Thank you.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

here is the link again sorry it failed, please support us in this vital attempt to expose once and for all, corporate failings, deliberate child trafficking agendas and abuse of children in corporate care. Thanks

http://www.ukcolumn.org/events/blowing-w...

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Barrow in Furness Court is corrupt and unlawful, they tried to charge me with contempt of Court and failed in April 2011. They allow corporate criminals and brutality by police to go unchallenged and persecute victims of corporate crimes. I am reporting this as a matter of public interest and for the protection of the public.

Police officers Burk Johnson and Edwards are all criminals who have been awarded protection by Kendal and Barrow in furness Courts and Magistrates. The IPCC Crown Prosecution are in collusion to pervert the course of Justice.

ivanataylor left an annotation ()

Magistrates Barrow in Furness
Responsible for my false detention and incarceration, by use of a PRIVATE security FIRM!!

Garry Ormandroid, Liz Eagles and Geroge Butler. Magistrates.

Clerk Mr Laurenson.

Corporate criminals abusing authority, perverting justice, committing fraud and perjury, aiding and abettting corrupt brutal police officers to commit crimes and continue to work and committ yet more crimes against the unsuspecting members of the public, who pay their wages. These unlawful courts are manned by vipers, and no justice is ever served in them.