Broken engagement-family home?

Gizmo102

Hi Hopefully someone can help me out! i broke off my engagement and now my ex fiance says he can claim something off my house because we were engaged. im not sure what he means but i suppose a bit of background might help!

4 years ago i bought a house on my own, my name on deeds my mortgage etc.
1 year after that my boyfriend moved in,
6 months later i was preganant,
7 months after having my son we got engaged,
2 months after that i, well technically the guards removed him from the house.

what and why can he claim off me regarding my house?

dermot_sheehan

Look at the 1981 Family Law Act http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1981/en/act/pub/0022/index.html

The rules generally applying to beneficial ownership of property holds he must have made a financial contribution to the house to acquire an interest in it, i.e. by paying the mortgage. He could argue that discharging day to day expenses left more money to pay the mortgage.

seamus

Slight aside - if he bought you a ring as part of the engagement, you are required to give it back to him if you haven't already. The ring forms part of a contract and having broken that contract, ownership of the ring reverts to him.

Gizmo102

seamus i returned the ring to him complete in the box it came in

Gizmo102

This makes no sense to me, we were engaged for 2 months!! and it was his fault i had to end it. is it expected that i should have let him live in my house without making any contribution? all mortgage payments are DD out of my bank account and contributions made by him were cash to me.

Hagar

You should really talk to a solicitor about this. The reason for the breakup is going to be of paramount importance as is the fact that you rather than he broke it off as opposed to him doing so. I'm trying to imagine what a woman could expect from the courts if the roles were reversed. That's probably what he is entitled to. Did he work and contribute to running of the household? If he did I think he has some rights. But IANAL.

Gizmo102

Hagar wrote: »

You should really talk to a solicitor about this. The reason for the breakup is going to be of paramount importance as is the fact that you rather than he broke it off as opposed to him doing so. I'm trying to imagine what a woman could expect from the courts if the roles were reversed. That's probably what he is entitled to. Did he work and contribute to running of the household? If he did I think he has some rights. But IANAL.

i know i should really speak to a solicitor but am waiting on legal aid, and he just announced this last night and now im all in a fluster!
i was forced to end the engagement because he got violent with me. i would have thought that after everything else hes put me through that the fact it was my house before he came on the scene at all meant it was safe even if i ament.

partyguinness

Can you clarify if the title or the mortgage is in your name or joint? Did he raise or contribute toward the purchase money originally?

If its still in your name and he didnt contribute toward the purchase originally, I dont believe that he has any entitlement to the property. He is effectively a tenant and any costs he may have discharged was in return for him living in the house.

What is referred to above is effectively a trust situation but they only kick in when the parties are married unless the case law has changed dramatically since I last looked at it.

Gizmo102

partyguinness wrote: »

Can you clarify if the title or the mortgage is in your name or joint? Did he raise or contribute toward the purchase money originally?

If its still in your name and he didnt contribute toward the purchase originally, I dont believe that he has any entitlement to the property. He is effectively a tenant and any costs he may have discharged was in return for him living in the house.

What is referred to above is effectively a trust situation but they only kick in when the parties are married unless the case law has changed dramatically since I last looked at it.

its all in my name! he had nothing to do with the purchase or furnishing of the house. i did once ask him to help me pay a tiler to tile the bathroom and he refused on the grounds..it was my house! which im now glad of from the sounds of things!

partyguinness

If you came into me, I would tell you not to worry because:

a. The chances of him doing anything are slim;

b. If he does, he has little or no chance of succeeding and would be making a fool of himself. Thats what I would say to him if he came into me.

Of course thats just on what you have written and as we all know there are two sides to every story..;)

Gizmo102

partyguinness wrote: »

If you came into me, I would tell you not to worry because:

a. The chances of him doing anything are slim;

b. If he does, he has little or no chance of succeeding and would be making a fool of himself. Thats what I would say to him if he came into me.

