Faiz Siddiqui, an unemployed 41-year-old man lives rent-free in his parent’s £1 million apartment in London. The man’s parents live in Dubai and have been financially supporting him for 20 years.
After getting fed up with their son, they finally decided to cut him off.
That led Siddiqui to sue his parents for lifelong financial support. Siddiqui claims that he is dependent on his “enormously wealthy” elderly parents and wants support from them for the rest of his life.
A court rejected Faiz Siddiqui’s attempts to live off his parents.
Siddiqui’s claim was rejected after the court took all of Siddiqui’s constraints into consideration and stated that “Parents should be under no legal duty to support their adult children however grave their need.”
Siddiqui has a master’s degree in taxation from Brasenose College, a part of the University of Oxford, and is in no way unqualified to make a living. He even worked at reputed law firms after he graduated but has been unemployed since 2011.
His parents had been helping him in paying his utilities and bills. However, their financial support has been reducing over the years. After his parent’s “long-suffering” and the deteriorating relationship between Siddiqui and his father led to them wanting to cut off support.
Siddiqui claims he is a ‘vulnerable’ adult.
Siddiqui states that he has some health issues that qualify his parents to support him financially for the rest of his life. However, his parents refuted the claim and stated they were already paying him around £1500 a month and didn’t want to do any more than that.
While the court couldn’t get involved with the parents’ decision of paying their son the £1500 per month, they did speak in favor of the parents and dismissed his health issues.
“What Mr Siddiqui seeks is to foist a relationship of financial dependency on parents who do not wish that relationship to continue.”
“The appellant is not treated differently because of his health status or disability. They are not relevant features in the context of this case.”
The court stated how this might affect other adult children seeking financial help from their parents.
“It would fundamentally alter the relationship between the state and cohabiting/married parents, enabling all adults to litigate against their parents, whether their parents are cohabiting or not, where an adult asserts that they are contemplating higher education or where there are special circumstances.”
The court also took into consideration that the parents were already doing more than enough for their son.
“It goes without saying that the parents are devastated that they are being put through this ordeal by their son and that they are being put to such enormous expense, particularly when set against their historic and ongoing generosity towards him,” a judge stated.
This isn’t the first time Siddiqui has taken something to court.
Siddiqui previously sued his alma mater stating that he didn’t receive the desired level of education and the cost of tuition was unreasonable. He stated that it led to him having low grades in college and an unsuccessful career now.
He also mentioned that he might have missed opportunities in law courses in top Ivy-league schools because of that.
However, even that claim was rejected by the court as it was established that it was Siddiqui’s “inadequate preparation” and “lack of academic discipline” which resulted in his poor academic performance.