Texan property tycoon jailed in absence for not paying first £50k divorce installment 

An American property tycoon will be jailed if he steps foot on British soil after failing to pay his model ex-wife’s maintenance bill following a £5.8m divorce court fight.

Preston Haskell IV, 55, has been embroiled in an acrimonious five-year battle with his ex-wife and mother of his three children, model Alesia Vladimirovna, 40.

They split up in 2016 after she accused him of serial infidelity and cocaine and alcohol abuse. She demanded a £5million divorce payout in 2016 but he failed to pay up.

The sum was expected to be paid in instalments, starting with £50,000 in February last year, but Mrs Haskell was forced to return to court saying her ex-husband had not paid the money in breach of orders.

The Texan millionaire, son of Florida construction mogul Preston Haskell III, made his £160million fortune in the property and restaurant business.

His wife was a member of the exclusive 5 Hertford Street club, where Meghan Markle and Prince Harry had their first date.

He is said to have enjoyed a ‘superior lifestyle’ at their Chelsea home, and threw parties graced by the likes of Elton John, Madonna and Cheryl Cole.

He once splashed out nearly £1million on a New Year’s Eve party in 2012, while at another event guests including Cheryl Cole are said to have been handed coded gold wristbands as entry passes.

Mr Justice Moor at the High Court ruled that Mr Haskell’s failure to pay his ex-wife was in contempt of court and imposed a six-week prison sentence in his absence if he did not pay within 14 days.

He lodged a Court of Appeal challenge against the ruling but it was struck out and now Mr Haskell faces jail if he returns to the UK.

He met his wife Alesia in Moscow in 2003 and later moved to London where they had a rented £3.3m apartment in Sloane Street.

But the couple split amid accusations of Mr Haskell’s infidelity, drinking and drug taking. Last year family judge Mr Justice Mostyn ordered him to pay her £5,878,732 – with the first instalment of £50,000 fixed to be paid by February 20 2020.

When he failed to pay up, personal style consultant Mrs Haskell, who said she was in such a dire financial situation that she could lose her Chelsea home, returned to court asking that he be compelled to hand over the cash or face prison if no money came through.

Mr Haskell IV has now been sentenced to six weeks in prison in his absence after losing an appeal, meaning he faces immediate imprisonment if he steps back on English soil.

His lawyers last week at the Court of Appeal argued that Mr Haskell had shelled out ‘considerable sums’ since March 2020 to allow her to pay her utilities bills and £6,000-a-month rent on her flat, but his appeal was refused by Lord Justice Underhill.

During the couple’s first court battle, which concluded with the £5.8million order in March last year, Mr Justice Mostyn said the pair, who married in 2008, had enjoyed a ‘superior lifestyle’ after moving to London in 2013.

They had a £3.3million apartment in Sloane Street, as well as properties around the world, but the marriage was ‘blighted by the husband’s serial infidelity and abuse of cocaine and alcohol,’ he said.

Mrs Haskell filed for divorce in November 2016, sparking the bitter court row over money, during which Mr Haskell ‘denounced (his wife) as a gold digger’ and began a ‘process of financial attrition.’

The judge had to add up the value of the couple’s assets and how much Mr Haskell – who in 2013 was linked with a bid to buy Coventry City FC – should pay in maintenance, and said the tycoon had even asked him to weigh his ex’s engagement ring in the balance.

But the judge told the court: ‘I do not take into account any value of the wife’s engagement ring. The husband was very keen that I should do so asserting that it was worth perhaps £100,000.

‘It is bordering on the grotesque that the husband should be expecting the wife to liquidate this ring.’

He found that Mr Haskell’s finances were ‘opaque’ and noted the string of businesses and properties he owns – or is linked to – around the world.

These included a South African winery and a ‘magnificent’ £6.5million villa in Cape Town, plus another high-end villa in Johannesburg.

‘The villa in Cape Town is an outstanding property with views over the ocean,’ added the judge.

Mr Haskell had complained that he was in a dire financial position and was unable to get his hands on cash, telling the judge: ‘I have no money at all.’

The real estate boss – once reputedly worth £160million – claimed to have ‘liabilities’ of £50million and to be struggling to meet his maintenance commitments.

However, Mr Justice Mostyn decided Mr Haskell could get his hands on sufficient funds to pay his ex £5.8million to conclude their divorce.

Other overseas interests include a stake in a Swedish gold exploration company, part of a building in Kiev, land in Crimea, part of a business in Romania, and an elegant property in the Swedish Archipelago complete with a motor yacht.

He also highlighted social media posts from Mr Haskell in which he was shown speaking about his ‘beautiful year’ and posing with a £400 bottle of vintage red wine.

Giving him two years’ ‘breathing space’ to get his finances on track, he said the final instalment of the bill should be paid by March 2022.

But it was his failure to pay the first £50,000 instalment in February 2020 which triggered his ex’s bid to have him jailed for contempt of court if he did not pay up.

With Mr Haskell now overseas, the case came before Mr Justice Moor in the High Court in May and ended with the judge finding Mr Haskell had ‘entirely set his heart against complying with these court orders other than on his terms’.

‘I am, however, quite clear that he has had, since the date of the order, the means to pay the £50,000 as the first instalment of the lump sum, and that he has refused or neglected to do so,’ the judge commented.

Mr Haskell was handed a six-week prison sentence by Mr Justice Moor, but last week claimed through his legal team at the Court of Appeal that the judge got it wrong.

His ex-wife had herself confirmed he had paid out various sums since February 2020, but could not say how much and had not filed any evidence to update the situation, said his solicitor Adam Tear.

And as Mr Haskell was her source of income, she must have received large amounts from him to enable her to keep paying the £6,000-a-month rent on her Sloane Street apartment, he argued.

‘As such, without updating evidence, the judge could never have been sure at all even on the balance of probabilities, if the sum had not been discharged by February 2020, it had not been discharged since that time,’ said Mr Tear.

‘On the circumstantial evidence, the judge was bound to conclude that the respondent, whose own source of resource was Mr Haskell, must have received considerable sums of money from him or on his behalf to pay rent, and other costs that have been incurred.

‘The respondent gave no evidence of borrowing money, or other sources of income, not declared in the matrimonial.’

Rejecting his challenge and upholding the prison sentence, Lord Justice Underhill said: ‘The judge was fully entitled to conclude to the criminal standard that £50,000 was still outstanding.’