Looking for help in your family court proceedings?Bridge The Gap is a free, community-built guide to UK family court, written by litigants and McKenzie Friends, for litigants. Real observations, plain English, and people who can help.
You've received your Cafcass section 7 report and it contains factual errors — things that didn't happen, evidence that was ignored, and a recommendation built on a single 40-minute phone call. You know it's wrong. But you're a litigant in person and you can't afford a barrister to cross-examine the officer or commission a psychological report. The hearing is in two weeks.
This content reflects observational insights and lived community experiences. It does not constitute legal advice — always consult a qualified professional for your specific circumstances.
Tell the judge everything that's wrong with the report in your position statement. List every error, every missed piece of evidence, every contradiction. Surely if the court sees how flawed the report is, they'll set it aside.
The court is not obliged to accept a Cafcass report, but judges frequently give it significant weight. Simply listing errors in a position statement does not test the report — the officer is not cross-examined on paper. Without focused questioning of the officer in the witness box, the errors remain allegations. And without understanding the statutory framework the officer was working within, some of your 'errors' may be disagreements with their professional judgment rather than factual mistakes the court can act on. Getting this wrong means the recommendation stands unchallenged and shapes the final order.
Identify the factual errors the officer can be questioned on — things that demonstrably did or did not happen — and separate them from disagreements with their opinion. Prepare focused, polite questions for cross-examination that expose each factual error without attacking the officer. Ask the court to direct that specific evidence you filed be addressed. If you cannot afford representation, ask the court about the bar for cross-examination of the officer and whether a McKenzie Friend can support you in framing questions. File a position statement that sets out the errors concisely and states you will ask the officer about them in the witness box — do not relitigate the whole case on paper.
A McKenzie Friend helps you separate factual errors from opinion, draft focused cross-examination questions, and structure your position statement so the court sees you are testing the report methodically rather than reacting emotionally. They can sit with you in court and prompt you, but cannot ask the questions themselves unless the court permits it. The goal is to give the judge a clear basis to depart from the recommendation — not to relitigate everything Cafcass got wrong.
✦ Shared by Bridge The Gap community
Navigating court alone?
A McKenzie Friend can help you make sense of this in the context of your own case.
Find your supportWe use essential cookies only, such as remembering this choice and keeping you signed in if you create an account. No tracking or analytics cookies are used. Read our Privacy Policy.