Advice on eviction

poppysarah

BigAunty wrote: »

Without the OP supplying numbers,

The most important numbers are the ones that involve housing the OP and paying the mortgage on a house they don't live in.

The_Negotiator

poppysarah wrote: »

The most important numbers are the ones that involve housing the OP and paying the mortgage on a house they don't live in.

On a personal level you might be right, but this is a business transaction.

Somerset

The_Negotiator wrote: »

What about this?

"When we completed the mortgage my father drafted together this 'contract' which states they can live in the house rent free until death,"

I must confess I missed that


To my mind there are three conflicting elements :
- The rent free contract you mention
- The later HB rental contract
- The 100K gift that 'one' could argue, was intended to void the rent free element.


It's a classic example of two people who thought they were agreeing to X and the other thought it was Y.

DaftyDuck

The_Negotiator wrote: »

On a personal level you might be right, but this is a business transaction.

That's exactly the point, and the source of the problem. It's a business transaction - between family members - where one party now wants to change the details. Might be "have to change"... but it amounts to the same thing. Yes, it might help if parents moved to a small house or the like, but I suspect parents saw this as a "life end solution".

DaftyDuck

Somerset wrote: »

It's a classic example of two people who thought they were agreeing to X and the other thought it was Y.

I'm not clear that there was any original dissension to the terms of agreement. It was beneficial to both parties - highly so to the OP who gained £100,000 of property - so long as the OP & family had sufficient assets for their own needs.

Deprivation of assets hasn't been bandied about that much; if the parents need long-term medical care late in life, this could come into play and severely affect the OP. Equally, I can't see that the parents would be liable for housing benefit, as the disposal of their main asset - the house - and their subsequent occupation of it rent-free would be seen from this point of view.

BigAunty

Somerset wrote: »

The legal issue is there was no agreement about living rent free or paying rent, one for the courts to decide.
.

There's mixed messages or at least confusion or wavering on this issue. There is indeed an informal self written document that was signed by both parties granting the parents the right to live rent free in the property until death. Then again there was an abortive bid to secure HB to pay rent. Now apparently, the OP needs her parents to tear up their mutual agreement for rent free living because she's on the cusp of debt herself.

Somerset wrote: »

The killer is the missing 100K that was 'gifted' to the parents.

Yes,one wonders whether this was used to pay off their original debts, squandered on a brandy and flashy house lifestyle or is still a nest egg that the elder parents are sitting on.

BigAunty

Granariesgirl wrote: »

Hi Rocky99,



1) Both of you write a letter to your parents recapping the whole story so far, explaining your dire financial situation & suggesting a couple of equitable solutions (need advice from more experienced than I for this - Shelter or other?) & Mediation to sort the situation out. Send two copies with proof of posting from 2 separate Post Offices & keep copies (note plural) of letter, copies & originals of proof of posting. Make the letter factual, not emotional & request that they reply IN WRITING with any suggestions they have to resolve the situation equitably, or corrections of the facts. Request a reply within 2 weeks.

.

I myself have recommended putting in writing the agreements, their options,the expenditure incurred by the OP, etc, but I suppose this could be equally seen as risky, putting things down in black and white that they are later held to account for so perhaps the OP should get legal advice on the communication strategy and content of any such letter that doesn't expose them to a greater chance of litigation/compensation claim further down the path.

BigAunty

poppysarah wrote: »

The most important numbers are the ones that involve housing the OP and paying the mortgage on a house they don't live in.

All the numbers are important - value of the property then, price paid plus legal/stamp duty fees, who got what out of the equity and where this went, how much the OP has paid in mortgage fees, potential future debt from the property getting repossessed, everything.

HelenRachel

Is there a possibility that the OP could sell the house to an equity release scheme now? Using the equity to pay off the mortgage and then her parents could continue to live in the house?

Somerset

DaftyDuck wrote: »

I'm not clear that there was any original dissension to the terms of agreement. It was beneficial to both parties - highly so to the OP who gained £100,000 of property - so long as the OP & family had sufficient assets for their own needs.

Disagree, it wasn't beneficial to the OP who seems not to have understood the contract at all ( and I still think the terms of the contract are murky )


The OP only gained 50K up-front for an open-ended agreement to service the mortgage until parents vacated/died.


The OP said they effectively released 150K from the arrangement. She gave 100K of that to the parents to deal with debts. So she's 50K up, but with an on-going liability. If she'd kept the 150K I'd agree.


Say the monthly mortgage payment was £500pm so 6K pa, that 50K covers 8.33 years ( at current interest rates ). Parent's could live two year's or twenty year's. Commercially it was a gamble.


I don't think the OP understood any of this. I think the OP is consequently unreasonable asking the parents to accommodate her financial difficulties. But I think, because she gave them 100K that she didn't need to, that demonstrates she was trying to help/sort them out, rather than conduct a financially reasonable transaction.