He has houses and offshore accounts – this is clearly fraud!

July 30, 2013

My daughter’s father is very well off. Until March 2012 he was paying £197 per week (had to go through a Tribunal to get any money at all). However the money stopped in March 2012 and the CSA told me they had received notification from DWP that he was signing on as unemployed and all I was entitled to was £5 a fortnight.

This was clearly fraud as he has three houses, offshore accounts, and dividends from a company he owns of more than £250k per annum. CSA said there was nothing they could do as they had to abide by the DWP notification that he was unemployed.

Through my daughter I discovered that he has ‘hidden’ his money, and now that she has gone to university the CSA are no longer interested and the case is closed. What can I do? Anything?


  • Ross says:

    Get a grip! Get a job! Get a life! He has no obligations to pay anything further your daughter is all grown up. Trying to scrounge back money you think you should have been en titled to is a disgrace. Im not surprised he went on the dole having to pay £197 a week. Be grateful for you had!

  • Sally says:

    it astounds me that women like you think you are entitled to money someone else has worked for…. Your ex obviously built up the business so why on earth you think that YOU should benefit from it is absolutely disgusting….

    you gave birth to his child… you don’t own his life!!! Jesus… Ross has hit the nail on the head!!!

    How much money that YOU have worked for (not the hand-outs you get from the government i.e. child benefit, child tax credits, working tax credits (if you work part time) other benefits (if you don’t work)….. NRP’s ARE NOT SUBSIDISED LIKE PWCs…..

  • Katy Kaul says:

    I think you’ve got things a bit wrong here Sally. The money he should have paid to me FOR HIS DAUGHTER would have helped my daughter with books, train fares to college (£140 per week as the NRP paid for her to go to a college in London and then stopped paying the fees just before her A’levels) , money for her lunches, money for leisure activities, money for clothes, etc etc.
    The use of the word ‘scrounge’ by ‘Ross’ is a bit odd incidentally. Trying to get for one’s child money that she should have had to assist with her education and living costs is about as far from scrounging as it is possible to get.

    Why should NRP’s need any subsidies anyway ? Their contribution is assessed on their income after allowances for housing costs etc have been taken out of the equation. It’s an equation applicable to all – rich or poor – it’s just that the richer you are, the easier it is to hide assets….

    PS I do have a job, have always had a job and never claimed benefits.

  • Sally says:

    @ Katy – but you were subsidised with child benefit, working tax credits and child tax credits… the reason the NRP’s should be subsidised is that they, like you have ESSENTIAL outgoings such as mortgage, gas, electricity, food…. none of that is taken into account when the assessment is made… that is why so many NRP’s are unhappy with the system!!!

    I don’t know of any decent father who does not want to pay for their children… but what the CSA demand is unreasonable and unfair!!!

    You are an equal parent so why didn’t you pay the £140 per week?? I appreciate that it is not cheap to bring up a child but it’s not half as expensive as you are making out… your daughter could go to a college closer to home… what you are explaining there is very privileged!!!

    My partner and I moved all of our assets to my name only because his ex thought she was entitled to MY income!?!?! and by following the CSA rules she would have been entitled to MY home that SHE paid NOTHING towards (neither did my partner/her ex) because I had bought into his mortgage to help him maintain the extortionate child maintenance payments the CSA said he should pay…. he was in a financial mess….

    Both parents should pay equally for their child(ren) and both parents should have equal access to have a relationship with their child(ren)… PWC’s spend so much of their time focusing on the money that they don’t seem to care that they are destroying the relationship between NRP and the child(ren)…

  • dai says:

    how do you know he has 3 houses etc etc. is that what the Tribunal said?

    just sour grapes and allegations?

    he was entitled to JSA if he had a job and lost it.

    if you had a job then you presumably bought all the books your child needed.

    anyway, always absent from these stories/gripes – how often did you let him see the [ie his and your] child?? it was your call the corrupt Fam C’s always do what Mummy wants. did you concentrate on the money [for you] or child’s best interests?

  • Katy Kaul says:

    Hi Sally, yes I did receive £20 per week child benefit. That’s true. I received nothing for myself, not one penny, from the NRP and never expected to. He is not a decent person. I worked, paid my mortgage, and did the best I could for my daughter. My situation was very different from most though, in that the NRP was, and still is, extremely wealthy ( even more so than I thought, which all came out at the Tribunal when HMRC produced realms and realms of evidence of the houses, rents, bank accounts, share certificates etc) that he had been hiding. Prior to the Tribunal he had been giving me £30 a week. I don’t understand why you think that I should have paid £140 a week and even less who I should have been paying it to. I was paying far more than that in mortgage/food etc providing a home for my daughter and she didn’t at any stage in her life live with the NRP and rarely stayed with him and nor did I. To go back to my original point though, the CSA assessment was set at £197 per week, his (known) weekly disposable income was over £2000 and still he chose to cheat. I don’t think PWC in general focus on the money, we actually just want to provide a decent life for our children.

