Help with my half of a house !!!!!

Lipsy1982

BigAunty wrote: »

Erm, so you helped to screw your mum by facilitating the transfer of ownership and a lump sum to your aunty....? Blimey, you are really pliable, aren't you?

I expect that another factor, given how conniving and greedy your family is, is that your nan or aunt were aware that if your nan needs means tested care, such as a care home or home help, the local council expect homeowners to sell their property to fund it, the council puts a charge on their house.

So I think your aunt (perhaps your nan, too, if she was aware of this) would have wanted to thwart this by having ownership transferred while she was still alive.

However, it has the potential to backfire because a local council who receives a request for a care home or home care services can investigate whether or not the claimant once had capital (owned a house) and if they have deliberately deprived themselves of it in order to qualify for means tested benefits/services, the council can take some action around this. What action, I don't know.

To understand about deprivation of capital for elderly home owners, look at the Age UK site. This will help you determine whether or not you can get back at your aunty (without harming your nan) by reporting this to the local council in future if your nan goes into a care home, for example. I don't know what the council or care homes do when they find out that someone who once owned a property worth £200k or more presents themselves as a pauper! Perhaps another poster can tell you what happens or if this will be counterproductive because only your nan gets affected instead of your aunt, for example.

The law on capital and elderly care is changing at the moment - new rules. So check those out, too.

No way would I rip my mum off ! I was always going to give mum her share out if mine even if she said no and always to this day make sure she ok with money ect , I'm the only one out of four that does .
But I don't know what there plan is or was but its all devious and I fell for it at first to be honest . I will look into it

BigAunty

Lipsy1982 wrote: »

No way would I rip my mum off ! I was always going to give mum her share out if mine even if she said no and always to this day make sure she ok with money ect , I'm the only one out of four that does .
But I don't know what there plan is or was but its all devious and I fell for it at first to be honest . I will look into it

ah, yes, sorry, that makes sense - your aunt would have convinced you that it was a way to pass on something to your mum, even though its becoming clear that you may never realise a penny of your investment or the equity, or may only realise this upon the death of your aunt...

Go to bed! You've got work in a few hours. I've got chronic insomnia so I'm trying to stay up and make myself tired.

Lipsy1982

BigAunty wrote: »

ah, yes, sorry, that makes sense - your aunt would have convinced you that it was a way to pass on something to your mum, even though its becoming clear that you may never realise a penny of your investment or the equity, or may only realise this upon the death of your aunt...

Go to bed! You've got work in a few hours. I've got chronic insomnia so I'm trying to stay up and make myself tired.

Ok will do goodnight .

mysterywoman10

Sorry I know I'm new but not to message boarding!!

I'm going to bed even though I also have insomina

Glad OP's grammar etc has improved!!

CKhalvashi

Its good to see that you're getting some advice on the forum, so I'll make it a quick one.

This looks a difficult situation, and it maybe worth speaking with the lender, to see if they will be able to make you aware if the house is sold, as you may be owed money in this, if there's still equity after sale. I'm working on the assumption that this is a well-presented property, on the equity stakes. It will also depend on what property is going for in the area, as in this part of the UK, it'll be almost guaranteed, whereas in some parts of the UK, it won't be.

I'm with the others on trying to work out where £3k+ a month is going, and after 6 years as a Housing Specialist, there could be some serious implications for your aunt if she presents her homeless, as the council will turn her away. I smoke, quite often go to the pub, have 2 new cars every 12-18 months and we still don't spend that; in other words, we live a life that is quite luxurious.

The options have been outlined, however it may be worth speaking to the local Housing Specialist at the council (you'll need District/Borough, and I'm one of 2 for our council, so there may be more than one. They will typically be a Councillor), then getting yourself a free 30 minutes with a solicitor to discuss your options. I think a Charging Order may be the way to go, but there are a number of other solutions.

Best of luck, and PM me if you need anything.

CK

BigAunty

Lipsy1982 wrote: »

And the 50% is not verbal I remember that bit caus she tried to get more percentage and the solicitor said no basically not for the reasons she wanted so it is equal joint at half and half

Right I could be wrong but I think there are two separate things here and I think you are conflating them. I am happy to corrected on this.

Do you have any kind of written document (not the title or ownership deeds or mortgage document) where both of you signed to say that you would get 50% of the sale price or equity of the property? Did you draw up any extra documents with this solicitor about this?

