Following Ozzy Osbourne’s passing, Woodstock Legal Services explores the legal steps behind the scenes—royalties, estates, and what this means for others.

Having a working relationship with an outsourced HR provider can make day-to-day people management easier for many businesses. But what happens when that relationship goes a step too far? In his latest insight, Employment Law Consultant Richard Hiron explores when outsourced HR professionals may legally become agents of their clients, and why this matters. Why Outsourced HR Services Appeal to UK Businesses Outsourced HR services offer a range of benefits that have made them increasingly attractive to UK employers. These include: Cost-effectiveness compared to employing a full-time HR team Greater freedom in advising clients than being an in-house HR adviser A sense of legal separation, making HR advisers appear at arm’s length from internal decisions However, recent case law from the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) suggests that outsourced HR professionals may not always be as independent as they assume, and that they need to be very careful not just about the contractual terms of their arrangements with their clients, but also the practical application of the relationship. Handa v The Station Hotel: What Happened? The case of Handa v The Station Hotel (Newcastle) Limited and others [2025] EAT 62 raised important questions about the legal standing of outsourced HR professionals. We won’t linger on the details, because you didn’t come here for a lecture in employment law, but in essence: An employed director reported potential financial misconduct, which could have been classified as whistleblowing (also known as “protected disclosures”). Complaints from other staff members about bullying and harassment were then made against that director. One outsourced HR consultant was instructed to investigate those complaints and recommended that disciplinary action against the director be considered. A second outsourced HR professional conducted the disciplinary hearing and advised that the employer would be “justified” in dismissing the director for gross misconduct - advice issued in collaboration with the employer’s solicitors. Ultimately, the employer dismissed the director, based on the outsourced HR professional’s recommendation. What Is an Agency Relationship in Employment Law? It is not enough to simply provide a service or act helpfully to become someone’s agent in the eyes of the law. Legally, an agent is someone who has been authorised to act on behalf of another person or organisation, often with the ability to make decisions that directly affect that person’s legal or financial position. Typically, an agent is someone trusted to act in another’s best interests, which is why many agents are also fiduciaries. Trustees, company directors, financial advisers, business partners, and solicitors are common examples of these. What they have in common is the authority to affect relationships between the person or organisation they represent and third parties. Crucially, there must usually be more than just a contract for services for a person to be considered an agent. An agency relationship arises when a person has decision-making authority and is actively representing the interests of someone else with their approval. Without that, no matter how beneficial or reliable the service provided, an agency relationship is unlikely to be found. What Would Make an Outsourced HR Professional an Agent? In the Handa case, neither of the two outsourced HR professionals was found to be an agent in the decision to dismiss the employed director. But that doesn't mean an agency relationship couldn’t have existed elsewhere. Here’s where the legal line gets blurry: 1. Performing Core Employer Functions If an outsourced HR consultant performs functions that are typically reserved for the employer, such as conducting grievance processes or disciplinary hearings, they may be considered the employer’s agent. This is especially the case where employees or third parties deal directly with the HR provider, and the employer has little or no involvement. 2. Going Beyond Contractual Services Even where a written contract exists, carrying out roles that go beyond pure service delivery can give rise to an agency relationship. Whilst a fiduciary relationship is a key hallmark of agency, it is not the only factor in determining whether an outsourced HR professional will be considered an agent. This may include making final decisions on matters such as pay, dismissal, or internal procedures. 3. Exercising Authority Without Oversight Where the HR provider is granted authority to act independently, for example, to run a disciplinary process from start to finish without significant input from the employer, they may be legally classified as an agent. 4. Evidence of Collusion or Shared Control The closer the working relationship between the employer and the HR consultant, the more likely it is that the agency will be inferred. In the Handa case: The first HR professional merely recommended a disciplinary process. The second HR professional reviewed the evidence and concluded dismissal was justified, but did not carry it out herself. If either had gone a step further and directly made the dismissal or made other decisions on behalf of the employer, they would likely have crossed the line into agency. 