Of course thats just on what you have written and as we all know there are two sides to every story..;)

Thanks partyGuinness i feel a bit better!

ive been reading the law thing that the moderator posted, would i be right saying he can only make any claim for the duration of the engagement...i.e 2 months???

i know what you mean by 2 sides to every story but believe me when i say i done everything for that lad and in the end got nothing in return, except my beautiful son who i wouldnt give up for the world, dispite his eternal blabbering about building us a house to get us out of the housing estate and into the country. but now my ex is intent on making my life hell. so when you see this daft story on the front of all the papers... think of me :-D

dats_right

I'm sorry OP but Party Guinness would be contacting his professional indemnity insurers to inform them of a potential claim in negligence againt their policy if he/she gave advice like that to a client. Gabhain's summary is far more accurate. I certainly don't want to panic you and it might well be the case that the ex either does nothing or after taking advice decides that he does not have a case, but on the facts before us nobody can rule out the possibility of him bringing an action and claiming a beneficial interest in your property.

In any event, there is probably no need to speak to a solicitor just yet as you have not received any solicitors' letters or court proceedings. What I am saying is that the ball is firmly in his court and it is really a matter for him what, if any, his next move is. So I think you would be best advised to sit tight, wait and see and of course not to discuss anything whatsoever in connection with the property with him.

Civpro

OP, this is both simpler and a lot more complicated than some posters are suggesting.

The law in this area is quite complicated from an academic point of view (which is where some posters are coming from, although the principles are more nuanced than suggested).

However, from a practical point of view, the factors you refer to would also have an impact on how likely it is a court would have any sympathy for your ex-fiancee.

The engagement doesnt give him any rights. Living in the house by itself doesnt give him any rights. After that it gets fuzzier, but if its in your name and you were paying the mortgage, all he has is a distant possibility (no more) that he might get a small amount if he can establish that he paid for certain things, that him paying for things meant you didnt have to (this is important and overlooked), and that there's no proof that you didn't both intend him to take an interest in the property.

As you can imagine, this can be difficult to establish in evidence, and gives a judge scope to find 'evidence' of inconsistent agreements if he or she feels its merited in the case. Because the law is so flexible in this area in Ireland, that's something that really shouldnt be underestimated from a practical point of view. If your ex-fiancee was getting legal advice (which I doubt - sounds like he's trying it on in an effort to bully you), he's likely to be told that. It may not decide the case, but its certainly not something you would advise someone to ignore.

The main thing is not to let him bully you into any sort of agreement, and to wait until you get proper legal advice. I know its stressful at the moment but you shouldnt get overly worried about it!

Gizmo102

Civpro wrote: »

OP, this is both simpler and a lot more complicated than some posters are suggesting.

The law in this area is quite complicated from an academic point of view (which is where some posters are coming from, although the principles are more nuanced than suggested).

However, from a practical point of view, the factors you refer to would also have an impact on how likely it is a court would have any sympathy for your ex-fiancee.

The engagement doesnt give him any rights. Living in the house by itself doesnt give him any rights. After that it gets fuzzier, but if its in your name and you were paying the mortgage, all he has is a distant possibility (no more) that he might get a small amount if he can establish that he paid for certain things, that him paying for things meant you didnt have to (this is important and overlooked), and that there's no proof that you didn't both intend him to take an interest in the property.

As you can imagine, this can be difficult to establish in evidence, and gives a judge scope to find 'evidence' of inconsistent agreements if he or she feels its merited in the case. Because the law is so flexible in this area in Ireland, that's something that really shouldnt be underestimated from a practical point of view. If your ex-fiancee was getting legal advice (which I doubt - sounds like he's trying it on in an effort to bully you), he's likely to be told that. It may not decide the case, but its certainly not something you would advise someone to ignore.

The main thing is not to let him bully you into any sort of agreement, and to wait until you get proper legal advice. I know its stressful at the moment but you shouldnt get overly worried about it!

Civpro...apparently it was his solicitor that gave him the info, we've been in court to make legal our access arrangements regarding our son. but ive a feeling he has told his solicitor that he has been paying off half the mortgage because when he moved in, to work out how much his 'Rent' would be i used half the mortgage figure as a guide and lumped on a bit for ESB, Groceries, Childminders(obviously after son came along and not before!) etc. he wasnt paying anything OTT and def no more than if we had rented a house together and split things 50/50. the only items we purchased was a tv and a painting which was paid for 50/50 by both of us. oh it wasnt a new tv...we bought it off my sister who bought it off her boyfriends brother, so it was 3rd hand!

Civpro

Hi gizmo,

This is why you will really need to wait until you can talk to your own legal advisors for more clarity. People on here cant give specific advice and wont know all of the facts (just as you suspect your ex's solicitor might not either). The law in this area is that the courts should enforce what was intended. As often people dont actually discuss it, the courts often end up having to look to other things, like who paid what bills, as evidence of what was/would have been intended.

