A Chinese student who was sent $18 million-plus by his parents to invest in Sydney property instead blew part of the fortune on cosmetic surgery, luxury jewellery, a car and a lavish apartment, before a court ordered him to hand back millions and two homes.
Allen Xu, 29, has lost his appeal against a Victorian Supreme Court ruling that found the money was not a gift, with judges ordering he repay almost $5 million and transfer two properties to his mother, Jiyun Ma.
The Victorian Court of Appeal judgment, dated August 26 and published online, found Xu’s case was badly damaged by his own WeChat messages, in which he admitted the money and properties were his mother’s.
MORE NEWS
49yo’s no regrets, rips up neighbour’s home
Woman loses court bid to stop parents selling ‘her’ home
The ghost town that was meant to be Australia’s capital
In one draft apology message tendered in court, Xu described himself as “a greedy person, a dishonest person, an immoral person, and a very bad person” who “couldn’t control the devil living in my heart”.
Allen Xu lived in the apartment in Haymarket. Picture: realestate.com.au
Court documents show Xu came to Australia to study around 2020 and later completed a double degree in finance and accounting from the University of South Australia, as well as a Master’s degree in economics from the University of Sydney.
Ma had financially supported her son through his studies, paying his tertiary fees and living expenses.
Near the end of his studies, Ma and her first husband, referred to in the judgment as Mr Xu, gave him about $5 million to invest in Australia so he could qualify for an investment visa.
In April 2021, Ma – who has never been to Australia – then sent about $2 million to buy a Haymarket property, which both parties agreed would be put in Xu’s name.
A second property was also bought in Bennelong.
Then, between July 2021 and May 2022, Ma transferred a further $11,133,322 to her son in nine separate payments from bank accounts in China, Singapore and Canada to be invested on her behalf.
He bought the unit with his mother’s money (unit complex pictured).
Instead of investing the money in property for his mother, the court heard Xu spent part of it on luxury items, including cosmetic eyelid surgery, jewellery, a car and an apartment at Wentworth Point, while placing the rest into a bank account in his own name.
By June 2022, Ma had discovered what happened and demanded the money back.
Xu then sought help from his uncle, identified in the judgment as Mr Peng, to draft an apology to his mother.
In a handwritten draft later shown to the court, Xu wrote: “It follows that once the wealth that was in return for your hard work arrived in Australia, I became arrogant, even though I knew it was your wealth.”
He added: “There is currently $1.6 million yet to be invested…I satisfied myself with your wealth and met many famous people and opened my horizon. You’re right, I’m just vain.”
The court heard Peng told Xu it was not enough to simply apologise. He needed to explain why he had lied to his mother along the way.
A mock up of a draft WeChat message from Allen Xu to his uncle, Mr Peng.
Among the concerns was Xu’s claim he had opened an account in his father’s name to hold the remaining funds, when he had in fact opened the account in his own name and failed to tell her.
He had also claimed he spent about $250,000 on “living necessities”, which Peng reportedly said was unrealistic and something Ma would never believe.
Peng also pressed him to explain why he converted his mother’s money from US dollars into Australian dollars without telling her, and why there was still more than $332,000 unaccounted for.
In a second draft, Xu said there were administrative issues opening an account in his father’s name and claimed he kept the new account in his own name secret because “I was afraid that you would blame me for my incompetence”.
He then wrote: “I know that these things don’t belong to me, the money doesn’t belong to me, and I don’t have the ability to earn that much money. But under the circumstances at the time, I really couldn’t control the devil living in my heart.”
The final message went to Mr Xu’s mother.
Ma received a third and final draft of the apology later in June 2022.
She then asked Xu to give her power of attorney over his bank and investment accounts, which he did, and she removed him from the Haymarket apartment.
In his appeal, Xu argued he only signed the power of attorney because he was under intense emotional pressure from his mother and Mr Peng, and that he was desperately trying to appease his family.
He also claimed his eyelid surgery had affected his sight so badly that he could not have written the second apology draft, tendering photos of his swollen eyes.
The court rejected both claims, noting the surgery happened three weeks before the letters were written and finding it implausible that Xu could prepare one handwritten draft but be unable to read or approve another.
Ma launched civil proceedings against her son in November 2022.
While she had regained access to about $7 million from his bank accounts and secured control of both properties, she told the court she was still out of pocket.
Her claim was over the $11.1 million she transferred to Mr Xu between 2021 and 2022.
It did not include the earlier $5 million provided to help secure an investment visa, nor the separate $2 million used to buy the Haymarket property.
Justice David Croft ruled in Ma’s favour in June 2025, ordering Xu to repay $3,120,445.72, plus $989,063.04 in interest.
He also declared that Xu held the Haymarket and Wentworth Point properties on trust for Ma and ordered him to take all necessary steps to transfer them to her.
In the appeal, Xu maintained he believed the money was a gift and denied saying the properties were not his.
He also relied on a 2016 conversation between his mother and a relative in Canada, during which Ma, who was seriously ill at the time, said she wanted to make up for not caring for him during parts of his childhood and that her money should go to him if anything happened to her.
The Court of Appeal dismissed Xu’s appeal and upheld the original orders.