What is a McKenzie Friend?

A McKenzie Friend is a person who supports a litigant in person in court by taking notes, helping with paperwork and offering practical and moral support. They are not a solicitor and do not provide legal representation unless the court grants additional rights.

Can I go to family court without a solicitor?

Yes. Many people represent themselves in UK family court as litigants in person. Bridge The Gap shares community observations and resources to help you understand the process. It does not provide legal advice.

What is Bridge The Gap?

Bridge The Gap is a community-built platform by litigants and McKenzie Friends that highlights the gaps between what people assume about family court and what actually happens.

How Family Court Actually Works

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.

Start here About the site

Guided Explorer

⚖️

Subject Guide

How Family Court Actually Works

Most people walk in not knowing what a hearing is even for. These are community-shared observations of the process — not a prescriptive step-by-step guide.

Want support with this?

A McKenzie Friend can help you navigate understanding the process in family court.

Cookies

We use essential cookies only, such as remembering this choice and keeping you signed in. If we add analytics cookies in the future, we will ask first. Read our Privacy Policy.

How Family Court Actually Works

Assumption: "My solicitor will take care of the hard bits."

Assumption: If I explain everything clearly, the court will move faster.

Assumption: "How can they do that?"

Assumption: "They're lying — why isn't the judge doing anything?"

Assumption: "The judge didn't listen to me"

Assumption: "They breached the order — why aren't they being punished?"

Assumption: "Why is the case taking so long?"

Assumption: "I thought the court would see what they've done"

Assumption: "Why is nothing being done about this?"

Assumption: "My ex is just bluffing — they won't really push the case all the way."

Assumption: "They'll drop the case before we actually end up in front of a judge."

Assumption: "We'll never reach a final hearing — my ex will back down before it comes to that."

Assumption: "I've given the court all my proof – they have to look at it."

Assumption: Expectation vs Reality Gap

Assumption: Communication/Explanation Gap

Assumption: Responsibility Gap

Assumption: Process & Timing Gap

Assumption: Information Asymmetry Gap

Assumption: Power & Confidence Gap

Assumption: Outcome Expectation Gap

Assumption: Once I have a consent order, it is over and I am protected.

Assumption: The judge will read everything I have submitted.

Assumption: If the other side lies in their statement, the judge will see straight through it.

Assumption: I do not need to attend every hearing — it is just procedural.

Assumption: My ex has to follow the child arrangements order. If they don't, the court will automatically enforce it.

Assumption: Their solicitor said they can ring-fence the money — so it must be true.

Assumption: The next hearing will sort it.

Assumption: I have left the property, so I still have to keep paying the mortgage.

Assumption: I just want out — I do not need to know what they have in pensions or savings.

Assumption: I disclosed my bank statements. The judge will see them at the hearing.

Assumption: The other parent verbally agreed to pay half the nursery fees but is now refusing. Can I enforce that?

Assumption: I will have to see my ex in court

Assumption: Legal aid was removed from family cases for good reasons — the government knew what it was doing.

Assumption: The Section 7 report will decide who the child lives with.

Assumption: An urgent hearing means the court will make an instant decision on the day.

Assumption: Without prejudice means the communication is private and can never be used.

Assumption: If they don't cooperate, nothing can happen.

Assumption: More evidence earlier makes my case stronger.

Assumption: If we go to mediation, it should resolve things.

Assumption: I've been reasonable, so this should be straightforward.

Assumption: The solicitor is driving this — they will sort it out.

Assumption: The court needs to understand everything now — I should put it all in at the first hearing.

Assumption: If I don't engage in calls or informal chats, it will go against me.

Assumption: If they lie or delay, the court will step in quickly and deal with it.

Assumption: My husband is not disclosing his assets. Can an accountant help me find out what he has?

Assumption: I have a solicitor but the bills are mounting up. Can I switch to a McKenzie Friend instead?

Assumption: My solicitor is submitting my C100 and C1A. Once that is done, can I just take over from there?

Assumption: I can have a McKenzie Friend and a solicitor at the same time.

Assumption: The final divorce order can be granted before finances are resolved — it does not affect my financial claims.

Assumption: If the other party causes unnecessary court proceedings by refusing to cooperate, they will automatically pay the costs.

Assumption: The other party has provided a much lower property valuation than mine. The court will see through it.

Assumption: If the other party is hiding assets using third parties — family members or business associates — there is nothing the court can do.

Assumption: If I tell the truth and explain how much I love my child, the court will understand.

Assumption: I will just explain how much I have been involved and show the court the messages. That will speak for itself.

Assumption: I need to make sure the court knows everything the other parent has done wrong.

Assumption: When I am in court I just need to explain everything that has happened from the beginning.

Assumption: I am scared and angry — I just need to get into court and say how I feel.

Assumption: I do not need to prepare for the Cafcass safeguarding call — I will just answer their questions honestly.

Assumption: Allegations have been made against me. If I just deny them clearly, the court will see they are false.

Assumption: The other party did not ask me any questions at the FDR. That means nothing is expected of me in terms of negotiation.

Assumption: I don't have to disclose my finances. This is private information and I am not going to hand it over to someone who is trying to use it against me.

Assumption: I am being dragged to court to have my character defiled. I am the one being bullied here. My refusal to engage is self-defence.

Assumption: They won't let me take the children on holiday. They're just doing it out of spite. There's nothing I can do.

Assumption: I know what we own, so we can just split it fairly.

Assumption: I don't need to disclose that bank account — it only has a few pence in it. It's irrelevant.

Assumption: The paperwork of the divorce is the hard part.

Assumption: "The Cafcass parenting plan is a court form I have to file."

Assumption: A fair split is obvious.

Assumption: The FDR judge recommended 50/50. That's clear enough — we know where we stand.

Assumption: We've been paying solicitor fees for 18 months and can't afford to continue. If we change now we'll have to start the whole process again.

Assumption: Saving money on solicitor fees is the smartest move.

Assumption: My spouse being cooperative during the divorce means they're being transparent about finances.

Assumption: He is refusing to engage with the financial proceedings. His solicitors won't respond. There is nothing I can do until he decides to participate.

Assumption: I need an expert witness to read our messages and tell the court who the abuser is. That's the only way the judge will understand what's really happening.

Assumption: Will the judge see the bigger picture of what has been going on?

Assumption: Will the court force the other side to disclose everything?

Assumption: Should I make a D11 application to force disclosure?

Assumption: My child is over 10 and wants 50/50 — but I know that isn't right for them. Will the court listen to me?

Assumption: The safeguarding concerns are real — keeping the children away protects them. Won't the court understand?