Feedback and support forum

Let us know any questions or queries about any of Resolution’s online products or services – such as:

Learn Resolution – learn.resolution.org.uk
Online agreements (including consent order drafting) – my.resolution.org.uk
Resolution’s main website – resolution.org.uk

Please note: any message you post on the forum is public.

Alternatively you can email us on: support@resolution.org.uk

  • Hot ideas
  • Top ideas
  • New ideas
  • My feedback
  1. Order 15

    15 the blank box before the date needs to say “insert time” over-writeable

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  2. Order 11 - former home

    In 11, After “known as” there needs to be a free text option for the property in the event it is not the former home, but please keep the ability to import the former home if desired

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  3. Order 10 - choosing options

    In 10 if you choose the option “shall remain the absolute property of [applicant/respondent] there needs to be the option of stopping there, rather than having to fill out the “except” boxes. And where it says “The Respondent agreeing to afford The Applicant access to the former matrimonial home” please change “the fmh” to “the property”. If you choose the “shall be divided” option there is a typo – “either party shall be at liberty”

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  4. Order 2 - Definitions

    In 2, Definitions there needs to be a free text option for the mortgage in the event the mortgage does not relate to the former home, but please keep the ability to import the former home if desired

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  5. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    started  ·  1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  6. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  1 comment  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  7. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  8. 1 vote
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  9. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  10. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  11. 30 - Pension – the logic is wrong

    30 - Pension – the logic is wrong in a. When you choose ‘applicant’ for instance, the logic needs to reflect singular (his or her) rather than ‘their’. It will get confusing – can we change it so you select the named party? (For example, Bill and Sue. If you choose Bill at the very start, “their best endeavours” needs to become “his best endeavours to nominate Sue” and “of which he may from time to time”. “They will nominate the other” needs to become “Bill will nominate Sue”.

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  12. 18 - Business termination

    • Please can you make “director/company secretary” into separate options? (three options: “director” “company secretary” and “director and company secretary”).

    In ii it uses the plural (their) – it needs to be singular and take the gender of whoever it applies to. Is this possible?

    We have a little bullet trouble further down – at the moment “The parties agree that upon termination of this agreement they will” is exporting as a separate bullet - it should be part of vi “Agree a value for”.

    In the bullet below (vii on screen), starting “The respondent /applicant shall pay” – it…

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  13. 17 Re business interests

    17 Re business interests – in B “clause 46” is locked in – needs to be “Insert clause” – please can you amend?

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  14. 12 Ownership of pre-acquired

    12 Ownership of pre-acquired - I filled in A but it is exporting blank

    Exporting blank because there is a £ sign in the para - when you remove this the export into word works

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  15. 9 Separate incomes

    9 Separate incomes –apostrophes and speech marks are not ones the correct font, can it be changed?

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  16. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  17. Naming parties

    where one party is singled out they should be named by first name. Where both are agreeing to do something they should be The Parties.

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  18. 0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Financial remedy order  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  19. HTML functionality added to WYSIWYG footnotes

    General technical tweaks to the footnotes.

    • Need more heading levels – one isn’t enough. We often go down to three, and we use a mixture of numbers, letters, roman numerals, and bullets depending on the nature of the clause. If possible, we need to be able to choose which one to use and when, as different formats get used depending on the nature of the footnote. Numbering will always be the main list level, but we need to be able to select a format for sub levels and the tab positioning.
    • Is there any way we can override…

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  20. Clause 48 change - add arbitration

    There are three changes to the clause below. 48.2 has to be a bracketed option for those who do not want to consider arbitration at all – just agreeing to mediate or go to collab. 48.1 has to contain an option to go straight to arbitration. And then 48.2 has to have “under the terms of [48.1] above” inserted to allow for the rare situation where people agree to try mediation first and then arb if that fails.

    0 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Facebook Google
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    0 comments  ·  Cohab Agreements  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
  • Don't see your idea?

Feedback and Knowledge Base