Paid £11,000 over 4 years turns out i'm not the father, what can I do?

Poshsalt

ZaSa1418 said:

He didn't need to sign the birth certificate to be liable for maintenance.
I assume this was a private arrangement for child maintenance rather than using the CSA/CMS? 

He didnt sign it and no it wasnt private, as we where very surprised someone can just call up and say your the dad and demand money. So its either the birth certificate was faked his signiture, the person at the time said she showed evidence in form of text messages. It went through CMS and a collecting agency collects the payments from the bank.

ZaSa1418

Poshsalt said:

ZaSa1418 said:

He didn't need to sign the birth certificate to be liable for maintenance.
I assume this was a private arrangement for child maintenance rather than using the CSA/CMS? 

He didnt sign it and no it wasnt private, as we where very surprised someone can just call up and say your the dad and demand money. So its either the birth certificate was faked his signiture, the person at the time said she showed evidence in form of text messages. It went through CMS and a collecting agency collects the payments from the bank.

On the letter/ form he would have first received it would have asked him if he was the father. These are the guidelines for them to assume he was the father:

The Child Maintenance Service can assume parentage if the person named as the parent:

• was married to the child’s mother at any time between the conception and birth of the child (unless the child was adopted)
• is named on the child’s birth certificate (unless the child was adopted)
• has taken a DNA test that shows they’re the parent
• has legally adopted the child
• is named in a court order as the parent when the child was born to a surrogate mother

If parentage is assumed, they’ll work out a child maintenance amount. The person named as the parent has to pay this until they can prove that they’re not the parent.

Even with the above he still could have said he wasn't the father at the start. 

If he was not there to put his name on the birth certificate and wasn't married to the ex then he needs to ask the CMS to ask how they determined he was the father. If his name has been put on the birth certificate without his permission then the ex needs reporting. 

He needs to tell the CMS he has had a dna test which determines he is not the father and go from there (he may have to have another one if they don't recognise the test he used) 

Manage your Child Maintenance Service case: Disagreements about parentage - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 

TonyMMM

If he wasn't married to the mother, then he can't be named on the birth certificate (in England/Wales) unless he went with her to the registration and signed the entry with her (as a joint informant).....presumably he didn't do that, although that doesn't automatically mean he can't be required to pay (if he is the father)
Has he actually seen a copy of the birth certificate ?  

What did he say to the CMS when they first required him to pay - did he not dispute that he was the father then ?

gettingtheresometime

TonyMMM said:

If he wasn't married to the mother, then he can't be named on the birth certificate (in England/Wales) unless he went with her to the registration and signed the entry with her (as a joint informant).....presumably he didn't do that, although that doesn't automatically mean he can't be required to pay (if he is the father)
Has he actually seen a copy of the birth certificate ?  

What did he say to the CMS when they first required him to pay - did he not dispute that he was the father then ?

I was going to post the very same thing

Mojisola

TonyMMM said:

Has he actually seen a copy of the birth certificate ? 

If he hasn't, he can buy one here -

www.gro.gov.uk/gro/content/certificates/Login.asp

Gavin83

So I found that case I mentioned. I was actually slightly wrong. So he'd paid in total £15,600 in child maintenance over 4 years but the judge awarded him £25,000 in damages, plus the same again in costs. According to the article he also won a court order to force a sale of her home to cover this. Link below:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261427/Richard-Rodwell-Husband-tricked-believing-wifes-children-awarded-25K--bereavement.html

Sad case. The father is now childless, the children now hate the 'father' and clearly have their own issues due to the fallout and the mother is now presumably homeless. Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

It's worth noting however that he was awarded damages partly because he's now too old to have children again. I can't really comment on your friends case but it's definitely worth a conversation with a solicitor. 

burlingtonfl6

Gavin83 said:

So I found that case I mentioned. I was actually slightly wrong. So he'd paid in total £15,600 in child maintenance over 4 years but the judge awarded him £25,000 in damages, plus the same again in costs. According to the article he also won a court order to force a sale of her home to cover this. Link below:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2261427/Richard-Rodwell-Husband-tricked-believing-wifes-children-awarded-25K--bereavement.html

Sad case. The father is now childless, the children now hate the 'father' and clearly have their own issues due to the fallout and the mother is now presumably homeless. Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

It's worth noting however that he was awarded damages partly because he's now too old to have children again. I can't really comment on your friends case but it's definitely worth a conversation with a solicitor. 

The mother is behind this.
She's trying to gather sympathy to mask her promiscuous ways instead of taking responsibility.

CRANKY40

If it went through the CMS then they will reimburse him and recover payment from the mother. Used to be my job to calculate refunds a long time ago when it was the CSA......

wannabe_a_saver

Gavin83 said:

 Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

Its the mother's fault, but the father had a choice in how he responded, and the way he chose to respond threw away all the years he'd raised them as his own and the fact that to them he was their dad who they loved.  He basically let them know that DNA and their mother's behaviour mattered more to him than they did.  I can't imagine how awful it must have been for them.:(

CookieMonster

wannabe_a_saver said:

Gavin83 said:

 Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

Its the mother's fault, but the father had a choice in how he responded, and the way he chose to respond threw away all the years he'd raised them as his own and the fact that to them he was their dad who they loved.  He basically let them know that DNA and their mother's behaviour mattered more to him than they did.  I can't imagine how awful it must have been for them.:(

Everything before the word "but" is correct.
Everything after is putting blame on a decent man who lived up to responsibilities he thought he had, but did not.
The mother has caused this, and is responsible for the the subsequent loss in the child's life. 100%. The child could have had their real dad all this time, had their mother been honest.