5. Perception Alone Is Not Enough An employee’s perception that an HR professional is acting on behalf of the employer is not enough by itself to create a legal agency, but might be important if combined with other factors. However, in Handa, the director’s claims of being victimised after whistleblowing did not automatically make the HR professionals agents of the employer. How Outsourced HR Professionals Can Avoid Legal Risk So, what can HR consultants do to protect themselves? Be Clear in Your Contracts The contract with your client should clearly state the limits of your role. Avoid any language that implies you can make final decisions on behalf of the employer, especially regarding disciplinary action, grievance outcomes, or dismissals. Simply saying that you are not your client’s agent is unlikely to be enough, especially if your actions do not match what your contract with your client says. Stay Within Advisory Boundaries Advise, recommend, support, but don’t decide. Let your clients make the final call, even if you believe a certain outcome is justified. This is where the line between adviser and agent is often drawn. Avoid Acting Like an Employee Don’t allow staff to contact you directly for day-to-day HR matters unless this is carefully managed through a defined service agreement. Even then, remember that providing services like payroll, internal HR policies, grievances, or disciplinaries puts you in sensitive territory. Seek Legal Advice When in Doubt If you find yourself being asked to take actions that go beyond your usual service scope, pause and take legal advice. It may save you significant time, stress and potential liability later. Why This Case Matters for Employment Law Professionals The Handa decision serves as an important reminder that legal responsibility doesn't always rest neatly with the employer. If you’re working with HR consultants or are one yourself, understanding where legal boundaries lie is critical. This is especially important for: Solicitors working with SMEs who rely on outsourced HR providers HR professionals offering freelance or agency services Employers who want to reduce legal risk when outsourcing HR functions  Specialist Advice from Woodstock Legal Services Worried about becoming responsible for your client’s employment decisions? At Woodstock Legal Services, we specialise in employment law advice tailored to HR professionals and consultants. Richard Hiron, our experienced Employment Law Consultant, has worked directly in the HR sector and regularly advises outsourced HR professionals across the UK. Whether you need advice on contracts, investigations, disciplinaries or complex whistleblowing concerns, Richard is here to support you.

Selling a house? Discover how to speed up the conveyancing process with expert tips from a UK property lawyer. Avoid delays, stay on track, and complete with confidence.

In her latest insight, Housing Landlord and Tenant Specialist Zoe Turner shares the story of what should have been a simple, lawful rent increase that turned into a two-year legal battle, draining public funds, testing the limits of housing law, and ultimately driving a good landlord out of the private rental sector entirely. This is a real case she dealt with in England, illustrating how far the current system has strayed from balance and common sense. The Landlord’s Attempt at Fairness Zoe’s client, a long-standing private landlord in England, hadn’t increased rent for several years. With costs rising and market rents shifting, she issued a reasonable and entirely lawful rent increase notice. This wasn’t an aggressive change; it was a small step to reflect current market conditions. Instead of engaging in discussion or negotiating, the tenant refused to pay the new rate, fell into arrears, and consequently was served a Section 8 notice under the Housing Act 1988 , initiating the legal process for repossession. What should have been a simple and reasonable step soon turned into a complex, emotionally draining legal battle and one that would test the limits of the current system. A Misused Disrepair Defence The tenant responded by raising a defence under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 , alleging that the property was unfit due to mice, dampness and mould. However, this was the first time these issues had ever been mentioned. The tenant had not submitted complaints or requested maintenance before this point. On the contrary, the landlord’s multiple attempts to investigate were obstructed. Entry was denied to pest control professionals on several occasions. Eventually, when access was permitted, assessments found that the problems were caused by the tenant’s lifestyle, such as drying clothes indoors without ventilation, poor hygiene, food waste left around the flat, and blocked extractor fans. Environmental Health and the Improvement Notice Despite the landlord's ongoing efforts to resolve concerns, the tenant contacted Environmental Health. They issued an Environmental Health Improvement Notice , citing a damp corner in the basement and a mouse issue. Again, both the root of these issues are attributed to