Unemployed Oxford law graduate, 41, SUES his parents to get a maintenance grant for life

An unemployed Oxford graduate is taking his parents to court in an effort to force them to provide him with a lifelong maintenance grant.  

Faiz Siddiqui, 41, claims he is entirely dependent on his wealthy parents, who are based in Dubai, and is entitled to claim maintenance from them as a ‘vulnerable’ grown-up child due to his health issues.

Mr Siddiqui, who practised as a solicitor at top law firms after graduating from university, argues that denying him the money would be in violation of his human rights. 

The case come just three years after the former lawyer, who tried to sue Oxford University over his failure to get a first-class degree, has his £1million compensation thrown out by the High Court.

The Oxford graduate, who has been unemployed since 2011, currently lives rent-free at a £1million flat that is owned by his mother Rakshanda, 69, and father Javed, 71, near Hyde Park in central London. 

Faiz Siddiqui (pictured in 2017), 41, claims he is entirely dependent on his wealthy parents and is suing them in an effort to receive a maintenance grant for life

Faiz Siddiqui (pictured in 2017), 41, claims he is entirely dependent on his wealthy parents and is suing them in an effort to receive a maintenance grant for life

 Faiz Siddiqui (pictured in 2017), 41, claims he is entirely dependent on his wealthy parents and is suing them in an effort to receive a maintenance grant for life

The wealthy parents have been providing their son with more than £400-a-week and also help him with his bills. 

However the parents now want to reduce their funding after a row with their son who they claim is ‘difficult, demanding and pertinacious’.

Mr Siddiqui’s case has now been sent to the Court of Appeal after it was rejected by a family court judge last year. 

The family’s lawyer, Justin Warshaw QC, told The Sun: ‘These long-suffering parents have their own view of what is suitable provision for their ”difficult, demanding and pertinacious’ son.”  

The unique case come after Mr Siddiqui tried to sue his former university for ‘appallingly bad’ teaching that cost him a top degree and a lucrative legal career.

The Oxford graduate had claimed ‘boring’ tuition and staff being on extended sabbatical leave had meant he only received a 2:1 instead of the first-class degree he had wanted.

He maintained this cost him a place on a law course at a top US Ivy League university, such as Yale or Harvard, and a subsequent high-flying legal career.

Mr Siddiqui and his barrister Roger Mallalieu had valued his loss of earnings claim against the Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford, at £1million. 

However in 2018 Mr Siddiqui’s claim was thrown out of court and he was told by a High Court judge the tuition he received at Brasenose College was of a ‘perfectly adequate standard’. 

Mr Justice Foskett ruled Mr Siddiqui’s ‘inadequate preparation’ and ‘lack of academic discipline’ towards his modern history degree were the reasons he under performed in his June 2000 exams. 

He added a ‘severe episode of hay fever’ may also have contributed to Mr Siddiqui’s failure to get the grade he wanted. 

In 2018, Mr Siddiqui, who studied modern history at Brasenose College (pictured), Oxford, tried to sue his former university

In 2018, Mr Siddiqui, who studied modern history at Brasenose College (pictured), Oxford, tried to sue his former university

In 2018, Mr Siddiqui, who studied modern history at Brasenose College (pictured), Oxford, tried to sue his former university 

The judge also rejected claims Mr Siddiqui’s personal tutor at Brasenose had failed to alert exam authorities that he was suffering from ‘insomnia, depression and anxiety’ when he sat a paper on the history of imperial India.  

While expressing ‘sympathy and understanding’ for Mr Siddiqui’s intermittent bouts of severe depression, Mr Justice Foskett said there was no evidence he was suffering from mental health problems when he took his final exams.

Meanwhile Oxford University accepted there were fewer teaching staff during the autumn term in 1999 but denied teaching was ‘inadequate’. 

Following the landmark trial, the judge said: ‘Mr Siddiqui does now possess a firmly entrenched belief that his post-Oxford problems lie with what occurred here. I have been unable to accept that that is so.

‘Mr Siddiqui’s claim fails and must be dismissed. I recognise that this will come as a great disappointment to him.

‘It is to be hoped that he can re-focus, perhaps lower his expectations at least for the time being and start using his undoubted intelligence to create a worthwhile future for himself.’

link

(Visited 43 times, 1 visits today)

Leave a Reply