Moral and Legal help house split. - mostly moral

Rendol

Any input really arreciated.

Moral and Legal help house split. - mostly moral

Question : Is X being unreasonable and immoral or am I missing something.

Ok have a moral quandary .Recently a my ex has requested that morally I should sign over the house we built together to her completely for nothing. She had just a year ago offered me 20k(Her dad) to sign over , I would be happy with even 14-15k at moment, between 80 to 100k equity in house.

Background

House begun around 2007. Together over 10 years till January 2011 I lost my job went back to College and she ended relationship 4 mths into college.
We sought planning permission and Her Dad (has 500 acres+ Farmer) signed over land 1 acre to her (agricultural value 16k)/. We spent time and effort over years building house as cheaply as possible and dealing with obstacles such as archaeology digs spending every weekends bargain hunting etc. We built this fantastic large (beautifully furnished-marble hardwood etc) house for 135,000 plus what we put in ourselves.-paid bottom price everything in building-)
Current Mortgage is only 500 P/M.
2 Recent evaluations min 220,000 and other guy min 240,000 said realistically sell 250,000


She states I have contributed on 14,000 to build I think more like 20 k

Her side

I should sign over the house to her because it’s what she would do ,house 3 miles from family (She is Moral but has brutal temper-if situation was reversed really?)
The house is not an asset it’s my home.
Her Dad gave us the land and helped with foundations
X is living in the house last 3 years +
She has paid over 20,000 ish over last 3 years I have paid nothing .,she goes theres your 20,000

She gave me a written evaluation stating contributed on 14,000 to build , we paid through her bank but I argue 1000’s s paid through cash over years.
Moving me legally now expensive
House needs work


Legal advice

Told me I should have acted straight away to push sale of house - I did not want to sell house from under her

Her solicitor should have been advised to have my own solicitor at initial signing did not, everything through her dads solicitor,
I have a document where originally the land was been signed over to both of us created by her dad ,not signed by all parties-eventually signed to her
Solicitor Told that land was not her dads but her uncles and some messy shenanigans’ with land signed over only 3 yrs ago.- Dads solicitor moron

My side

She ended relationship , if I ended relationship Morally I would feel obliged to compensate her for contribution time and money into house
She has a home and Asset , I have nothing , Left with just my cloths.
She is living there for 500 a month , she could move new boyfriend in and it would be cheaper again, she would have to pay rent anyway if she lived somewhere else.
Could rent house out and make a monthly profit making 150-200 p/m , there is a shortage of rental houses in area.
There is anywhere between 80 k to 100k in equity in the house , she has a dream house if she chooses not to sell.- house will only increase in value



Would appreciate any input moral or legal…..I have no desire currently to take legal action I wish her the best but she thinks I am been unfair , what happens in the future , will she eventually just own the house , I am not paying mortgage cause I cant live there .

MarkAnthony

If ya not married then this is what happens. You owe no obligation to the person once you stop sleeping with them.

Get legal advice and follow it.

Stheno

MarkAnthony wrote: »

If ya not married then this is what happens. You owe no obligation to the person once you stop sleeping with them.

Get legal advice and follow it.

They were together elevenyears wasn't there legislation brought in that covers this? The cohabitation act?

MarkAnthony

Stheno wrote: »

They were together elevenyears wasn't there legislation brought in that covers this? The cohabitation act?

You're actually bang on sorry, I'll go back to my 19th century hole. :pac:

That said morally, smorrally - do what you're told by your legal advisor.

MrWalsh

The story is very confusing but from what I can gather, you feel you put 20k into build. For her part she contributed 16k (value of land) plus presumably matched your 20k while it was being built?

Then you both contributed equally until you broke up and for the past 3 years she has been paying the mortgage,20k, and you have paid nothing?

So overall she has contributed 36k more? The mortgage is 135, the value is 230 (average of min)? So if sold, split 95, subtract her extra 36, that would leave with 11k. Course there would be conveyance fees, expenses etc so more like you'd see about 5k.

Legally, speak to a solicitor.

Rendol

Thanks for response , To Clarify , we were engaged since 2007 . I have stopped paying the mortgage last 3 years with no intention to pay any more , but she lives there not me .She has no intention of selling the house and legal costs would negate any gains plus fact i am not paying mortgage .The value of house say is 230=240k conservatively with mortgage of 135 k.

If she continues to pay mortgage by that logic in 10 years she would own the house ? ,so really does she have any incentives to pay me off rather than if she dies i would get house , mortgage in both our names.

Stheno

Rendol wrote: »

Thanks for response , To Clarify , we were engaged since 2007 . I have stopped paying the mortgage last 3 years with no intention to pay any more , but she lives there not me .She has no intention of selling the house and legal costs would negate any gains plus fact i am not paying mortgage .The value of house say is 230=240k conservatively with mortgage of 135 k.