the tenant’s behaviour. Environmental Health did not investigate the origin of the problems or the tenant’s contribution to them. Nor did they consider the repeated obstruction of the landlord’s attempts to gain access for expert evaluation. This had serious consequences. Even though the eviction proceedings were brought under Section 8 rather than Section 21 , the Improvement Notice could still be used to support the tenant’s disrepair claim. Under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 , rent is not lawfully due during any period the property is considered unfit. In this case, the tenant sought to have all rent arrears dismissed, despite never having previously reported the issues and having contributed substantially to the very conditions they cited. This misuse of the disrepair defence threatens the integrity of Ground 8 proceedings . Even where there is clear evidence of obstruction and tenant-caused issues, such claims can delay justice, drain public resources through legal aid and impose an unsustainable burden on responsible landlords striving to uphold their obligations. Legal Aid Misuse and Deliberate Delay Tactics The tenant’s legal team made additional allegations, such as the deposit not being protected and prescribed information not being served, seeking compensation of up to six times the original amount, despite clear evidence that all legal steps had been followed. These claims added further delay and complexity. What made this case especially galling was the tenant’s access to Legal Aid, which funded the tenant’s defence even though the case lacked merit. Public funds were used to support repeated, baseless applications and counterclaims, many of which were filed purely to prolong proceedings. This isn’t an isolated example. Many landlords now find themselves up against legally aided opponents, despite facing fabricated or exaggerated claims. It’s a pattern that’s growing and one that requires urgent reform. The Broken Court System The entire court process took nearly two years. Why? Because of meritless counterclaims, a sluggish court system, and systemic flaws in how possession proceedings are handled. Cases like this often take more than six months just to be listed. Eventually, her client won. She proved that she had met her legal obligations and had acted in good faith. But the victory came at a steep price. Emotionally exhausted and financially drained, the Landlord made the difficult decision to sell the property. Another responsible landlord lost to the system, not because she broke the law, but because the law no longer works for her. What This Case Tells Us About the State of Housing Law This wasn’t just about rent arrears. This was a battle over fairness, accountability and access to justice. Several key issues emerged: 1. Disrepair Defence Can Be Abused: The disrepair defence, which is intended to protect tenants from negligent landlords, is now being weaponised. In cases like this, where the tenant contributes to the problem, the law still leans in their favour. 2. Legal Aid Needs Proper Gatekeeping: We strongly support Legal Aid when used correctly. But the lack of oversight means many cases with no prospect of success are still fully funded, wasting valuable public resources. 3. The Courts Can’t Cope with Current Demand The civil courts are already struggling. And yet, the Renters Rights Bill proposes to remove Section 21 entirely, and introduce greater tenant protections, whilst adding regulatory complexity. These reforms might be justifiable if the judicial system were equipped to handle them, but it isn’t. Why This Matters to You If you’re a landlord , this case is a warning. Even when you follow the law, you can face prolonged legal challenges, reputational damage, and huge financial strain. If you’re a tenant , it’s a reminder that housing rights exist for a reason, but they should be used responsibly. Exploiting the law undermines its integrity and ultimately harms the wider rental market. If you're a policymaker , it’s time to listen. This isn’t about choosing sides, but it’s about designing a system that works. Specialist Advice for Landlords and Tenants from Woodstock Legal Services Whether you’re facing a Section 8 notice , a disrepair defence , or trying to understand your obligations under the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 , we’re here to help. Our experienced team can guide you through: Possession proceedings under the Housing Act 1988 Responding to an Environmental Health Improvement Notice Defending or pursuing disrepair claims Navigating proposed reforms under the Renters Rights Bill

