advice needed please

Ocean_Star

Hi there, I'm new to the forum but I really need some advice regarding my father in law.

He has been living a house belonging to his partner (not wife) for over 10 years with her. Although they are apparently a couple he has been paying rent to her monthly (around £600 per month) for that entire time. On top of this he buys all the groceries, pays utility bills, pays for home improvements etc.

She gave up working about a year after he moved in and has never claimed any benefits. She used his rent to pay off her mortgage. Which was paid in full last year.

She has now told him she has sold her house and has bought a small flat to move into on her own. She has made him homeless. She is giving the remainder of the proceeds of the house sale to her 2 children.

Can he do anything at all to get his money back? He has been left high and dry. I don't believe she ever loved him. She has bled him dry and now she no longer needs him she is off.

Confusedandneedhelp

Basically the question really ( and I'd post in housing forum) is whether he contributed to the house as in paying mortgage etc.

It sounds like he might've done, in which case yes he can get something back.

McKneff

Not sure to be honest, you said yourself he has been paying 'rent'


She just chose to use that money to help towards the mortgage,


Having said that, I wish him luck....

savingmummy

I don`t think he has much of a case to be honest.


I`m assuming the mortgage was in her name?
Any proof he was contributing?
Him paying rent will show he was a tenant and nothing more I`d assume, like when older kids pay their `keep` to parents.


The wise people on the home forum will indeed be the best people to ask. http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/forumdisplay.php?f=16


Awful situation, I really feel for your father in law.

tea_lover

Without meaning to sound harsh, why does he think he should get the money back? He was paying rent for somewhere to live. He could have been paying a mortgage in that time but chose not to (absolutely fair enough of course).

BigAunty

On the housing forum, there are regular posts from people co-habiting with a property owner (and vice versa) who want to understand how to protect their interests, either to show they are paying towards the mortgage despite it being in another person's sole name, or to ensure that the property owner is not later challenged by their partner for sharing the bills.

From memory, an occupant who is not on the deeds who can show that they are paying directly towards the mortgage (not just general household bills) and towards non-occupant type expenses like home improvements, may be able to demonstrate they have an interest in the property.

Where they stand if they are not married, I don't know if this complicates or thwarts matters.

Ask on the housing forum. Get your uncle to collate all his information and docs on his contribution, their type and evidence like bills,invoices, statements and so on. Once he has that overview of total sum paid and on what particular areas, he should see a solicitor.

When there are disputes over interests in a property, some embroiled in the dispute will lodge something against the deeds at the land registry to thwart the sale. Did she sell up without him realising or did he not understand that he potentially had that option? Sorry, I don't know much about the process of lodging disputes with the Land Registry to know if this was a realistic prospect for him but it sounds like the ship has already sailed there.

Mojisola

If a partner pays "rent" or otherwise contributes to the house financially, he/she can claim a "beneficial interest" in the value of the property.

The only problem is that you usually have to go to court to assess what you are entitled to and that costs money.
http://england.shelter.org.uk/get_advice/relationship_breakdown/beneficial_interest

Beckyy

That's a lot of money each month ontop of bills etc.
Did he pay by bank transfer, or have proof of the money changing hands each month?

FBaby

There have been cases in the press when people in your FIL situation when they've managed to win a case proving an interest in the property they lived in. The problem is that to do that, he will need to go to court and that will cost him money.

He took the risk not to protect himself during all this time, he now needs to decide if he wants to take the risk of taking her to court.

Without meaning to sound harsh, why does he think he should get the money back? He was paying rent for somewhere to live. He could have been paying a mortgage in that time but chose not to (absolutely fair enough of course).

That's the thing, did they really both see if as him paying rent? If so, why would he have also paid towards the maintenance of the house?