If she continues to pay mortgage by that logic in 10 years she would own the house ? ,so really does she have any incentives to pay me off rather than if she dies i would get house , mortgage in both our names.

You need legal advice

Rendol

Thanks for response , To Clarify , we were engaged since 2007 . I have stopped paying the mortgage last 3 years with no intention to pay any more , but she lives there not me .She has no intention of selling the house and legal costs would negate any gains plus fact i am not paying mortgage .The value of house say is 230=240k conservatively with mortgage of 135 k.

If she continues to pay mortgage by that logic MrWalsh in 10 years she would own the house ? ,so really does she have any incentives to pay me off rather than if she dies i would get house , mortgage in both our names.

Rendol

Thanks , cant afford solicitor yet, would you give her house for nothing ?.

MrWalsh

How would you be giving it to her for nothing?

She has put more in financially than you. You have stopped paying the mortgage. That was totally wrong of you. You have both a moral and legal obligation to pay the mortgage and by stopping paying you put her credit rating at risk as well as your own.

I don't think you have any moral high ground unless you pay back what you owe for the time you haven't been paying the mortgage plus knock the value of the land that she brought to it off it also. Only then would you both have equal standing in the asset.

As it stands she has already contributed a lot more financially so any deal will need to take that into account. You should have jumped on an offer of 20k from her last year.

If the issue that in 10 years she would have a house gets you then stump up the land value plus the mortgage payments you've missed and make an equal contribution to it for the next 10 years and then buy her out for half the value at that point.

Rendol

Being in College for last 4 years i could not afford to rent and pay mortgage last 3 years. I would have loved to keep the house but we cant both live there . Yes i would have snapped the 20k but she withdrew it . I told her i would take 14K.

When built the house was valued well over 300,000 and i imagine will eventually bounce back to those value ( now 230k 240k on 135k mortgage) , she ends up with a house and an asset.I pay 250 rent a month for an apt she pays 500 mortgage and lives in the nice house which she could share costs with new boy-friend(not sure where he lives)

Due to prohibitive legal costs and potential outcomes i cant take any legal action i would lose money .

So would you agree with her since she is paying the mortgage and theirs not much point me paying it that i should just sign it over for nothing.

MarkAnthony

Speak to a solicitor, explain the situation there may be option available ref payment. At the very least get some advice through FLAC.

MrWalsh

Well if you couldn't afford your mortgage repayments you should have rented out your portion of it or sold it or had her move out and rented out the entire property. Simply not paying and letting her pick up the entire tab was a really irresponsible thing to do. Why do you feel you have any rights to making decisions about it seeing as you just walked away from it? Now you're worried it's future value might go up and she might gain? And what if the property market crashes again, I presume you will be happy to make up the loss in that future scenario?

The point is, you can't be basing your decision on possible future values. The only fair thing to do is set out how much each person contributed, how much the mortgage still is, how much the property is currently worth, how much you'd lose in legal fees etc and come to a figure that one pays to the other to relinquish ownership.

Will the bank even allow you to walk away from the mortgage?

Rendol

You sound exactly like her .My solicitor suggested that if I wanted money from the house i would need to move straight after i moved out , i could have pushed to have house sold say 230,000 and negotiated the split of the money with the solicitor , I know she loved this massive 2 story house with marble and hardwood floor, walk in wardrobes , expensive furniture , flat screen TV'S , large conservatives, etc.

My point is she ended our relationships and expects everything .She refused to take a year off mortgage , rent house or negotiate in any way , only to state house was hers . I would gladly have rented out one of the many large rooms but she is incredibly obstinate. Her Dad would have ploughed 1000's into legal action, i would be stuck in court for years . How am i irresponsible not paying into a house i cant live in , she could rent house at healthy profit or sold house but refused . She has a luxury house which would cost 750 to rent monthly i have nothing . I dont think it's unreasonable to expect something in return , what i have put into it , time money and effort . I believe she should compensate given the asset she has and the current value . I have come away with nothing. I could not pay more mortgage into a house that i can never own or live in . I not even asking for the amount I put into it, At the end of the day i rent for 250 and it goes nowhere i have nothing , at the end she has a stunning house.

MrWalsh

I don't think you're living in the real world. You make it out as though she ends up with the house for free. (She gets everything?) She doesn't. She takes on the mortgage debt, and the responsibility of paying it in full. At the end of paying back the mortgage she gets a house she paid for. During that time she will also have to cover the costs of property tax, maintenance, utilities etc.. Plus the fact that she continued to pay the mortgage after you walked away. She took responsibility for your irresponsibility. Just because you broke up didn't absolve you of your mortgage responsibility. If you wanted to stop paying the mortgage you should have forced a sale of the house at that point.