In his latest insight, Richard Hiron discusses how to effectively manage Workplace Exit Strategies. Whether you're dealing with an underperforming team member or facing a dispute, understanding when to use a protected conversation versus a without-prejudice discussion can save your business time, money, and potential legal issues. This guide aims to help UK employers and managers better understand the Employee Exit Process with confidence and care. Why Getting Exit Negotiations Right Matters There is a famous quote often attributed to author C.S. Lewis, brought together from themes in his work. It goes like this: “You can’t go back and change the beginning, but you can start where you are and change the ending”. It’s an interesting idea, but in the realm of employment law and employment processes, it can take time and money to achieve, and much more so than simply ensuring that the beginning is correct from the get-go. At Woodstock Legal Services, we regularly support businesses that have attempted to hold an exit conversation without fully understanding the legal framework. When misused, these conversations can lose legal protection and later become part of the evidence reviewed by an employment tribunal. This is why it is important to understand whether a protected conversation or a without-prejudice conversation is appropriate, and when you can minimise risk and manage employee departures legally, respectfully, and efficiently. What Is a Protected Conversation – And When Can You Use One? A protected conversation, under Section 111A of the Employment Rights Act 1996 , allows employers to have off-the-record discussions with an employee about ending their employment, but it only applies in specific circumstances. Protected Conversations Only Shield Against Unfair Dismissal Claims At the time of writing, employees in the UK need two full years of continuous service to claim unfair dismissal. This may change in 2026 when the government proposes to make unfair dismissal a day-one right under the proposed Employment Rights Bill . A protected conversation can only be used when an unfair dismissal is the only potential claim. If the employee could suggest that there was discrimination, whistleblowing, unlawful deduction of wages, breach of contract, or automatically unfair dismissal, then the conversation would not be protected and could be disclosed in court or a tribunal. Use Protected Conversations Carefully Some situations where a protected conversation may be appropriate include: • Performance management processes • Redundancy discussions • Conduct or capability issues • Certain “some other substantial reason” dismissals However, the strength of a protected conversation should never be assumed. Employers are often surprised to learn that protection fails if any part of the conversation falls outside of the strict scope. This is why you should always seek professional legal advice before relying on this route. When to Use a Without Prejudice Conversation Instead If a dispute has already arisen, or if one seems likely, you may need to hold a without prejudice conversation instead. This type of conversation allows parties to explore settlement without fear that the discussion will be used as evidence in legal proceedings. What Counts as a Dispute? This can be a grey area. A grievance or disciplinary action on its own might not count. However, if the issue is serious enough that either party is contemplating legal action, then it may constitute a dispute. For example: • A disciplinary process that could end an employee’s career • Ongoing issues that might lead to a claim of constructive dismissal • Raised grievances involving potential discrimination or harassment When a genuine dispute exists, a without prejudice discussion can give employers broader legal protection across multiple potential claims, not just unfair dismissal. Why You Should Never Mix Up the Two It’s tempting to try and combine both protections, but this is a legal trap. Phrases like “This is a without prejudice, protected conversation under Section 111A,” create more confusion than clarity. Using both labels simultaneously doesn’t double your protection; it could cancel both out, leaving you fully exposed in a tribunal. Instead, conduct a careful analysis of your situation to determine which option applies. If you’re unsure, please feel free to give Woodstock Legal Services a call or email . Avoiding the Cost of Getting It Wrong A poorly handled employee exit process can come back to haunt you. Not only could you face legal claims, but even a signed settlement agreement can be challenged if it's later revealed that the conversation wasn't protected. In some cases, mismanagement can lead to reputational damage, especially if tribunal decisions, often published online, name your business. Taking a few extra steps at the beginning can ensure you have the correct approach to Workplace Exit Negotiations, helping to protect your brand, finances, and peace of mind. Final Thoughts – Take Control of the Ending Ending the employment relationship doesn't have to be messy. With the right structure, support, and language, exit negotiations can be managed respectfully and effectively for everyone involved. Whether you're considering a settlement agreement, planning to hold a protected conversation, or investigating a workplace dispute, remember that the best results come from getting it right from the start. Specialist Advice for Employers from Woodstock Legal Services Workplace exit strategies are often emotionally charged, but with the right legal support, they don’t have to be risky. Woodstock’s consultant, Richard Hiron, has a lot of experience helping UK employers manage exits the right way. Whether you need help preparing for a protected conversation, evaluating the risks of a without prejudice discussion, or drafting a settlement agreement, Woodstock is here to support you.

