The new girlfriend of a deceased RAAF mechanic who pocketed $350,000 of his estate while his two young daughters were left with far less, offered the girls just $50,000 each.
Airman Daniel Leverton, 40, died suddenly during a surfing trip with his father Geoff on April 4, 2015, leaving behind his new girlfriend Kirsty Lea, his two young daughters and their mother.
Daniel’s father Geoff told Daily Mail Australia on Tuesday Ms Lea offered his two granddaughters $50,000 each, leaving herself the remaining $350,000 of Daniel’s superannuation account.
Daniel Leverton (pictured with his two daughters) passed away suddenly while surfing with his father in Arrawarra, on the New South Wales north coast
‘We rejected it of course,’ Geoff said.
‘She offered my granddaughters $50,000 each, $50,000 per child is a pittance compared to what it’s going to cost them to make their markers in life.
‘It’s not fair to the girls, it’s a travesty of justice.’
Daniel’s former partner and the mother of his two daughters, Angela Watson, believed she was the sole beneficiary and executor of his will and believed her daughters’ future was secure.
But his new girlfriend of five months, Kirsty Lea, filed a claim through Military Super entitling her to $352,170 of the $451,500 of his superannuation account.
The claim left his two daughters, who were aged 9 and 7 at the time of his death, with just $49,664 each.
‘It should have been a three way split between the young lady and the girls,’ Geoff said.
‘We’re not gold diggers, we just want the right thing to happen.’
Ms Lea (pictured left) and right, a Facebook display picture
Geoff said the girls were offered $50,000 on top of the initial settlement, $100,000 under the sum the Leverton family asked for.
‘We rejected it because it still left Kirstie with $250,000 and that’s the reason they said no,’ he said.
‘She’d only been with him for five months,’ he claimed.
Geoff said the family did not wish to drag Ms Lea’s name through the mud, and tht they simply wanted an appropriate outcome for the girls.
‘Education, how much does a young person’s education cost over 15 years, primary, secondary school, university – it’s got to be at least $120,000 each,’ he said.
‘They’re beautiful kids, beautiful kids.
‘It’s sour grapes what’s happened to us – the character of this young lady who’s taken advantage of us.’
A servicewoman known by the name Kirsty Lea is at the centre of a controversial will dispute
Mr Leverton was surfing with his father in Arrawarra on the New South Wales north coast when he complained of chest pains and suddenly collapsed.
News Corp first reported this week that Ms Watson was shocked when she later learned that there was less than $100,000 remaining from his estate to split between their two daughters, and appealed to the Commonwealth Superannuation Corporation. Her appeal was denied and the decision upheld.
In conversations, friends also reiterated Ms Lea was legally entitled to his superannuation payout.
Mr Leverton’s father Geoff recently starred in a short online video recently where he described the Corporation’s decision as ‘morally wrong’.
‘The girls are missing out on Daniel’s wishes,’ he claimed, explaining he had recently written to the Minister responsible for assistance. He said he was posting the video for his deceased son and his two daughters.
In the video, he told how Mr Leverton made a statutory declaration in mid-2014 that his new girlfriend was his ‘independent partner’.
This was done as he was about to be posted to Katherine, in the Northern Territory, but did not want to move away from his daughters.
So he used a loophole to declare he was in a de facto relationship and he wouldn’t have to be relocated.
Mr Leverton died shortly after returning from deployment in Vanuatu helping the country recover from the devastation of Cyclone Pam
‘It put a terrible burden on Daniel… he asked if there was a way around it,’ Mr Leverton’s father Geoff said in the video.
‘He had a casual relationship with a young lady at the time, so they advised him that even though it was well below the de facto relationship civil laws of Queensland which is two years, if he signed a stat dec, they could be recognised as de facto and therefore being in such state, Daniel didn’t have to be transferred and could stay at Amberley, in Queensland, therefore close his girls.’
It is not suggested Mr Leverton’s girlfriend knew of the statutory declaration.
On Tuesday, a friend of the couple, who asked not to be named, characterised their relationship in a different light.
‘It definitely wasn’t a ‘casual relationship’ like his father stated,’ the friend claimed.
The friend pointed to the extensive requirements for a couple to be recognised as de facto by the Defence Department.
A Defence fact sheet seen by the Daily Mail said couples must provide documents that prove they live together on a genuine basis, including rental agreements, joint bank accounts, bills and statutory declarations.
‘It put a terrible burden on Daniel because he didn’t want to be away from his girls, and he asked if there was a way around it,’ Mr Leverton’s father Geoff told News Corp
The friend said: ‘It’s not like she wasn’t legally entitled to his super.
‘The only people who know the truth about their relationship is the two of them, but he doted on her.
‘He used to bring her coffee, lunches, had flowers delivered for her birthday, he seemed to be head over heels…both of them were.’
Ms Lea’s lawyer told Daily Mail Australia that Mr Leverton did not get to choose who he nominated as the beneficiary of his superannuation.
‘Military Super do not allow their members to nominate beneficiaries. It is Military Super’s own scheme rules that determine who receives the payment of the benefit in the event of a member’s death. It was completely beyond our clients control as to the decision that was reached by Military Super.
‘Further, what is failed to have been mentioned, is that when the Military Super decision was originally handed down, our client made an offer to the mother of Mr Leverton’s children, via her Solicitor, to gift a significant sum to the children from the benefit she was due to receive. This offer was made on 17 July 2015 and was never accepted by the mother of the children.
‘Our client was in a meaningful relationship with the deceased. The material published contains many inaccuracies with respect to the type of relationship and duration of the relationship that our client shared with the deceased, among other things.’
The Defence Department was also approached for comment, although a spokesperson said they would endeavour to respond as soon as possible.