Your point about putting time money and effort in is irrelevant. She put in the same (more actually if you include the land). And you lived in it for a period so you got your money's worth.

I think you can fight your corner legally if you wish but it'll cost you a lot more in the long run and no judge is going to look favourably upon the fact that you walked away from your responsibility of paying the mortgage for 3 years.

Mr. Incognito

You say you cannot afford a solicitor, mate you cannot afford NOT to have one.

Get legal advice

Colser

Do you have a paper trail of what you spent on the house and your contribution to the mortgage Op?
Would the bank allow the house to be sold?
Who is pushing the issue..you or her?

Rendol

Thanks for response.
She is the one pushing for me to sign the house over to her for nothing even do I ahve put 20.000 into it , she gave me a list written by her which suggest i gave just over 14,000.. I dont care be happy with that , she offered 20k before and then withdrew it.
Thanks for reply . I have no way of bringing this to court ever i was just chasing after peoples

I can never take this to court = we both instantly lose 30,000
Her Dad did not own the acre of land he signed over to us it belonged to his brother the banks missed this an i went through her solicitor . The land was signed over officially 4 years later to us . This has tax implications , my solicitor calculated we owe the state min of 20,000 to over 30,000. (If discovered)
I couldn't live in live in the area her family lives there . She suggest that morally i should sign everything to her.I Really couldn't afford to pay both rent and mortgage while in college and she demonstrated no flexibility to rent etc, also I was cut up for a year after break up (was after 10 and engaged-so)

Maybe i am just being petty that she would move new boyfriend into what was my house , I just feel given he current value and the amount i put in that I should have gt something. Its such a nice house for a tiny mortgage and we both put so much time and effort into the place living there for over 3 years. I would love to be in her position.No point paying mortgage i cant do anything to get money back.

Rendol

Thanks for response.
She is the one pushing for me to sign the house over to her for nothing even do I ahve put 20.000 into it , she gave me a list written by her which suggest i gave just over 14,000.. I dont care be happy with that , she offered 20k before and then withdrew it.
Thanks for reply . I have no way of bringing this to court ever i was just chasing after peoples

I can never take this to court = we both instantly lose 30,000
Her Dad did not own the acre of land he signed over to us it belonged to his brother the banks missed this an it went through her solicitor . The land was signed over officially 5 years later to us . This has tax implications , my solicitor calculated we owe the state min of 20,000 to over 30,000. (If discovered)
I couldn't live in live in the area her family lives there . She suggest that morally i should sign everything to her.I Really couldn't afford to pay both rent and mortgage while in college and she demonstrated no flexibility to rent etc, also I was cut up for a year after break up (was after 10 and engaged-so)

Maybe i am just being petty that she would move new current boyfriend into what was my house(She could be renting house for all I Know) , I just feel given he current value and the amount i put in that I should have gEt something back. Its such a nice house for a tiny mortgage and we both put so much time and effort into the place living there for over 3 years. I would love to be in her position (Mortgage 500).No point paying mortgage now i cant do anything to get money back.

Rendol

Thanks for response.
She is the one pushing for me to sign the house over to her for nothing even do I ahve put 20.000 into it , she gave me a list written by her which suggest i gave just over 14,000.. I dont care be happy with that , she offered 20k before and then withdrew it.
Thanks for reply . I have no way of bringing this to court ever i was just chasing after peoples opinions morally If I had broken the relationship I believe i would have offered to try and compensate)

I can never take this to court = we both instantly lose 30,000
Her Dad did not own the acre of land he signed over to us it belonged to his brother the banks missed this an it went through her solicitor . The land was signed over officially 5 years later to us . This has tax implications , my solicitor calculated we owe the state min of 20,000 to over 30,000. (If discovered)
I couldn't live in live in the area her family lives there . She suggest that morally i should sign everything to her.I Really couldn't afford to pay both rent and mortgage while in college and she demonstrated no flexibility to rent etc, also I was cut up for a year after break up (was after 10 and engaged-so)

Maybe i am just being petty that she would move new current boyfriend into what was my house(She could be renting house for all I Know) , I just feel given he current value and the amount i put in that I should have gEt something back. Its such a nice house for a tiny mortgage and we both put so much time and effort into the place living there for over 3 years. I would love to be in her position (Mortgage 500).No point paying mortgage now i cant do anything to get money back.

MrWalsh

I think you are too emotionally attached to make any practical decisions without feeling bitter about it.

Let it go to court. It'll cost you a packet but you won't be happy otherwise.

