Use the journey to deepen your players' knowledge and understanding of this barbarian king. Let the encounters illustrate his (and his underlings') personality and decisions. Maybe show him to have multiple sides, to be a person of grays instead of black and white, if you haven't done so yet.
An example: Have an encounter centered on refugees fleeing this king. Say, their cart (or ship or whatever) got into trouble, and they can't proceed, and the king's men (a small capture party) are catching up with them. Give your party the chance to help the refugees escape and/or fight the hunting party... but give it a twist (one, at least): Show that the refugees are, in fact, slavers: they have a few chained youngsters hidden (or out in plain sight?), who apparently haven't been treated well. These youngsters are from the king's people. Twist, once again: Even though the refugees are slavers, the youngsters are rapers and thieves who did hurt the refugees' families - that's why the slavers think enslaving them is proper punishment. In the eyes of the king's men, however, the refugees are just outlaws, though... but so are the youngsters, who would have to face even harsher punishment at the king's hands than slavery. Reveal this all relatively quickly, and have the king's men arrive (by an unexpected shortcut) in the middle of the debate. Try to turn it into a standoff, if possible, with talk first and combat later (or not at all.) Show what this king and his laws are like through the words of the opposing NPC parties.
Another example: Have your party come across a pillaged, burnt out village, with a few looters still there, picking what they can, killing the wounded etc. Reveal that this village belongs to the barbarian king, and that the cruel looters work for the same power (god, jarl, thane etc) as the PCs. The village was relatively unprotected because its fighting men went off to conduct a burial, from which they won't be back for at least a day. (Have the party learn this from someone: either a villager or a pillager.) Reveal that the looters - even though they're on the same side as the PCs - were about to plant evidence incriminating the PCs, at the behest of some internal rival (a nice way to introduce a mysterious one if you haven't done so yet. ;)) Make a villager or two a reliable witness of this - and then have the looters make a secret attempt on their lives. Then have the scouts of the villagers' returning warriors turn up and witness how the PCs handle the situation. Then show how the barbarians react to what they've seen. Maybe they'll like, in their grief, the PCs' actions, and try and put in a word for them with the king. Or not. It's up to what you wish the king and his rule to be and seem like.
So... something like this. Use the encounters you come up with to foreshadow the confrontation with the king. Once again, have NPCs and situations reveal what he's like, illustrate - through NPCs' actions, words, and opinions (of him and of his rule) - what the PCs can expect.
You have 2 choices for starting equipment. One is to take the equipment given by your class and background, which in some cases (such as the Rogue) includes tools, and in other cases (such as the Fighter) does not.
The other option is to take starting gold as given at the start of Chapter 5, and buy items from the basic equipment lists up to that amount. If you want a tool that your class and background do not provide, you can take starting gold and buy that tool. (Note that if you choose to take starting gold instead, you do not get any equipment from your class or background.)
You should consider, though, that in general the beginning of your life as an adventurer is meant to be a significant change from whatever you were before. (Such as a criminal, or urchin, and so on.) So even if you had those tools in your past, and became proficient with them during your former occupation, whatever caused you to become an adventurer might have involved leaving some possessions behind, or some things been stolen from you.
It's not so much a case of "proficient with tools she does not own" as "proficient with tools she had at some point but doesn't have now for some reason." But as I said earlier, if you want to have something that your starting equipment does not provide, you're free to take starting gold and go shopping for it.
Best Answer
You should cut that out.
You've basically answered the question yourself in describing the situation to us: You have a requirement that characters have a backstory. If they don't bring a backstory, you write a “sadistic” backstory that “affects them badly” and “mock” them with it, and a player has confronted you that they feel bullied. (This is all your own words.) I am relieved you listened to your own alarm bells and asked us. You are being abusive towards your players and need to stop.
Now there's a possibility this is a miscommunication or an English-second-language issue — others have brought up similar concerns and edited the question accordingly — but at minimum I think we can agree that what's happening here is you have players unable to meet part of the requirements at the start of the game, and you're holding this over their head ongoingly in a way that will compromise their enjoyment of the game, and someone's brought up serious concern about it.