If you did discuss it before he moved in, that will be highly relevant to either of your entitlements.

Hope it all works out for the best for you and your son.

Laura79

You poor thing - I'm so sorry for you at this horrible time. Family law is a really difficult area, and you should get a solicitor. The Free Legal Advice Centre (www.flac.ie) can recommend a solicitor, or you may be entitled to legal aid.

As I said above, family is a really difficult area of law, where relevant factors of each case are taken into account, so there are very few hard and fast rules. You need to focus on yourself and you son now, and get legal advice. None of us on this post know the full facts, so, to be honest, you shouldn't listen to us.

partyguinness

dats_right wrote: »

I'm sorry OP but Party Guinness would be contacting his professional indemnity insurers to inform them of a potential claim in negligence againt their policy if he/she gave advice like that to a client. Gabhain's summary is far more accurate. I certainly don't want to panic you and it might well be the case that the ex either does nothing or after taking advice decides that he does not have a case, but on the facts before us nobody can rule out the possibility of him bringing an action and claiming a beneficial interest in your property.

In any event, there is probably no need to speak to a solicitor just yet as you have not received any solicitors' letters or court proceedings. What I am saying is that the ball is firmly in his court and it is really a matter for him what, if any, his next move is. So I think you would be best advised to sit tight, wait and see and of course not to discuss anything whatsoever in connection with the property with him.

LOL....that is your opinion and your opinion only.

I have seen this in practice and that is how it has developed when similar situations to the OP have arisen.

Advising a client (the boyfriend)to embark on a course of action i.e. litigation, when in my opinion he has little chance of succeeding is far more negligent in my eyes. Would you not agree?

But as you said, the ball is in his Court.

Jo King

Any claim in the house must be on the basis of a capital contribution. Given that the mortgage has only been drawn down for about four years, the amount of capital paid off is probably negligible. If the mortgage is 25 years or longer this is certainly the case.
The only potential claim is for a share of the equity in the house as a percentage of the capital contributed. The house is probably now worth the same or less tha four years ago. Any potential claim will likely be for a very small sum. Given the evidential difficulties and likely costs the chances of an action would be slim. There may be an attempt to utilise the nuisance value of a potential claim and full and informed legal advice is necessary in the event of a claim being thereatened.

partyguinness

Jo King wrote: »

Any claim in the house must be on the basis of a capital contribution. Given that the mortgage has only been drawn down for about four years, the amount of capital paid off is probably negligible. If the mortgage is 25 years or longer this is certainly the case.
The only potential claim is for a share of the equity in the house as a percentage of the capital contributed. The house is probably now worth the same or less tha four years ago. Any potential claim will likely be for a very small sum. Given the evidential difficulties and likely costs the chances of an action would be slim. There may be an attempt to utilise the nuisance value of a potential claim and full and informed legal advice is necessary in the event of a claim being thereatened.

Yes I agree.

Victor

Gizmo102 wrote: »

2 months after that i, well technically the guards removed him from the house.

Is there the potential for a counter claim for assault?

Carawaystick

Gizmo102 wrote: »

Civpro...apparently it was his solicitor that gave him the info, we've been in court to make legal our access arrangements regarding our son. but ive a feeling he has told his solicitor that he has been paying off half the mortgage because when he moved in, to work out how much his 'Rent' would be i used half the mortgage figure as a guide and lumped on a bit for ESB, Groceries, Childminders(obviously after son came along and not before!) etc. he wasnt paying anything OTT and def no more than if we had rented a house together and split things 50/50. the only items we purchased was a tv and a painting which was paid for 50/50 by both of us. oh it wasnt a new tv...we bought it off my sister who bought it off her boyfriends brother, so it was 3rd hand!

If he paid you more than the rent a room relief limit ( 10 Grand a year, I think) you need to declare that for tax as rent received, and it might even be an idea to make a tax return to document this. get advice on this of a pro though...

Gizmo102

Victor wrote: »

Is there the potential for a counter claim for assault?

Possible but one day in the courthouse was enough to make me feel like a criminal to be honest! Its over now and i want a clean break, or as clean as it can be with a toddler in the mix. but saying that if he wants to play dirty buggers, if he pushed me far enough i suppose its something i could as leverage to make him back off, but its something id prefere not to do. im taking the moral high ground on this one for now!