Rendol

Nope , If you read what i said I'm not going to court , i was hoping to show her this link that she may get an a variety of opinion on this . But given that the main response's contained not advising legal intervention were Mr Walsh's who agrees with her perspective completely i cant.

longgonesilver

Hi tough position to be in but not unusual.

Who owns the land now? Who owns the house? Both names on the morgage?

Pat Mustard

Rendol wrote: »

I can never take this to court = we both instantly lose 30,000

I could be wrong but it sounds to me that you would consider selling to her for the right price.

So you could get professional advice and negotiate.

You might think that you can't afford to pay for a solicitor. But if the house is going to be sold to one party or the other, money will be freed up and the solicitors can be paid at that point.

Rendol

Land was eventually signed over to her (2013) after being build started in 2007 (This is illegal) , I had one visit to solicitor (One good solicitor) she checked and unknown to me Ex's uncle owned the site and not officially transferred father and to to her till 2013 . WTF . This means i could not go to court or government would charge both of us 20k -30k or my solicitor calculated due legal transference issues , don't ask . Ex sorted it with father and land transferred currently.If i had gone to court during initial split we would both face this cost, she eventually informed me when land had been transfered

Mortgage in both our names , transfer of land to her but complicated due to above shenanigans. I haven't paid mortgage in 3.5 years which empowers her. Now i am in a position to pay mortgage there is no point due to 3 yr lapse when in college.

I met with solicitor for 1 hr for legal advice , i had one sitting with legal counsel , FLAC will not consult with you if you had paid legal advice.

Rendol

She will never sell , she see's as her house ... i can never sell could never encourage rental ...she made it clear when we broke up it's all hers.....
she argues it's not an asset it's her house....

Rendol

She will never sell , she see's as her house ... i can never sell could never encourage rental ...she made it clear when we broke up it's all hers.....
she argues it's not an asset it's her house.... I would take 10k half of what i have given at this stage ... its a stunning mansion for 500 a month . I was hoping to show her this forum to get reason but Mrwalsh fecked that up for me.

Pat Mustard

FLAC will see anyone. You must have got somebody awkward. In any event, FLAC is not appropriate for this. FLAC is a one-off meeting with a volunteer solicitor/barrister who is giving up his/her free time. FLAC is not the place to deal with this problem.

You need someone who can take all of the details, carefully consider them and offer advice.

Also, it is not advisable to post details of tax evasion.

gctest50

Rendol wrote: »

She will never sell , she see's as her house ... i can never sell could never encourage rental ...she made it clear when we broke up it's all hers.....
she argues it's not an asset it's her house.... I would take 10k half of what i have given at this stage ... its a stunning mansion for 500 a month . I was hoping to show her this forum to get reason but Mrwalsh fecked that up for me.

So - you wanted to show her this forum to frighten her basically ?

After running away and not paying the mortgage for 3 years ?

Tayla

How are there tax implications for you if the land was only signed over to her?

walshyn93

Don't sign it over for nothing. How on earth is that a good outcome for you? You're probably still entitled to whatever you put into it plus whatever capital gains you made from it. It doesn't matter that she continued to pay the mortgage after you stopped, you still own a stake in it and that stake is worth more than nothing. Arguably if it wasn't for your early contributions she probably wouldn't have the house.

MrWalsh

Rendol wrote: »

I was hoping to show her this forum to get reason but Mrwalsh fecked that up for me.

Sorry, but your "reason" is not reasonable.

You want to have your cake and eat it. You contributed less to the initial build (she brought the land to it). Then you stopped paying the mortgage. Now you want to be paid off for that.

The longer you delay, the more of the mortgage she pays off, the higher the value of the property goes. So its in your interests to do nothing - which is exactly what you did for 3 years. Youre hoping that you can force her hand to pay you off when you shirked your responsibility and threatened her credit rating for the past 3 years.

So morally, you are completely in the wrong. However, legally you might be able to recover something.

If I were her I would dig in and refuse to negotiate with you now, and Id stop paying the mortgage and get the bank chasing you for it also. See how quickly you move when you are being asked to meet your actual financial responsibility with pressure from the bank.

goz83

MrWalsh wrote: »

The story is very confusing but from what I can gather, you feel you put 20k into build. For her part she contributed 16k (value of land) plus presumably matched your 20k while it was being built?

Then you both contributed equally until you broke up and for the past 3 years she has been paying the mortgage,20k, and you have paid nothing?

So overall she has contributed 36k more? The mortgage is 135, the value is 230 (average of min)? So if sold, split 95, subtract her extra 36, that would leave with 11k. Course there would be conveyance fees, expenses etc so more like you'd see about 5k.

Legally, speak to a solicitor.

