Kelly Clarkson has accused her estranged husband, Brandon Blackstock of defrauding her over the years as their divorce gets messier.
In September, her former management company, Starstruck Management Group, which is owned by her father-in-law Narvel Blackstock alleged that the singer owes them US$1.4 million (approx. $1.9 million) in unpaid commissions.
Now in papers obtained by Page Six this week, it’s been revealed Clarkson filed a countersuit back in October accusing Narvel and Brandon of fraud and “illegal services”.
Clarkson alleges in a filing submitted to the California Labor Commission that her agreement with Starstruck Management was a ‘fraudulent and subterfuge device’ allowing them to carry out ‘illegal services’ as her agent, even though they were not licensed to do so.
The singer is hoping her filing will void her agreement with Starstruck Management, a company she has been with for the last 13 years of her career.
She is also reportedly requesting money she paid the company between 2007 and 2020 to be returned as she argues she paid “unconscionable fees” for “illegal services”.
Kelly Clarkson is expected to have a ‘fortune’ refunded to her after paying large commissions to the company during her 13 year run with them.
“Based on the wrongful acts and conduct of Starstruck Management and the Blackstocks, all agreements between the parties, should be declared void and unenforceable, no monies should be paid by Petitioners to Respondents, and all monies previously paid by Petitioners to Respondents should be disgorged from Respondents, forthwith,” the petition reads.
Bryan Freedman, a lawyer for Starstruck, told TMZ of the filing: “The labor petition conveniently ignores the fact that Kelly had her own licensed talent agency CAA at all times.
“While Starstruck Management Group provided talent management services on her behalf, it did so at all times that CAA was her agency of record.
“It is unfortunate that Kelly is again attempting to avoid paying commissions that are due and owing to Starstruck to try and achieve some perceived advantage in her ongoing custody and divorce proceedings.”