Posted on 08/19/2014 2:02:41 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Furious Steven Carter is fighting to get the money back after paying the Child Support Agency but waited 23 YEARS to have the paternity test
A man claims the Child Support Agency is refusing to refund him £31,000 in payments he made for someone elses daughter.
Steven Carter has been involved in an 11-year dispute with the CSA after he was accused of being the father of a girl he has never met.
DNA tests taken this year by Steven and the girl - now aged 22 - finally proved they were not related.
But furious Steven, aged 49, said the CSA have rejected his demands for the money to be paid back.
He said:I had a one night stand with the mother of this girl on two occasions. She was with a boyfriend at the time.
She obviously looked at me like a cash cow. It was a fling 23 years ago and the girl is now 22-years-old.
I work in a nightclub and the CSA contacted my employers and took my money. They accepted her word with no proof at all. I always said she was not my child.
I wore protection which I know is not 100 per cent - but from day one I knew she was not my child.
Now the British Government seem to be penny-pinching off me. I work all the hours I can every day and have not had a holiday in nine years.
(Excerpt) Read more at mirror.co.uk ...
I guess you’d call it a “two night stand”. And a pretty pricey one at that...
There’s no end of trouble a loose zipper can get you into.
So he waited all these years for a dna test and he didn’t use a condom and he slept with a woman he knew had a boyfriend...he doesn’t appear so smart with all these actions.
He should sue the mother for the money. Its not the fault of the CSA as they just collected the money.
This is a common occurence. Happens here in the US too.
He said he did wear a condom. It’s not clear whether he means he knew she had a boyfriend at the time, or he is assuming that now, since he is not the father.
You are correct. That has been the law here for many decades. “The Law presumes Virtue, not Bastardy.” I still have that in my police academy notes from over 30 years ago.
Unless the husband can PROVE non-access (e.g. in solitary confinement with no ‘conjugal’ visits) he is responsible, regardless of what paternity tests might say.
Also, once you start paying, you have to keep paying, regardless of what paternity tests say. Judges say it isn’t about the father or his rights, it is about making sure that the child has financial support. Tag, you’re IT!
No, it isn’t Just, but it is the Law. The two are not the same.
ROTFLMAO!!
Yeah.... I saw that the other day and fell out of the chair laughing...
Once they have your money, it’s gone. PERIOD.
“It was a fling 23 years ago”
Was it worth it?
He should have done the test at the beginning.
Sounds like he needs money. She’s 22 now. He’s not paying anymore I’d think, and hasnt for a number of years.
So he waited all these years for a dna test
*********************
Probably couldn’t compel the mother to have the girl tested.
First off, the guy protested from the beginning and never accepted paternity; probably demanded the test but didn't know how to get one since he never met the child.
Furthermore and more importantly, he never "paid" anything. The Kleptocracy forcefully detached him from his money without his consent. Frankly, if there were any justice in England, he would not only get all his money back with interest but would be awarded damages to the stratosphere.
Sucks to be him.
“Unless the husband can PROVE non-access (e.g. in solitary confinement with no conjugal visits) he is responsible, regardless of what paternity tests might say”
It is quite just and has been the basis for western civilization.
This case is an extreme that arises due to the immorality of our current value system.
He had his chance at the beginning to sort it out and not need to become the child’s provider.
I’m still searching for the elusive unicorn.
I should post this little video as its own chat thread. Its pretty funny....
Did he? because the article is not clear. Did he wait this long to have a paternity test, or was the delay the fault of the system? Makes a difference, and I don't know the answers.
I must respectfully differ. That a father should support his offspring is a foundational principle of civilization is unquestioned.
But adultery corrodes the family, and with it civilization. That is immorality.
The respondent can't even go after the actual biological father and the state won't bother. How is that just? Why not just have the judge grab any likely victim (Why would it have to be a man?) walking through the courthouse that day and assign him or her the financial responsibility?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.