I think you have it a bit wrong here. She didn't contribute the other 16k, her Dad did. In doing so, he made a balls of it too, because the land was not even his to begin with and this has potentially cost the OP and his Ex a considerable sum of money in tax.

The OP was not welcome after the break-up. He may not have felt safe living there against her wishes. He mentions her family in the area. The Ex refused to rent, or sell the property. It's only reasonable that she pay the mortgage if she is the enjoying the property, while the OP was forced to rent elsewhere.

MrWalsh wrote: »

How would you be giving it to her for nothing?

She has put more in financially than you. You have stopped paying the mortgage. That was totally wrong of you. You have both a moral and legal obligation to pay the mortgage and by stopping paying you put her credit rating at risk as well as your own.

I don't think you have any moral high ground unless you pay back what you owe for the time you haven't been paying the mortgage plus knock the value of the land that she brought to it off it also. Only then would you both have equal standing in the asset.

As it stands she has already contributed a lot more financially so any deal will need to take that into account. You should have jumped on an offer of 20k from her last year.

If the issue that in 10 years she would have a house gets you then stump up the land value plus the mortgage payments you've missed and make an equal contribution to it for the next 10 years and then buy her out for half the value at that point.

The mistake the OP made was moving out and renting elsewhere when he could not afford to pay rent AND a mortgage. The question is...did he move out by choice, or was he told to leave? If it is the former, he has some thinking to do. If it is the latter, he certainly retains some moral ground.

MrWalsh wrote: »

Well if you couldn't afford your mortgage repayments you should have rented out your portion of it or sold it or had her move out and rented out the entire property. Simply not paying and letting her pick up the entire tab was a really irresponsible thing to do. Why do you feel you have any rights to making decisions about it seeing as you just walked away from it? Now you're worried it's future value might go up and she might gain? And what if the property market crashes again, I presume you will be happy to make up the loss in that future scenario?

The point is, you can't be basing your decision on possible future values. The only fair thing to do is set out how much each person contributed, how much the mortgage still is, how much the property is currently worth, how much you'd lose in legal fees etc and come to a figure that one pays to the other to relinquish ownership.

Will the bank even allow you to walk away from the mortgage?

The op has already covered this to some extent. But, I wish to add that if I were in his situation (as i understand it), any deal would have to result in my name being taken off the mortgage, which would be tricky. The OP would find it very hard getting a mortgage if he was still liable for the first mortgage, which brings me to another point......he is no longer a First Time Buyer and loses those benefits in any future purchase.

MrWalsh wrote: »

I don't think you're living in the real world. You make it out as though she ends up with the house for free. (She gets everything?) She doesn't. She takes on the mortgage debt, and the responsibility of paying it in full. At the end of paying back the mortgage she gets a house she paid for. During that time she will also have to cover the costs of property tax, maintenance, utilities etc.. Plus the fact that she continued to pay the mortgage after you walked away. She took responsibility for your irresponsibility. Just because you broke up didn't absolve you of your mortgage responsibility. If you wanted to stop paying the mortgage you should have forced a sale of the house at that point.

Your point about putting time money and effort in is irrelevant. She put in the same (more actually if you include the land). And you lived in it for a period so you got your money's worth.

I think you can fight your corner legally if you wish but it'll cost you a lot more in the long run and no judge is going to look favourably upon the fact that you walked away from your responsibility of paying the mortgage for 3 years.

All the above costs would easily be spent in rent and she does end up with what sounds to be a considerable asset. A persons time is arguably their economic worth, so the time he put in is very relevant.

While he should not have stopped contributing to the mortgage, it seems like he has a good defense as to why this happened and I woul not presume to think what a Judge might rule when taking all the facts into account. The fact is that the Ex has enjoyed the property while the OP did not. The mortgage would appear to be at least 20% below the rental rate in the area, which allows for tax and maintenance costs.

I think you're being very unfair with the OP. We don't have the full story and imo, we have too much info, as this thread could easily identify the OP.

OP. You need legal advice. Forget any emotional atrachments here. If you accept a sum of 15k, it will be gone before you know it and you will still have a mortgage liability. This needs to be legally resolved. As I see it, you both had expenses when living apart. Yours went on rent, while hers went on the mortgage.

MrWalsh

goz83 wrote: »

I think you're being very unfair with the OP. We don't have the full story and imo, we have too much info, as this thread could easily identify the OP.

I have already stated that the OP could probably recover something legally, I was simply addressing the moral side of it.

Unfortunately he did move out and he did stop contributing. He also accepted the land worth 16k to build the house on. Regardless of who gave that land, the OP benefited from it (at the time).

He is also in a precarious position right now in that his ex could decide to simply stop paying the mortgage (as he did) and then he would have the bank on his back for the mortgage repayments. They dont care who is living in it.