  • Katy Kaul says:

    NB – to Dai. I know where the houses are! Easy to check on Land Registry who owns what and whether or not they are owned outright i.e. with no mortgage.
    Further NB – whilst he was cheating on me by claiming JSA/CCB – he was also cheating on the rest of the UK’s tax payers, by claiming money to which he was not entitled. I still hope they catch him for it.

  • Sally says:

    and no one is saying you shouldn’t have a decent life for your child but if it’s what YOU want for YOUR child then YOU should work harder for it, get a second job…. you should be paying the £140 to your daughter for her travel to and from college?!?! isn’t that where you said the money was going that your ex gave you??

    Your ex was (I presume) also paying for a mortgage and food (whether or not your daughter stayed with him, it was still essential outgoings that he (like you) could not avoid paying!!).

    I think the PWC ONLY focus regarding their ex is money… I’m not saying your ex is an angel or what he is doing is acceptable but I sincerely do think that our government and the CSA have led PWC’s to believe that they are entitled to money that someone else has worked for and it’s 100% wrong!!!

    If you can only afford £50 (for example) for your daughter due to your income/outgoings then why do you expect your ex to pay more!?! because the CSA tell you so!?! the CSA tell you that your ex should pay % of his income…. that he has worked for… does your daughter (or any other child for that matter) NEED £187 per week… on top of the child benefit, working tax credits etc the PWC claims… NO! they don’t…

    The whole system is wrong…..

  • Katy Kaul says:

    My daughter is entitled to be supported financially by both parents and I hope you would agree that all children of separated parents should support the child according to their ability so that the child’s lifestyle remains as close to the way it was before the separation.

    If the NRP is a millionaire, and the PWC is scrabbling with money for fares, food, mortgage etc every single week – would you think this was fair? I certainly didn’t, and don’t.

    However, I do hope that your situation works out. I no longer worry about it. I originally posted my message many months ago, and life has gone on…….

  • Sally says:

    I completely agree that both parents should pay and would never argue with that… I do however with the fact that the CSA and our government run an unfair system and are very bias towards PWC’s…

    I would like to think that if either parent were millionaires he/she would see their children ok… however, the way the current CSA system works (CSA 2 and 3) the PWC can be a millionnaire and that money is not taken into account at all… the NRP still has to pay the same…

    I would never see my partners kids go without and we now (after a lot of issues with the mother and CSA) have a brilliant relationship… I am glad your life has gone on, and hope things have settled (financialy) for your daughter, society today seems to have forgotten the meaning of ‘family’ and ‘relationships’ and I blame our government… they are the biggest crooks around… stealing from the poor to give to the rich…

  • Macon says:

    Your ex paid his dues and whatever he did with the rest of his pay check is nothing to do with you £197 a week would have been a massive help to both you and your daughter , Now your daughter is at university so that’s the Csa ATM at an end now go and get a better payed job to keep you in the lifestyle that you are accustomed
    too or go and have kids to another man who has a well paid job !

  • Macon says:

    You got £20 a week child benefit and £197 a week of your ex if you put £ 197 pounds a week in that would be £414 a week to look after a kid after all it takes two to make a child so the financial burden should be shared that’s enough to send the kid to private school !!!!!

  • Katy Kaul says:

    I’m really glad for you too Sally that things have worked out OK.

    My daughter is an University now, and because of my low income I have managed to get her the extra maintenance grant of £1000.

    Best wishes to you and your family.


  • Macon says:

    Your ex gave you over 10,000 per year tax free that’s more than generous how did you manage to survive with you low paid jobs ,tax credits and child benifit on top of the 10,000 quid you must have really struggled !

  • andy says:

    Bloody hell! Your daughter has been earning you more than my annual wage. Damn! Wish I was a woman so I could go sleep with a wealthy business man, have his child, then screw him out of £10k per year, then get about £5k in benefits on top!

    Get a grip woman! No child requires £15k a year, so why weren’t you saving that money? Where is all that spare money to? And with that sort of money being fleeced from her dad, how much were you contributing to her daily upkeep?

  • Lisa says:

    With the above making herself look greedy I rest my case, the guy is wealthy through his own success and still wants to bleed him dry, he is obviously clever enough to stay one step ahead, now your child is at uni he owes you nothing, maybe you lived beyond your means to long and the n

  • Lisa says:

    Normal life of earning your own cash starts here, enjoy its what normal mums do, we don’t expect wealthy ex,s to keep us, you have your own job do overtime you were given this life by your ex, down to earth with a Big Bang poetic justice

  • karen says:

    Ignore many of the above, with the continued abusive through jealously mainly.

