exe's name on deeds can he claim 12yrs later

needhelpp_2

hi

I will be visiting a solicitor but any early advice be appreciatef. My mum and dad divorced 30 yrs ago. He had written into deeds that will recieve 20% of house once mother remarried or children were no longer dependent.

Now 12 years after he should have claimed (when i was 18) he is demanding 20% of the house,he is now retiring and purposely waited using this like a pension . My issue is that he should have claimed 12yrs ago and i believe have a case to only give 20% of what the house was worth 12years ago.

Thoughts appreciated

lika_86

So, presumably your mother never gave him 20% when you turned 18 and he never forced a sale?

needhelpp_2

That is correct. He had previously said he had no interest in the share, but have no written proof of that

geoffky

It will cost you more in legal fees...the only winners will be lawyers...

System

needhelpp wrote: »

My issue is that he should have claimed 12yrs ago and i believe have a case to only give 20% of what the house was worth 12years ago.

Thoughts appreciated

Conversely, your mother should have forced the issue 12 years ago as well so he could argue that he is entitled to the 20% of what the house was worth 12 years ago PLUS interest up to the current date,

needhelpp_2

She would be willing to pay 20% of what house was worth 12 years ago (to get rid). He claims entitled to 20% of what house worth now, which i think unfair. Plus never made any contribution towards bills or house maintenance

rpc

Lawyer needed pronto.

It depends on the wording of the agreement. Was he to receive 20% of the value at the time of the split? 20% of the value when the agreement triggered? 20% at the time of the sale?

I suspect he could get a lawyer saying one thing and your mum will get one saying another. They will then get a lot of money to go to court and argue the point. It may be worth trying to negociate a settlement lest more money is spent in legal fees than is under dispute, although 12 years of appreciation has probably built up a significant sum.

needhelpp_2

Am really grateful for all advice so far. Please keep it coming

McKneff

Try turning the situation round.

What would you do if your mum was owed 20% and dad had brought you up.

Get them to negotiate together.
Lawyers are expensive.

BitterAndTwisted

I don't see it as unfair at all that he thinks he should get 20% of the value of the property now. It wouldn't be much of an issue if property-prices had been soaring during most of that 12 year period and that's probably the main reason why your mother thinks he shouldn't. I think your mother sounds unfair and rather greedy. If your mother thinks he should get 20% of what the property was worth 12 years ago, how does she fancy paying him rent for his share for the last 12 years?

If he didn't make any contribution towards bills or house maintenance and it was important to your mother at the time that he should, and he had no benefit himself from co-owning a property which he no longer lived in for a very long time, then that should have been part of the divorce settlement. I can't see why he should have contributed to the bills, myself. He had his own to pay elsewhere presumably.

McKneff

Good point about the rent B&T, she should have been paying 20% of the going rate as rent to dad.

OP in fairness, if mother gave him 20% of the value now I think it would all even out to be quite honest.

She may see it better if you relay some of the points made on here.

Personally I wouldn't be lining solicitors pockets at around £200/300 an hour.