The legal profession has never been an easy road for women. It’s been a world of glass ceilings, closed doors, and outdated structures. At Woodstock, we don’t sit around as “that’s the way things have always been”, we’re looking to challenge the traditional law firm model. This International Women’s Day 2025 , we’re embracing the theme "Accelerate Action" by celebrating the women in our firm doing exactly that: reshaping the legal industry, breaking down barriers, and proving that flexibility can coincide with legal excellence. Women Leading the Way at Woodstock Law has traditionally been a man’s game. But here, women are leading from the front, balancing expertise, leadership, and life in a way that challenges the industry's outdated norms. Carly Jermyn, our CEO , runs a thriving law firm while raising three boys. She knows firsthand that leadership and family life aren’t mutually exclusive. Natasha Boyland, our Head of Risk & Operations , keeps our firm at the peak of governance and compliance. Anna Hughes, our Head of Landlord & Tenant , leads an award-winning team, mentors the next generation, and pioneers a fresh approach to law. At every level of Woodstock, women are leading with strength, innovation, and impact, proving that talent, not tradition, should define success in law. Flexibility That Works for Everyone At the current rate of progress, full gender parity is still five generations away. That’s 2158 – long after any of us will see it. By prioritising flexibility and choice, we’re dismantling the rigid structures that hold women back. Our model works for: Working parents balancing careers with family life. Professionals who want control over their time without sacrificing ambition. Those easing into retirement, choosing to scale back without being forced out. But flexibility isn’t just for women. Yes, we have many women in leadership and consultancy roles at Woodstock, and, naturally, this model has been a game-changer for working mothers. Our model provides the flexibility to balance careers with family life. But what about working fathers? We’ve seen more and more men take the leap into consultancy because it allows them to support their partners’ careers too. In many industries, women’s progress has been stalled by the expectation that they will carry the heavier load at home. When men embrace flexible working, it redistributes the balance, making it possible for more women to step into leadership, grow their businesses, or return to careers they love. At Woodstock, we’re seeing this shift firsthand. Men chose consultancy to share responsibilities at home, be more present with their children, or give their partners the space to focus on their careers. It’s a shift that benefits both men and women – ultimately, the entire legal industry. An equal legal profession is built on opportunity, balance, and the freedom to succeed without compromise. When careers are shaped around real lives, rather than outdated expectations, everyone benefits. We’re more likely to achieve gender equality when we all take action – it’s not a battle for women to fight alone. What’s Next? We Keep Moving Forward The legal industry is changing. But not fast enough. This IWD 2025, we reaffirm our commitment to: Backing women at every stage of their careers – mentoring, supporting, and bringing more of them into leadership. Keeping flexibility at the heart of what we do, so legal careers work for real lives, not outdated expectations. Encouraging more men to step up as active participants in a fairer system. That means embracing flexibility, sharing responsibilities at home, and supporting the women they work alongside. To the incredible women at Woodstock, in law, and beyond, and those supporting, and pushing for change alongside them - Happy International Women’s Day.

Property fraud is a growing concern for homeowners. Fraudsters constantly find new ways to steal property ownership, commit mortgage fraud, or sell property without the rightful owner’s knowledge. If you own a residential property – whether you live in it or rent it out – it’s important to take practical steps to protect yourself. In his latest insight, Arvinder Samra , Consultant Solicitor at Woodstock Legal Services, explains the risk of property fraud and how to safeguard your home or investment property. What Is Property Fraud and Who Is Most at Risk? Property fraud happens when criminals take control of a property by stealing an owner’s identity or forging legal documents. Once they gain access, they may attempt to: Sell the property without the owner’s consent Take out a mortgage or loan against the property Transfer ownership to another name Some properties are at higher risk of fraud, including: Homes that are empty or rented out Mortgage-free properties Properties owned by elderly or vulnerable individuals Unregistered properties Taking the right precautions can help you prevent fraud before it happens. Register for the Land Registry Property Alert Service One of the simplest and most effective ways to protect your property is by signing up for the Land Registry Property Alert Service . This free service notifies you whenever an application is made to change the title of your property, allowing you to spot fraudulent activity early. Why This Matters If someone attempts to change ownership or take out a mortgage on your property without your consent, you will receive an alert. This early warning system gives you the chance to stop fraud before any damage is done. Who Should Register? Every property owner should sign up, especially: Landlords with rental properties Homeowners with mortgage-free properties Anyone who owns multiple properties or does not live at their registered address For those with elderly or vulnerable family members, it’s also worth assisting them with registration to keep their homes protected. How to Register You can register up to 10 properties for free through the GOV.UK Land Registry Property Alert Service . Keep Your Address Updated with the Land Registry The Land Registry uses the address on file to contact property owners, mortgage lenders, and other registered parties. If your details are outdated, you could miss important fraud warnings. Why This Matters If you move house and forget to update your details, the Land Registry may send important notices to an old address, leaving you unaware of fraudulent