Personally in his shoes Id be begging to be able to walk away.

Sorry - just to add, Im sure if it went to court the OP wont be able to produce any documentation to support him wanting to rent it out or sell it in the past and his ex will (of course) just say that he never asked for any of these things but instead buried his head and just stopped paying the mortgage. He also runs the risk of the ex looking to get back the amount that she put in over the amount that he put into it. Plus legal costs.

Rendol

Anyways my credit rating is gone as I used my credit card to pay the mortgage toward the end and i have not fully paid it back , i am 42 and that was my last opportunity to own a house .
I find the situation frustrating because from the moment she ended the relationship she felt an entitlement to everything- even though she ended it.She is stubborn and would not negotiate rental or postpone mortgage for year . I was cut up after the break up for a year and didn't handle things effectively .When i finally went to solicitor (1 Visit) I discovered the land was not in our name but her Uncles and that I had to sign another document , during this visit the solicitor suggested that If this came to light we would owe the state a min of 25 to 30 k.She dangles this 20k in front of me to sign over for a while and then withdrew it.Now she wants everything. She payed the 500 a month I pay 250 a month just renting at the moment she has a substantial asset and a stunning house I have nothing.I would be happy to take a much smaller amount that the 20k . If she stops paying mortgage bank sell house there would be 70 to 100k in equity.

goz83

MrWalsh wrote: »

I have already stated that the OP could probably recover something legally, I was simply addressing the moral side of it.

Unfortunately he did move out and he did stop contributing. He also accepted the land worth 16k to build the house on. Regardless of who gave that land, the OP benefited from it (at the time).

He is also in a precarious position right now in that his ex could decide to simply stop paying the mortgage (as he did) and then he would have the bank on his back for the mortgage repayments. They dont care who is living in it.

Personally in his shoes Id be begging to be able to walk away.

Sorry - just to add, Im sure if it went to court the OP wont be able to produce any documentation to support him wanting to rent it out or sell it in the past and his ex will (of course) just say that he never asked for any of these things but instead buried his head and just stopped paying the mortgage. He also runs the risk of the ex looking to get back the amount that she put in over the amount that he put into it. Plus legal costs.

You were tangling the morality with the lagality of it. Legally speaking, as long as the mortgage is getting paid, there is no legal hang up on that end. The OP and his Ex have a duty to the debt and as long as it is getting paid, it is not a legal problem for the OP on that end.

If his Ex stopped paying it, she would stand to lose more, as she is more emotionally invested in the property no doubt. She lives there and according to the OP, she sees it as hers. So, that scenario is unlikely.

I wouldn't be walking away if I were in the OP shows unless my name was cleared from the mortgage and I was at the very least, compensated for my investment. I would be seeking Market Value, less the mortgage amount and fees. If feeling generous, I might allow the 20k investment slide.

It would not be difficult for the OP to get this evidence. Some email or text correspondence with his Ex to steer toward the subject of why she refused to rent or sell the house as per the OPs requests. Produce this in court and there's the evidence.

walshyn93

Rendol wrote: »

Anyways my credit rating is gone as I used my credit card to pay the mortgage toward the end and i have not fully paid it back , i am 42 and that was my last opportunity to own a house .
I find the situation frustrating because from the moment she ended the relationship she felt an entitlement to everything- even though she ended it.She is stubborn and would not negotiate rental or postpone mortgage for year . I was cut up after the break up for a year and didn't handle things effectively .When i finally went to solicitor (1 Visit) I discovered the land was not in our name but her Uncles and that I had to sign another document , during this visit the solicitor suggested that If this came to light we would owe the state a min of 25 to 30 k.She dangles this 20k in front of me to sign over for a while and then withdrew it.Now she wants everything. She payed the 500 a month I pay 250 a month just renting at the moment she has a substantial asset and a stunning house I have nothing.I would be happy to take a much smaller amount that the 20k . If she stops paying mortgage bank sell house there would be 70 to 100k in equity.

Morally you deserve to get whatever you put into it plus the increase in value of the asset. It's not dead money. MrWalsh is tripping balls I'm afraid and doesn't seem to understand the concept of joint ownership. He seems to think that whoever pays more owns the house. It also doesn't matter when these payments were made. If she wanted to own the house outright she should have used her own money to finance it.

JAMES VI

I dunno man. My hot head would say f*** it. Keep the f***in' house. I know it's very easy for me to say - and probably irresponsible. I'd say "for what we had, and did - you should pay up something so I can get back on my feet but fair enough, whatever - keep your f***in' house!". And bolt! Gone! Good luck in your life. You're half young yet so there's plenty of time to get sh*t back on track.

MrWalsh

goz83 wrote: »

You were tangling the morality with the lagality of it.