There is 50% ownership and there is the entitlement to 50% of the equity. I wonder if you are mixing them up, the joint ownership and the right to half the equity (now standing at 40-50k apparently, despite your modest outlay of a couple of hundred pounds per month towards the loan and mortgage for a couple of years).

If you are a joint owner, then you will always be a joint owner at whatever share is stipulated on the deeds, if it is stipulated there at all - is it? Or is it simply the nature of a joint ownership that it a 50/50 thing or not? Can anyone clarify?

You will always be a joint owner until either the property is sold or one owner dies or they both consent to one becoming the sole owner (which can only happen on a mortgaged property if the lender agrees that they earn enough to afford this).

So you will continue to be a joint owner until one of these scenarios takes place.

And then there is the verbal promise that was made to you that you would be entitled to a 50% share of the equity. As far as I know (and I am open to being corrected) this does not necessarily have to correspond with the ownership share. Sometimes, and particularly when the joint owners pay different sums towards the property, thsi type of arrangement is drawn up on a separate document, some kind of deed, by a solicitor. For example, some joint owners have one that has paid a lot more and so a document is drawn up that both parties sign which is done to prevent disputes of the type that you are embroiled in. They arrange clear proof of their intentions at the outset.

As far as I can tell you have no such deed - the promise made by your aunt is not necessarily enforceable by you unless you have evidence or proof that this agreement is in place. My understanding is that with property disputes (which can be prohibitively expensive in terms of legal fees) is that a judge will look into who has paid what share of the mortgage, household costs and so on. If this is the case, if you could even afford to sue her, your aunty will triumph.

Again, it would be appreciated if other posters can clarify this or provide more info on this.

But nonetheless, your aunty isn't going to sell, is she? She can clearly afford to stay there. It is her long-term home, she apparently has hidden savings, her dad is wealthy.

So even if she's sincere that you will receive 50% of the equity upon the sale of the property, it likely that she will simply stay there because you have no appetite to force the sale while your nan lives there and because if you do this later when your nan passes she'll have grounds to demonstrate in a legal dispute that you contributed a lot less because you stopped paying after the first couple of years.

BigAunty

CKhalvashi wrote: »

....

I'm with the others on trying to work out where £3k+ a month is going, and after 6 years as a Housing Specialist, there could be some serious implications for your aunt if she presents her homeless, as the council will turn her away. ..

And implications because the aunt is apparently about to have ownership of a second property transferred to her by her father.

Yes, my understanding about the homelessness process is that councils are not impressed when a person loses their accommodation through arrears when they could have paid. I know this ruling is generally discussed in terms of a tenant who runs up rent arrears when they are earning or in receipt of full housing benefit that they spend on other things but I wonder if this also applies to repossessions - how does a council deal with the repossesion of a property when both owners are in full employment (the OP and his aunt) and could have paid the mortgage??!! And if they get a lump sum after its sold?

I estimated a household income of at least £2,400 - around £1600 in wages and tips for the aunt per month, at least £400 for the nan (state pension rate, she does get an occupational pension so it could be twice that), £400 per month in sickness or disability benefits for her autistic son. I mean, its finger in the air time when it comes to estimating their income, could be half that or twice that. For all we know the aunt has lost her job, the nan didn't pay her stamp for her state pension and the austistic son is at college and recieves next to nothing.

However, I imagine the nan may possibly be treated more sympathetically as she's not responsible for the mortgage, and hence any subsequent repossession?.

CKhalvashi

BigAunty wrote: »

However, I imagine the nan may possibly be treated more sympathetically as she's not responsible for the mortgage, and hence any subsequent repossession?.

I'm not involved with the actual decision making, and all that I have been told when dealing with a not too different situation is that 'all applications will be treated on an individual basis, but I think that some sympathy will be added if there is any form of vulnerability involved.

I've been a Cllr for 8 years in May, and on District for 7 years in May (housing specialist for 6), and I've only seen one similar case.

Even after all bills and reasonable expenses for food etc, there should be £1000 left a month at a minimum to make to repayments. As stated above, we live reasonably well on less than a household income of £60k-ish (although I will admit we earn more than this), and about 80% of our spending is non-essentials.

The drug issue may be worth a quiet word with the local CDAT team, however only do this if it won't cause you serious issues.

I don't know anything about the legalities, as IANAL, and don't want to stray out my specialist area.

CK