At the very least the punishment you're exerting can and should be replaced with supportive measures assisting these players in engaging in the parts of the game you feel they need to engage in. Worse, what you're doing exacerbates the problem you're trying to resolve (I'll get to that shortly).
Managing differences
Each individual has ways they enjoy playing the game, right? Your method of enjoying the game involves players having backstories. Some players' fun doesn't come from having a pre-written backstory, or they find it difficult creating one.
If you want those players in your game anyway, they need your and the group's assistance and support in onboarding into the game process. This means working with them in a way compatible with their playstyle to get what you need out of their backstory defined when you need it. And I emphasize working with them — you should work in their best interests, in good faith, to produce backstory details you're both happy with. They need your support to help them give you the details you need.
They may not be able to produce everything you need right at the start. Some players like myself have a general idea of a backstory and characterisation, but need to actually start playing to work out the rest — we improvise and flesh out our character as we go, rather than doing it all at once at the start. Work with what you can get.
If there's an up-front rule, you need to find an implementation of it that doesn't feel like bullying to anyone. If someone's feeling bullied, that indicates an implementation malfunction, and that we need to step back and fix something if we value their participation in the group at all — even if we felt it was ostensibly advertised or forewarned. (If we don't value their participation we need to politely disinvite them instead of keeping them around in this state.) A player feeling bullied is a social breakdown state, and we need to revise and correct what's going on, including revising what rules might've lead us there. Your group may be able to help you identify how to better implement this rule, but I suggest the above is a solid start — replace the punishing backstory completely with benevolent exploration together.
Aggressive punishments doesn't solve this
What you're doing is aggressively, or passive-aggressively, abusing your players in-game to punish them for not doing something you wanted them to do. In-game retribution doesn't solve out-of-game issues: you need to talk with these people and give them benevolent support, as in the previous section.
Levelling punishment like this is generally seen as abusiveness and bullying. Trying to resolve out-of-game problems with in-game aggression is a pervasive anti-pattern in our hobby. It creates resentment and anger, it means the targeted party isn't having fun, and it sets back your ability to have a fun game where everyone is contributing meaningfully. What good is that for anyone!?
Ironically, like I said, this anti-pattern actually exacerbates the situation. Abusing your players leads to abused gamer syndrome. Abused gamers don't get invested in their characters or the game world, because their character and the world are being leveraged as a means of abuse, and non-investment is their single best defence against that abuse. Since they cannot get invested in their characters or the world, they also don't generally create backstories (let alone detailed ones), because that requires exercising emotional investment they can't afford to have. This makes them more inclined to play amnesiacs or whatnot, and to ignore the backstory you've given them as much as possible. An uninvested player is un-inclined to portray detailed characterization of their characters in any way. Given the backstory you've created to punish the player, why would they want to get at all invested in this character and portray them, if this character sucks and is being used against them?
Further, dictating the nature of a player character is often seen as a thing DMs should not do in D&D: they have control over absolutely everything else in the world, but players generally expect to maintain their sovereignty over defining and expressing their characters how they wish (it's the only thing the player's granted direct control over). If something you're doing as a DM undermines the player's agency to do that, it may be seen as unwelcome. I don't know to what extent your backstories are doing that, but if it is “a lot” you need to step that back and give those players back control.
Help your players have fun or don't invite them
Basically, don't do stuff you could describe as sadistic or make things awful — unless it's genuinely in the spirit of helping your players have fun. (As in, what they consider to be fun.)
When someone tells you what you're doing is bullying, take that seriously as a sign you need to change what you're doing. You've done this here; thank you.
If you don't think you can seriously facilitate people in good faith who don't produce backstories for their characters, and instead think you'll be using these abusive responses against them... don't invite those people to your game. Just have a hard requirement that they either have a backstory or aren't allowed in. Nobody deserves that level of abuse and you're better off sparing them from it.