activity until it’s too late. How to Update Your Details You can provide up to three addresses for official contact purposes, including: A UK or overseas postal address A DX (Document Exchange) address An email address This is particularly important for landlords and second-home owners who do not reside on their property. Keeping your contact details up to date ensures you receive legal notifications promptly. Verify All Communications to Avoid Fraudulent Emails Fraudsters frequently target property transactions , using email scams and phishing techniques to deceive homeowners and investors into transferring money to the wrong account. Common Warning Signs You receive an unexpected request to transfer funds. The sender’s email looks similar to a trusted contact but has minor differences. The bank details provided do not match those previously supplied by your solicitor. How to Stay Safe Always verify bank details over the phone with your solicitor before making payments. Do not click on links or open attachments from unfamiliar emails. Be extra cautious if you are in the process of buying or selling a property. If you receive an email with new payment instructions, call your solicitor to confirm before making any transactions. Place a Restriction on Your Property Title For an extra layer of protection, you can place a restriction on your property title. This ensures that no one can sell or mortgage your property without a solicitor or conveyancer verifying your identity. Who Should Consider This? A restriction is beneficial for: Property owners who do not live at the property Owners of mortgage-free homes Anyone looking for additional legal safeguards How to Apply You can submit a restriction application through HM Land Registry (Form RX1) . This step can significantly reduce the risk of fraudulent property transactions and prevent criminals from taking out a mortgage in your name. Protect Your Home and Investments with Expert Legal Advice Property fraud is a growing concern, but taking the right precautions can help secure your property and prevent criminals from gaining access. At Woodstock Legal Services, we provide expert guidance on residential property law, ensuring that homeowners and landlords have the protection they need.  If you’re concerned about property fraud, need help updating your Land Registry details, or want to apply for a title restriction, our team can assist you. For tailored legal advice, contact Arvinder Samra by emailing a.samra@woodstocklegalservices.co.uk or complete the form below.

For years, family court hearings have been private, with rules preventing journalists from reporting on what happens inside. But since 27th January 2025, that has changed. Accredited journalists and legal bloggers can now report on certain family court cases involving children , provided they follow strict rules under a Transparency Order . So, what does that mean for families going through the courts? Karen Layland , Solicitor at Woodstock Legal Services, explains how this change works, what’s allowed, and what to watch out for. What is a Transparency Order? A Transparency Order allows journalists and legal bloggers to: Attend family court hearings Speak to families involved in a case Request and quote from court documents Report on what they see and hear in court But there’s a key condition: families must remain anonymous. That means no names, school details, employer details, photos, or anything else that could identify them. Before this change, journalists could sit in on hearings but had no right to report on what was said. The aim now is to help people understand how the family courts work while still protecting the people at the heart of these cases. Can You Speak to a Journalist About Your Case? The short answer? Yes, but only under strict conditions. You are not obliged to speak to a journalist. If you do, it must be with someone who has already attended a hearing in your case. You cannot share any documents unless a Judge has given permission. While journalists now have more freedom to report, parties involved in a case cannot. That means you must not post details of your case on social media, even if a journalist has already written about it. Breaching this rule could have serious legal consequences. How Does This Work in Practice? Will Journalists Be Allowed to Report on Every Case? Journalists and legal bloggers must first apply for a Transparency Order, which will outline: What they can and cannot share Any restrictions imposed by the court Steps required to protect anonymity In most cases, these orders will be granted unless there is a strong reason not to allow reporting. If a party objects, the Judge can: Prevent reporting altogether Impose stricter restrictions Allow reporting to continue under the original order The courts have made it clear that denying a Transparency Order will be rare. How Will Privacy Be Protected? While this is a major step towards transparency, it does not mean families lose their right to privacy. The following protections remain in place: No names of the people involved can be published. No identifying details—such as schools, employers, or locations—can be reported. In cases involving sexual abuse, details of the abuse cannot be shared. These rules are designed to reassure families that their most personal and difficult moments won’t be exposed while still giving the public a clearer picture of how the family courts operate. What About Financial Cases in Family Court? For now, these changes apply only to cases involving children. Financial cases, such as divorce settlements and financial disputes, are still under review. Further updates are expected in due course. What If You Are Worried About This Change? Understandably, families going through the courts may feel uneasy about journalists being allowed to report on their cases. Family law is already emotional and stressful, and the thought of details being made public could add to that pressure. However there are still strong safeguards in place to protect privacy, and the court can prevent reporting in exceptional circumstances. If you’re unsure how this change might affect you, it’s always worth seeking advice from a specialist family solicitor . Specialist Advice from Woodstock Legal ServicesIf you are involved in a family court case and have concerns about Transparency Orders, we can help.