CSA News

Banker in court over child maintenance dispute

A well-known Scottish Banker is being taken to court by his ex-wife over a dispute about how much child support he is paying for his daughter.

Bernard Higgins, 50, chief executive at Tesco Bank, and has had previous positions at RBS and HBOS, is arguing that the £3,000 a month should be enough for his 11 year old daughter, but his former wife is taking the dispute to court.

Mr Higgins changed the amount of support that he was giving to his daughter after fathering a set of twins, bringing the total number of children he has to support up to six. The Child Support Agency imposed a figure of £872 a month for the girl and he voluntarily paid £3,000 on top of that.

His ex-wife is trying to increase the claims to £5,000 pounds on top of what he is ordered to pay by the CSA. In her court action, Mrs Higgins said the sum was to be £5,000 a month. She pointed out that Mr Higgins had received “a significant income” from HBOS at the time, and had “significant capital resources.” Their lifestyle during the marriage had been “commensurate with his financial circumstances”.

In reply Mr Higgins said that he paid the girl’s school fees and was happy, in addition, to continue paying £3,000 a month. He considered such a sum “will allow all her reasonable needs to be met” and that £5,000 would be excessive.

The couple have been divorced since 2007.

3 thoughts on “Banker in court over child maintenance dispute

  1. Jesus and 3 grand a month is not enough for her i though i had problems. Surely there must be a cap on payments.

  2. I’m sorry, but if he is voluntarily paying that much, it simply shows that his ex-wife is just GREEDY, SELFISH etc etc.

    There is no-way it costs that much to keep a child for a month!!!

    I wish I earned £3000 a month! as it is, that’s 10 months worth of payments to my ex! and my kids have everything they need (not necessarily everything they want…) but definitely everything they need.

    His ex needs a kick up the backside, and needs to earn her own cash! she was only entitled to the lifestyle according to his financial status, whilst she was with him. Doesn’t she understand the meaning of divorce!!


    It’s not like he isn’t paying for his kid(s), another case of the payers being targeted, whilst those who won’t pay are never chased!

  3. £3.7 billion remains uncollected and this ‘discredit sham’ keeps on coming to the people who pay time after time, with ‘made up’ arrears!

    Those who pay are being discriminated against,and those who have never paid and will never are being let off. Anyone with money and a good lawyer will I believe sucessfully challenge the CSA in the High Court.

    When this happens I suggest that CSA Hell opens a new topic called:- CSA found guilty as not fit for purpose and unlawful!

    We should ALL then pursue a multi legal challenge to get ALL the money stolen from us back, plus compensation and interest!……Oh! and then involve the Serious Fraud Office!

    Even their own accountants won’t sign off their accounts, because of £25 million pounds worth of discrepencies,

    I suggest all on here write to their M.P.’s Cameron ,Clegg and Duncan Smith asking why there are people who pay and those who don’t and will never pay?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.