No, I stated from the beginning that the OP may well get something legally, but I was simply giving my moral view of it.

If the OP seeks (half?) market value less mortgage amount and fees then she is going to hit him and threaten to sue looking for 3 years of unpaid mortgage repayments AND the fact that her investment was greater (16k land value).

The golden ticket for the OP here is that she wants to keep the house and live in it. So he can take the position that she pays him some agreed sum OR they put the house up for sale.

If he isnt worried about either his credit rating OR his ability to get another mortgage - then he can just sit tight until it becomes more attractive to her to pay him off to get rid of him. I dont think that this is the "right" (moral - not legal!) thing to do, but he doesnt want to go to court and he doesnt want to walk away - so thats the only other option.

MrWalsh

walshyn93 wrote: »

Morally you deserve to get whatever you put into it plus the increase in value of the asset. It's not dead money. MrWalsh is tripping balls I'm afraid and doesn't seem to understand the concept of joint ownership. He seems to think that whoever pays more owns the house. It also doesn't matter when these payments were made. If she wanted to own the house outright she should have used her own money to finance it.

Well walshy, Im not sure "tripping balls" is a legal term but I can tell you from experience that the judge will take into account who put what money into the property build AND into paying the mortgage. Theyll both be asked to produce supporting documentation and under the cohabitation act 2011 the judge will make a judgement based on ALL the facts, not just on the words "joint ownership" - non financial contributions will also be counted. Tripping balls indeed - whatever that means.

Oh - and she did use her own money to finance the house, 20k of it in the last 3 years while the OP paid nothing plus her original contribution to the build including the land value (16k) she contributed.

NamelessPhil

OP - you should have taken your case within two years of the break up of the relationship. If you've sat on your hands for the last four years you'll probably get nothing.

There are two documents on the Citizens Information website that you might find useful. Breakdown of a co-habiting relationship

Redress scheme for cohabiting couples

Based on what has been posted here, you probably don't qualify and unless you want to pay money for a solicitor and fight your case there's no point grumbling about the morality of your situation, you'll end up bitter.

bpmurray

The problem is that you're both referring to what each contributed while ignoring what the house is worth. The calculation of what you should get is:

(HouseValue - RemainingMortgage) / 2 - (WhatYouOweHer)

Which is (assuming 250K for the house and 100K residual mortgage):

(250000-100000) / 2 - (3 x 12 x 250) = €64000

You're definitely short-changing yourself: if you don't get legal advice, you're totally insane. She clearly has gotten advice to try to force you down this path - her legal advisor understands that she probably can trick you into this, so don't fall for it. It sounds like you're being all conciliatory and wishy-washy: grow some balls and say NO.

walshyn93

MrWalsh wrote: »

Well walshy, Im not sure "tripping balls" is a legal term but I can tell you from experience that the judge will take into account who put what money into the property build AND into paying the mortgage. Theyll both be asked to produce supporting documentation and under the cohabitation act 2011 the judge will make a judgement based on ALL the facts, not just on the words "joint ownership" - non financial contributions will also be counted. Tripping balls indeed - whatever that means.

Oh - and she did use her own money to finance the house, 20k of it in the last 3 years while the OP paid nothing plus her original contribution to the build including the land value (16k) she contributed.

You're still tripping balls. I was talking about the moral points you were making. He already said this can't go to court because it will cost them 20-30k and that's something you keep ignoring so what a judge thinks is irrelevant.

When I said she should have used her own money I meant she should have used only her own money. You can't have someone else help finance the building of your house then break up with them and give them nothing in return.

MrWalsh

walshyn93 wrote: »

You're still tripping balls. I was talking about the moral points you were making. He already said this can't go to court because it will cost them 20-30k and that's something you keep ignoring so what a judge thinks is irrelevant.

When I said she should have used her own money I meant she should have used only her own money. You can't have someone else help finance the building of your house then break up with them and give them nothing in return.

I still dont know what the term "tripping balls" means....

How do you think he can force her to pay him off if he doesnt go to court with it? I already outlined above what his best bet is to try and get paid off.

You seem to be missing that they both financed the building of the property together and she contributed land also. Then they both lived in and enjoyed the property. Then he stopped paying the mortgage so she was stung with reducing the mortgage without his help. So what he got in return was essentially 3 years of not bothering to pay the mortgage or any other costs associated with the property. He should have resolved it then. But he let her pay for 3 years - so there goes his investment.

walshyn93

MrWalsh wrote: »

I still dont know what the term "tripping balls" means....

1.How do you think he can force her to pay him off if he doesnt go to court with it? I already outlined above what his best bet is to try and get paid off.

