Property Transfers to Avoid Child Maintenance: How Courts Undo Them

A transfer to a relative or a trust does not necessarily put a property beyond reach when child maintenance is owed. In F v EE [2026] EWFC 249 (B), the Family Court set aside a deed of trust after finding that a father had transferred property to his sister to frustrate a child-maintenance claim approaching £150,000.

The decision is a warning, not a shortcut for every unpaid-maintenance case. The court considered the evidence and the purpose of the particular transaction. It also highlights an important distinction: the Child Maintenance Service (CMS) calculates and administers most regular child maintenance, while a court may have a role in specific financial applications and in addressing certain transactions designed to defeat a claim.

Read the judgment in F v EE [2026] EWFC 249 (B).

What happened in F v EE?

The case concerned an order for almost £150,000, representing capitalised maintenance for three children. The father, who was working overseas, had put a UK property into a trust for his sister. The property was reported to be worth up to about £750,000, with substantial equity.

He said the arrangement reflected money he owed his sister and her interest in property inherited abroad. The judge rejected the explanation. Emails and other documents supported the finding that the transfer had been made to put the asset beyond the reach of the mother and frustrate enforcement of the expected claim.

The court set aside the deed of trust, restoring the position as if the transaction had not been made. That meant the property could be considered in efforts to satisfy the outstanding order. The ruling did not make every transfer to a family member invalid: the court relied on the evidence about this transaction and its purpose.

How could the court undo the transfer?

The decision relied on section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986. It allows a court to make an order to restore the position where a transaction at an undervalue was entered into for the purpose of putting assets beyond the reach of someone making, or who may later make, a claim, or otherwise prejudicing that person’s interests.

A transfer for no payment, a gift, or a deal where the value received is significantly less than the value given may raise questions about whether it was at an undervalue. But that fact alone is not the whole test. The court must also be satisfied about the relevant purpose.

The surrounding evidence can therefore matter. Relevant material may include when the transfer was discussed, what the parties said about it, whether proper value changed hands, who retained practical control of the property, and whether the explanations given are consistent with contemporaneous documents.

A deed or trust arrangement does not automatically defeat a maintenance claim. Nor does the judgment mean that a court will set aside a genuine transaction simply because it makes enforcement more difficult. The legal outcome depends on the evidence and the applicable law.

What can the CMS do, and what can’t it do?

For most eligible cases in England and Wales, the CMS is the route for calculating ordinary ongoing child maintenance. It uses statutory rules and can arrange collection. Where maintenance is not paid, there are enforcement measures available through the CMS process.

The CMS is not, however, a property-transfer court. It does not itself set aside a deed of trust or decide that a relative holds property on a sham basis. Its calculation and enforcement powers should not be confused with the court’s ability, in an appropriate case, to consider whether a transaction should be undone.

The CMS can also consider certain other income and expenses through a variation process. Government guidance gives examples including some rental income, investment income and assets, as well as income a paying parent may be diverting. The rules are specific: a parent should check the current GOV.UK guidance on asking for other income and expenses to be included.

When might a parent apply to the family court?

The family court is not a general alternative to the CMS for ordinary monthly maintenance. Under the Child Support Act 1991, the court’s ability to make child-maintenance orders is restricted where the statutory child-support scheme applies. There are exceptions, and the right route depends on the family’s circumstances.

For some parents, an application under Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989 may be relevant. It can allow the court to consider targeted financial provision for a child, including a lump sum or a settlement or transfer of property, subject to the statutory conditions and the court’s assessment of the circumstances. It is not a general way to replace or top up a CMS calculation.

School fees and certain other educational expenses may also fall within the family court’s powers in appropriate cases. The legal route and the way an application should be framed depend on the facts, including whether the parents were married or civil partners and whether a CMS calculation or court order is already in place. For details, see Schedule 1 to the Children Act 1989.

If you are considering a court application, get advice before filing. A parent’s legal options are not determined by need alone: jurisdiction, existing arrangements and the type of provision being sought can all matter.

Practical steps for receiving parents

If payments have stopped or you are concerned that assets are being moved:

• Keep copies of court orders, CMS decisions, payment records and relevant correspondence.
• Record what you know about the asset, the timing of any transfer and the people involved.
• Preserve documents obtained lawfully, such as messages or emails that may explain the transaction.
• Ask the CMS whether a variation or its enforcement procedures may apply.
• Seek legal advice promptly if there is a court order, a significant asset transfer or a risk that assets may be sold or moved.

Do not assume that an apparent transfer automatically proves wrongdoing. The court will need evidence, and legal advice can help identify the appropriate procedure and avoid unnecessary or misdirected applications.

Practical warnings for paying parents and recipients

A paying parent should not transfer property, give away assets or create a trust to frustrate a maintenance claim or court order. As F v EE illustrates, a transaction may be examined later and may be set aside if the legal test is met. A genuine gift or properly documented arrangement is not automatically unlawful, but it should be approached transparently and with independent legal advice where maintenance or enforcement is in issue.

A relative asked to receive property should also take care. They should understand the purpose and terms of the arrangement, obtain independent advice and keep clear records of any value paid or genuine beneficial interest. In F v EE, the judge found that the sister had been misled about her brother’s primary motive. A family connection does not remove the risk of being drawn into a dispute.

For further context on the difference between children’s arrangements and financial claims, read our guide to child-focused courts and what parents must know. For financial provision arising from divorce, see our overview of financial orders.

The key point

A child maintenance property transfer may be challenged where the evidence supports the legal requirements for setting it aside. But F v EE does not mean that the CMS can seize any property connected with a paying parent, or that every transfer to a relative will be undone. The CMS, family court and enforcement processes have different roles, and the right course depends on the order, the asset, the parties’ circumstances and the evidence.

This article provides general information about the law in England and Wales, not advice on an individual case. Tyndel Solicitors’ Family Law team can advise on child-related financial provision, court applications and enforcement options.

Request a Free Consultation

If you are concerned about unpaid child maintenance, a property transfer or a child-related financial application, contact Tyndel Solicitors to discuss your circumstances.

Telephone: 0208 154 3131
Email: [email protected]
Family Law: Learn more about our services