Paternity Fraud and Fraud by Misrepresentation in England and Wales

Introduction

As the founder of Paternity Fraud UK, I've dedicated the rest of my life to supporting victims of what I consider one of the most emotionally devastating forms of deception. Paternity fraud involves the deliberate misrepresentation of a child's biological parentage, typically when a mother falsely identifies a man as the father of her child. Through my work with countless victims, I've witnessed firsthand the profound legal, financial, and emotional consequences of this deception. In England and Wales, such cases are increasingly being prosecuted under fraud legislation, and as an advocate in this field, I believe it's vital to understand the legal landscape.

Legal Framework

The Fraud Act 2006

In my experience supporting victims through legal proceedings, I've found that the primary legislation governing cases of paternity fraud is the Fraud Act 2006, which defines three main types of fraud:

1. **Fraud by false representation** (Section 2)

2. **Fraud by failing to disclose information** (Section 3)

3. **Fraud by abuse of position** (Section 4)

The cases we handle at Paternity Fraud UK typically fall under Section 2, fraud by false representation, which occurs when an individual dishonestly makes a false representation, knowing it might be untrue or misleading, with the intent to gain or cause loss to another.

Criminal Liability

Through numerous cases I've advised on, I've learned that for a successful prosecution of paternity fraud, the Crown Prosecution Service must prove beyond reasonable doubt that:

- A false representation was made regarding paternity

- The representation was made dishonestly

- The representation was made with the intention of gain (financial or otherwise)

- The false representation caused actual or potential loss to the victim

The maximum penalty for fraud under the Fraud Act 2006 is 10 years' imprisonment, though in my experience, sentencing varies considerably based on the circumstances, duration, and impact of the fraud.

Case Law: The Morris Case

A landmark case which we at Paternity Fraud UK are aware of is Danielle Morris, who was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment in 2017. Morris falsely led Jamie Somers to believe he was the father of her child by forging DNA test results.

This case exemplifies what we commonly see in our advocacy work:

- Morris falsely represented Mr. Somers as the father on the child's birth certificate

- She fabricated DNA test results showing a 99.6% probability of paternity

- She obtained approximately £7,000 in child maintenance and gifts

- Mr. Somers suffered significant emotional trauma, including establishing a parental relationship with a child he believed was his

I was particularly struck by Justice Trevor Parry Jones' comments emphasizing the severity of "playing with people's emotions" and the "incalculable distress" caused to the victim – something I've seen repeatedly in my work with victims.

Financial Implications

Child Maintenance

In my role at Paternity Fraud UK, I've guided many victims through the process of recovering maintenance payments made under false pretenses. The Child Maintenance Service (formerly the CSA) has procedures for handling cases where paternity is disputed or disproven.

However, I must caution that recovery of payments can be extremely complex. Under Section 41 of the Child Support Act 1991 (as amended), there are provisions for repayment of maintenance in cases of misrepresentation, but I've found the process often requires separate civil proceedings which can be costly and time-consuming for victims.

Additional Financial Remedies

Beyond child maintenance, I regularly advise victims on pursuing civil remedies for:

- Recovery of specific expenses related to the child

- Compensation for emotional distress

- Damages for deceit (a tort in common law)

A case I followed with great interest was FX v JY [2018], where the High Court awarded substantial damages to a man who had been deceived into believing he was the father of a child for several years – a precedent we now reference in our advocacy work.

Family Law Implications

Parental Responsibility

One of the most heart-wrenching aspects of my work involves counseling victims on the complex questions about parental responsibility. Under the Children Act 1989, parental responsibility, once acquired (through being named on the birth certificate or through a court order), does not automatically terminate upon discovery of non-paternity.

I've seen firsthand how courts prioritize the child's welfare when considering applications to revoke parental responsibility. In cases where a significant parent-child relationship has developed, courts may maintain parental responsibility despite lack of biological connection – a reality that can be difficult for some victims to accept.

Contact Orders

In my advocacy work, I've supported non-biological parents who have established meaningful relationships with children in applying for Child Arrangements Orders under Section 8 of the Children Act 1989. I always emphasize that the courts will apply the welfare principle in determining whether continued contact is in the child's best interests, regardless of biological connection.

Psychological Impact and Harm Recognition

Through my years of working with victims at Paternity Fraud UK, I've become acutely aware of the profound psychological impact of paternity fraud. In the Morris case, the victim impact statement highlighted how the fraud "shattered" the victim and his family, describing it as "agony" that would last a lifetime – sentiments I've heard echoed by many victims.

My experience aligns with the growing body of research on the psychological trauma experienced by victims of paternity fraud, including:

- Trust issues and relationship difficulties

- Depression and anxiety

- Identity crisis and loss of self-esteem

- Complicated grief over the loss of a parental relationship

Prevention and Detection

DNA Testing

At Paternity Fraud UK, we often discuss how advances in DNA testing technology have made it more accessible and affordable to establish biological relationships. Based on my experience with numerous cases, I can clarify several important points about DNA testing:

- Anyone with parental responsibility for a child can legally consent to and arrange DNA testing for that child

- If you have parental responsibility, you can conduct DNA testing without informing the other parent - what some might call "covert testing" is not prohibited in these circumstances

- However, for court proceedings, it's advisable to use accredited testing services whose results will be admissible as evidence

Legal Safeguards

Based on the many cases I've advised on, I recommend individuals consider these protective measures:

- Requesting court-ordered DNA testing when paternity is in question

- Ensuring that any private DNA testing is conducted through accredited facilities

- Seeking legal advice before signing birth registrations if there is uncertainty about paternity

## Ethical Considerations and Rights of the Child

In my work, I'm constantly navigating the tension between:

- The right of individuals not to be defrauded

- The child's right to stability and meaningful relationships

- The complex nature of family bonds that extend beyond biological connections

While I advocate strongly for victims' rights, I recognize that the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child acknowledges the child's right to know their parents, but this must be balanced against welfare considerations when deception has led to established relationships.

Conclusion

Through my work at Paternity Fraud UK, I've seen how paternity fraud represents a serious criminal offense in England and Wales, with potentially severe penalties as demonstrated in the Morris case. The courts increasingly recognize both the financial and profound emotional harm caused by such deception.

As DNA testing becomes more commonplace, detection of paternity fraud may increase, potentially leading to more prosecutions. However, I believe resolving these cases requires careful consideration of the complex interplay between criminal law, family law, and the best interests of any children involved.

For victims of paternity fraud, I continue to advocate for multiple legal avenues, from criminal prosecution to civil remedies and family court applications. Through Paternity Fraud UK, I remain committed to supporting victims while navigating the intersection of fraud law and family law principles, always mindful that at the center of these cases are children whose welfare remains the paramount consideration of the courts.

*** The above article is for information only and not intended to be considered formal legal advice. You must consult with a qualified solicitor or barrister before making a legal decision. ***

Michael Thompson, founder of Paternity Fraud UK part of the Falsely Accused Network.

If you've been affected by Paternity Fraud please visit www.falselyaccusednetwork.co.uk/contact or email support@falselyaccusednetwork.co.uk to arrange a free and confidential call.