CMS DNA Tests: 4,045 Cases Closed Because He Was Not the Father

Two sets of figures came back, covering the ten years from 2014. The first counts completed parentage disputes where the outcome was parentage disproved: a negative DNA test, or conclusive evidence that the paying parent was not the father.

The second counts case closures where the outcome was that the paying parent was determined not to be the parent of the qualifying child, on any evidence:

Three caveats, straight from the response. The figures are management information, not quality assured to official statistics standard, so treat them as indicative. The two tables measure different things and overlap, so they cannot be added together. And when the requester asked for the number of cases opened each year so a percentage could be calculated, the DWP refused under the cost limit, so nobody outside the department can say what proportion of disputes these outcomes represent.

What the trend shows is clear enough: closures because the named father was not the parent have roughly trebled since 2014, reaching 651 in 2023, the highest full year in the data.

How a parentage dispute actually works

If the CMS opens a case naming you and you do not believe the child is yours, say so immediately and in writing. The CMS will presume you are the parent in certain situations, including where you were married to the mother at the relevant time or you are named on the birth certificate. Outside the presumptions, the burden shifts, and a DNA test settles it either way.

• The CMS arranges the test through an accredited provider. Home testing kits you buy yourself do not count.
• If the test shows you are the parent, you pay the test fee and the calculation stands, backdated to the effective date.
• If the test shows you are not the parent, you do not pay for the test and the case against you ends.
• Refusing a test is the worst move available. The CMS can treat a refusal as grounds to proceed as if you were the parent. If the child is not yours, the test is your friend.

The harder question: getting your money back

Ending the case is one thing. Recovering maintenance you already paid for a child who was never yours is another, and this is where parents get a shock: repayment is not automatic. The BBC's Panorama investigation documented the case of Gerry, who won his parentage argument at tribunal after his payments trebled, received a £100 consolatory payment, and was told to recover the overpaid maintenance from the child's mother himself.

If you are in this position: pursue the CMS for a refund of anything it collected after you first disputed parentage, ask for a special payment for its handling failures where there are any, and take advice before deciding whether recovering the rest privately is worth the cost and the conflict. Keep paying nothing further once the case is closed, and get the closure confirmed in writing.

Why this data matters beyond the individual cases

Roughly one case every working day, on the 2023 figures, closes because the CMS was pursuing the wrong man. Each one represents months or years of statutory demands, enforcement threats and arrears letters aimed at someone who owed nothing, and the system's own data shows it. It is a reminder that CMS processes run on the information they are given, not on verified truth, and that challenging an error early, formally and in writing is not obstruction. Sometimes it is the whole point. Our evidence checklist approach applies here too: contemporaneous records win disputes.