You seem to be missing that they both financed the building of the property together and she contributed land also. Then they both lived in and enjoyed the property. Then he stopped paying the mortgage so she was stung with reducing the mortgage without his help. So what he got in return was essentially 3 years of not bothering to pay the mortgage or any other costs associated with the property. He should have resolved it then. But he let her pay for 3 years - so there goes his investment.

Because she wants him to sign it over and he doesn't have to if he doesn't want to. He has leverage. You want him to do what exactly? Sign away a potential 20k because she asked?

MrWalsh

walshyn93 wrote: »

Because she wants him to sign it over and he doesn't have to if he doesn't want to. He has leverage. You want him to do what exactly? Sign away a potential 20k because she asked?

I already outlined to him how to go about doing exactly that. Youre a bit late to the party with that idea.

MrWalsh wrote: »

The golden ticket for the OP here is that she wants to keep the house and live in it. So he can take the position that she pays him some agreed sum OR they put the house up for sale.

NamelessPhil

From the documents linked to above:

"If a cohabiting couple in Ireland splits up, the family home (and other family assets) will belong to the person who holds the legal title to the home/assets. This means that in the case of the family home, the person who originally bought the house and whose name is on the title deeds will usually own the house."


She owns it, she keeps it. He's got to prove he has meanignful contributions to gain any share in the property. He's out of time to take a case as the other side will say it's statute barred. He can grumble all he wants...

Pat Mustard

Mod:

No legal advice.

OP, you may not rely on any of the information given here, especially people advising on the statute of limitations, the viability and/or potential outcome of any action.

goz83

MrWalsh wrote: »

No, I stated from the beginning that the OP may well get something legally, but I was simply giving my moral view of it.

If the OP seeks (half?) market value less mortgage amount and fees then she is going to hit him and threaten to sue looking for 3 years of unpaid mortgage repayments AND the fact that her investment was greater (16k land value).

The golden ticket for the OP here is that she wants to keep the house and live in it. So he can take the position that she pays him some agreed sum OR they put the house up for sale.

If he isnt worried about either his credit rating OR his ability to get another mortgage - then he can just sit tight until it becomes more attractive to her to pay him off to get rid of him. I dont think that this is the "right" (moral - not legal!) thing to do, but he doesnt want to go to court and he doesnt want to walk away - so thats the only other option.

MrWalsh wrote: »

I still dont know what the term "tripping balls" means....

How do you think he can force her to pay him off if he doesnt go to court with it? I already outlined above what his best bet is to try and get paid off.

You seem to be missing that they both financed the building of the property together and she contributed land also. Then they both lived in and enjoyed the property. Then he stopped paying the mortgage so she was stung with reducing the mortgage without his help. So what he got in return was essentially 3 years of not bothering to pay the mortgage or any other costs associated with the property. He should have resolved it then. But he let her pay for 3 years - so there goes his investment.

You keep saying that she contributed 16k worth of land, but it has already been mentioned that her father gave the land to them/her. It has also been mentioned that there were complications with this, adding an unpaid tax bill to the land of double the amount the land worth apparently.

Yes, the OP left and stopped paying the mortgage, but the Ex was benefitting from the property, where the OP could not.

I know that my Ex Girlfriend mother had to pay her ex husband almost half of the price of the property value to get his name off the house back in 2001/2. The husband in this case lived with the wife and 2 kids for about 4 years. He was an alcoholic and regularly beat his wife and was forcefully removed by Gardai and barring orders were put in place. He never contributed to the mortgage and both their names were on the house. He contributed nothing according to the mother and actually caused damage to the property and contents on a weekly basis the entire time they lived there. He got nearly half. He sat on his hole and waited, knowing that eventually, his pay day would come if she wanted his name off the property. And his name was also on the mortgage, just to be clear.

Rendol

Both our names were on the mortgage and I idiot signed something to have the land transferred properly in 2013.

Could't resolve it then not sure I can resolve it now in court due to father and her family solicitors and mind you our banks f**k up. Had one visit to a solicitor in 2012 advised that the land was in her Uncles name not her dads not hers , I signed a document in 2013 to have it transferred .One visit to a solicitor , She told me legally i should have had my own legal representation there I went through her family solicitor(My bad and her solicitors bad) .In 2012 My solicitor told me the land should have been signed over in 2007 2007 AND THAT WE COULD END UP PAYING 25- 30 K if it was discovered , my hands were tied in taking it to court as the land at the time (2011) did not belong to either of us.

Mr Walsh ,I was also a broke student for last 3 years- Jes cut me a break

dubrov

NamelessPhil wrote:

She owns it, she keeps it. He's got to prove he has meanignful contributions to gain any share in the property. He's out of time to take a case as the other side will say it's statute barred. He can grumble all he wants...

Are both names not on the deed?