LondonTown

I am aware of that fact, however under the Hague convention it is 1 year, all my hope is being pinned on the Hague laws, its just a matter of finding the right attorney.

lansbury

The child was removed from England. English law does not require habitual jurisdiction, it just requires that the child be removed from the jurisdiction of the English courts without the consent of a person or body having parental responsibility.

So as an example (simplified form) 2 US citizens take a child on vacation to the UK. One decides to stay the other decides to go home with child, the first refusing permission for the child to be removed from the UK. The other goes ahead and tries to remove the child and is arrested (by me) in the gate room prior to boarding.

Having read the OPs posts again I can see an argument that could be put before one of their Lordships at the High Court that it was in fact a child abduction. I'd like to be a fly on the wall if that is the way the OPs lawyer is thinking of going as it could be a very interesting discussion on the technicalities of a Section 1 Child Abduction and if in those circumstances the provisions of the Hague Convention apply.

Mummy in the foothills

If you do the free consult thing with every good lawyer in her town, it'll stop her being able to hire a good one, conflict of interest seeing you saw them and talked to them first, a bit underhanded but no more so than what she did, by getting you to come to US for 90 days and refusing to go back. I'd move quick too, a year goes by in a flash and then the Hague convention won't apply.

crg

LT: How long have you been in the US so far?

LondonTown

i'v been here for coming up to 6 months now, and before you ask I had to leave the US once before and come back in. However I was advised by the CBP on entry that next time I wont be let into the US if i don't prove I work or receive benefits from where ever it is I am coming from.

crg

So what's the plan? Are going back to the UK to begin the process?

Jerseygirl

Are you saying you've overstayed the 90 days allowed on the VWP or did you leave and enter before the 90 days?

LondonTown

I didn't overstay, i left before the 90 days were up.

Jerseygirl

Good

snowbunny

The child was removed from England with the tacit consent of both parents.

Now if English law requires that such a child be *returned* to England under a certain set of circumstances, then that's a different matter. Also - if both England and the US state in question assert jurisdiction, that's going to be a hard one to crack.

I wish the poster the best of luck in all things and advise the prompt use of a well-qualified lawyer.

lansbury

Really there is a possible argument about how that consent was obtained that may or may not have a legal standing. Only the OP and his wife know the details and only their lawyers know if their possible respective arguments have merit. Most posters from the comments made on here do not even understand the law on child abduction let alone have practical knowledge of it.

I wish him well having had to fight through the courts for access to my sons I understand what he is going through.

LondonTown

Thanks for that Lansbury, quick question, would a verbal agreement hold up in US courts?

Bitter-Truth

Lansbury, I rate you for this comment, your words were of a genius in this case because most of the comments on this thread, with all due respect to everyones knowledge, were as if one is trying to flog off a piece of advice, most of the people dont know much about Child matters and UK matters to be precise.

If you have not gone through this experience yourself, or a family member, then you would not have a clear picture of this case 'AT ALL'. The british system has offered help to anyone going through such a case, it is a shame the US cant offer any kind of help for it's own citizens let alone a spouse of a US citizen.

Goodluck

snowbunny

I'm obviously not Lansbury, but what sort of verbal agreement? If it is a matter that is delegated to the states, then that state's law would apply. Texas recognises "oral contracts" but proving that you have an enforceable oral contract is not very easy.

lansbury

That is a point which would have to be argued in the court. Normally, in the UK, if a verbal agreement can be shown to have been made and the points of it are not in dispute then the court would give considerable weight to it. As to the finer points of US law and what happens in practice I have no knowledge on that so cannot say. The comment above from Snowbunny clearly shows the problems you would face in a US court.

The problem usually arises in that there is a dispute as to if a verbal agreement was made or to what was actually agreed. If another person, persons, heard the agreement then that helps.

One matter a UK court will not accept a verbal agreement on in child abduction is parental responsibility. If the parents are unmarried and the child born born Dec 1st 2003 ( I think I have the date right) the agreement must be written. After that date providing the father is on the birth certificate he has parental responsibility.

When dealing with child matters in the High Court it only has to be proved on the balance of probabilities as it is a civil matter not a criminal one. Do not confuse that with the actual offense of child abduction which is criminal tried in a different court and has the usual beyond reasonable doubt burden of proof.

However, and this is just my opinion, in order to ask a US court to act on this matter you need to have it shown to be a child abduction in a UK court. The Hague Convention on Child Abduction is in practical terms just an agreement between the signatory countries to honor and act on decisions made in another countries courts. You cannot just rely on the terms of the Convention and expect a US court to do anything, that has been what I have seen in the past. But I have very limited experience with the workings of the Convention so my opinion is just food for thought.