Can I be forced to sell as a tenancy in common

Whatdo

princeofpounds wrote: »

As for an order for sale, it will take effort to get one but it is not actually that difficult. You might not want to sell, but you are effectively trapping her capital in an asset and the courts will not permit that indefinitely.

This is quite correct, an order is in fact straightforward, especially so as you were both original parties to a legal document. As to deprivation of capital it is noted that she also lives in the property and has therefore enjoyment and use of her capital. She is of course at liberty to dispose of her shareholding to anyone, without your approval or consent. To a management company for example who would be entitled to some benefit, for example a proportion of rent if they did not occupy the premises. Do you have free use of the whole property, or is there an annex?

May we ask if there charge on the property to secure any monies lent.

On the plus side.... I would assume she would never leave her daughter or grandchildren destitute unless she was very concerned about her circumstances. She may feel trapped, emotionally and financially, especially as she is recently bereaved.


..

Mojisola

She could go to court but there wouldn't be any guarantee that she'd win. If the amount you're holding out for is reasonable, the court could decide in your favour.

madmac2003

Sorry, no rent is lost as we all live together, my MIL is not giving us anything.

We are paying 50% for only a 28% return, so in fact we are providing funds to my MIL surely?

I understand the need to sell, I think I want it more, but as you say not a fire sale.
Thanks again for your reply.

Whatdo

Mojisola wrote: »

She could go to court but there wouldn't be any guarantee that she'd win. If the amount you're holding out for is reasonable, the court could decide in your favour.

The court is favoured to be bound by the deed of trust.

" to be held in trust as tenants in common"

It should have been properly explained by a solicitor at the time the documents were signed.

princeofpounds

Sorry, no rent is lost as we all live together, my MIL is not giving us anything.

We are paying 50% for only a 28% return, so in fact we are providing funds to my MIL surely?

Apologies, I had picked up the impression that she had moved out, I think when you said you paid her living costs but no longer do I interpreted that incorrectly.

So that whole long post you can disregard, should make for a simpler dispute.

DRP

Put the house for sale at whatever the EA recommends.

You can only make a decision on what you'll sell the place for if and when the offers start rolling in... it is really difficult to justify some arbitrary threshold below which your in-law must compensate you.

In £ terms how far apart are her and your desired selling price?

Whatdo

madmac2003 wrote: »

We are paying 50% for only a 28% return, so in fact we are providing funds to my MIL surely?

renovations are not always recoverable in the value of a property see RICS and numerous articles about this (spending £10,000 on a conservatory does not automatically add £10,000 to the value of a property). In fact only "essential maintenance" is normally recoverable for example re-roofing. Mainly money spent on a property is just simply to "protect" the principle investment. A bit like paying a management fee to an investment company.

Majority of renovations are for the benefit of the occupiers only. New purchasers normally rip out kitchens and bathrooms for example. Just because you each have spent £100K on renovations does not mean that the property is automatically worth £200K more.


If one had lived in rented accommodation and (if permitted) had agreed with the landlord to go halves on a new kitchen, would one expect any more than enjoyed use of the apparatus whilst one could still afford the rent?

May we ask how long the property has been owned?

..

madmac2003

We have lived in the property for over 10 years, all together.

I accept that we will lose money, and my MIL will make a healthy profit, as we pay 50%, but only get 28% return, but I just don't want to give it away. I feel that if my MIL wants to accept a lower offer than myself, then she is free to do so, but must take this hit. I'm not asking for more than the market value.

getmore4less

Market value is what someone will pay.

If you are convinced it is worth more than the MIL will take buy her out and sell yourself.

Where is your wife in all this, she should be negotiating a better share with her mother.

Whatdo

madmac2003 wrote: »

We have lived in the property for over 10 years, all together.

I accept that we will lose money, and my MIL will make a healthy profit, as we pay 50%, but only get 28% return,....

Forgive me but I do not quite understand this. Are you suggesting that she pays a proportion of the renovation cost in accordance with her shareholding? although this was not your agreement, she might consider this if put to her subtly

She pays an additional 22% of the agreed invoices for renovation and you then receive 28% of the distribution account. This would make both your shareholding and cash injection proportionate. Perhaps then you could give her full control of the sale.

It would seem that, whatever the outcome, unless you have other funds available you will continue to need her further future assistance in providing a home for your family. Has she spoken or hinted about her future plans at all?




..