    I dont think you can do anything now your case is closed, shame cos you could have gone to the Criminal Compliance Unit to do credit ref agency checks i.e. bank accounts, etc.

    Contact your MP to see if they could help. Good luck.

  • Sally says:

    Shut up Karen… no on is interested in what you have to say….

  • karen says:

    People dont know if people are working, and as I keep saying takes 2 to make a child and 2 should pay for that child. The CSA is a government agency – you should be blaming them also to allow the unfair situation on both PWC and NRP and stop abusing others who you dont know and dont know all their circumstances.
    If you not happy then do something yourselves about your problem with the CSA &/or ex/other parent, instead of wasting your time spent on abusing others, put that effort into sorting out your own cases.

  • Katy Kaul says:

    This site is supposed to be about problems with the CSA – my original post was about the problem with the CSA and fraudulent behaviour. My comment was perfectly valid. As Karen says, ‘instead of wasting your time on abusing others, put that effort into sorting out your own cases.’ Mine took ten years. I hope none of yours take that long.

  • gonk says:

    Do one Karen you clueless idiot..the likes of you will never understand this unfair,unjust and heavily biased towards the pwc system even if it came up and smacked you clean in the mouth. And where you get your fucking opening line ” Ignore many of the above, with the continued abusive through jealously mainly” idea from is laughable,what or why would any of the above be jealous of ?? Katy ….well yer..jealous being now left out in the cold with no free money coming in now her case is closed and her ex having all that wealth that hes worked hard for (good luck to him) lol….and you of cause the spiteful vindictive money grabber that spends tax payers money fighting for her scraps lol,
    but maybe you can enlighten us on why we would be jealous? well me please for sure tell me.
    I do hope that in the future( if you aint already found a mug that would have you)
    that he has kids who’s ex is fleecing him to line her pockets and taking it away from your family, maybe then you will get the message ?? that being, the CSA is a vile corrupt agency that cares nothing about the kids, and most of the mothers using this corrupt agency do so as they see it as a nice little earner for doing fuck all, Using the kids as cash cows and the fathers as ATM machines.
    now F…oooops! nearly said it.

  • Macon says:

    Karen are you jealous your ex didn’t give you 10 grand a year ?

  • Macon says:

    Katy Kaul. You didn’t have a Csa problem 10 grand a year that’s a lot of money and now you want ways to cling on to your ex wealth what a parasite you are low life now it’s time to live in the real world , I just hope you are not of child bearing age so you can scam another wealthy man !!!!!!!

  • John says:

    Can’t blame him for playing the system!

    Perhaps if there would of been some mediation, he would of happily provided for his child, and thereby lies the problem with the CSA. It interferes in peoples private family lives, by demonising and criminalising a parent………for being a parent.

    The CSA have no interest in the child/children, they are a profit making company with M.P.’s as stakeholders (wake up). There only aim is to hit performance targets for bonuses and keep themselves in jobs in order to obtain a ‘gold plated’ pension.

    Marriages breakdown. Relationships end, and when this happens it is up to both individuals to move on, financially and emotionally, by becoming independent.

    A parent should provide for their child/children. that should have nothing to do with a bunch of unqualified pen-pushers, who ruin contact and other issues between parents and their children. Not the governments children, not the CSA’s children.

  • Pete says:

    Karen Bedford lets play a game of “fuck” you go first

  • dai says:


    bit late in the discourse now but your answer to my comment merely raises more questions?

    how did you know where to look in the Land registry – as I recall it costs between £10 – £20 to look.

    what about the offshore accounts?

    as confirmed in high court CSA are above the law – the likes of us [the low life public] have to obey court orders/the law.

    still no info on how much contact he has/had with the daughter.

    10 years is about average for CSA cases.

  • Katy Kaul says:

    Land Registry costs £3 to check on line. I knew where his properties were.

    The Court made a decision about his contact with his child because of his behaviour towards her when she was on contact.

    The rest? Well, when a case gets as far as the Tribunal stage, the CSA Solicitor has legitimate access to personal bank information, HMRC information, Company Information etc etc.

    So if a parent thinks they can get away with lies at the Tribunal stage, they’ve got another think coming. He tried, and was seen for the liar he is. The CSA Solicitor had hard copies of all the information they had sought in front of them.

  • donna says:

    How dare these wealthy fathers get away without paying.
    ,A child has the legal right to live a life they should have as if both parents were still together.
    This woman is not scrounging ,she has work hard bringing up the children and cannot get a high powered job when she has to be there for the childe.
    ,People like you lot on here make me sick.
    Men like that who hide there money are awful,they made the child to and if they earn that kind of money then the child should live in the same comfort.

  • >