Alimony Investigation

Sandra has two children aged nine and twelve. The divorce was finalised two years ago, but the turmoil never subsided. Every month a dispute about alimony. Every month the feeling that something does not add up.

Her ex, Mark, is an entrepreneur. He operates through a holding company and a management fee that looks modest on paper. But Sandra sees him driving a new car, booking a holiday to Japan, and buying a house in Zeist last spring — without any visible mortgage.

She raises the matter with her lawyer. He nods sympathetically but is blunt: “Feelings are not evidence. Without objective substantiation, we cannot file a modification request that will hold up in court.” Sandra asks him to request the annual accounts. They arrive. They look neat. Too neat, she thinks.

Late at night she searches online: “entrepreneur hiding income”, “fictitious income alimony”, “holding company construction alimony”. She reads about management fees kept artificially low, dividends deferred indefinitely, loans to your own company that effectively finance private spending. It sounds complicated. But it also sounds very familiar.

She contacts an investigation firm specialised in financial analysis. She feels uncomfortable — as if she is doing something improper. But the investigator explains calmly: this is not a privacy violation, it is the mapping of what is relevant for a legal proceeding. Her children have a right to fairness. That is the only thing that counts.

What makes the difference

Judges rely on submitted documents. Without counter-evidence, the declared income position prevails. An external analysis breaks through this information asymmetry.

Financial context

A difference of \u20AC800 per month amounts to \u20AC76,800 over eight years. The investigation costs are a fraction of what is at stake.