Buying an ex-partner out of a house after paying different initial deposit values

Thrugelmir

mcsteely wrote: »

My ex-partner feels we should be jointly liable for the future selling on fees (1% of house value) even though the house is not being sold now. I feel that as she is getting full ownership of the property and she can decide if and when she wants to sell it, these fees should not come into the equation at this point and she should be responsible for these fees at if and when the property is sold.

Is there a legal precedence on this?

Will she take account of your buying fees and expenses in finding a new property?

Stick to the agreement. If she doesn't like it. Tell her that you will enforce it legally through the courts. There'll only be one loser in such circumstances. As the court will undoubtably award costs against her for wasting the courts valuable time.

jayss

But she might not sell and could sell privately.

davidmcn

densol wrote: »

I agree selling fees should be taken into account -after all if you were selling to get your money from the house - you would both pay half each - so I don't think it's unreasonable to factor them in now.

Btw - she will also pay stamp duty on buying you out - half the mortgage you are released from PLUS the sum of cash money she pays you. If they add up to £125 k it's 1% and if they add to more than £250k its 3%

Both things which she ought to have factored in at the time the agreement was being entered into, rather than legitimate points to renegotiate now. Bear in mind she's also saving various other costs which she would have had if she moved house just now. For all we know, she may never have estate agency fees.

princeofpounds

The deed of trust was not totally fair to her, in that it didn't account for appreciation of the extra equity her deposit acquired over yours.

It was, however, totally clear and agreed. And the amount she is losing out on is likely to be relatively small, given the deposit was probably a small part of the value of the property.

Her proposed alternative is even more ridiculous however.

Putting in 60% of the deposit does not mean you morally 'own' 60% of the appreciation on the whole property, especially when the mortgage was 50/50. Remember that it was the mortgage that provided the vast bulk of capital for the purchase, and so 'owns' the vast majority of the capital appreciation.

The agency selling fees thing is ridiculous. If you were selling the house and splitting the money then fine. But for her, just like anyone else, she has bought the house outright and should pay charges on selling it just like any other house owner. The fact that she has done it in two stages, once from the vendor and once from her partner, is rather irrelevant.

There would be more of a case to share any 'buying fees' for her to buy you out. Transfer of equity etc. But those will be less.

dimbo61

Can she afford to buy you out ?
She may well need to borrow a considerable amount of money to pay you your 50% of the increase over the last 5 years with London house prices.
Women are of course paid much more than Men in London so it will have been easy for her to raise the deposit she had when you got together.
She will be earning a lot more than you so a HUGE mortgage should be No Problem.
The whole 50/50 or 60/40 maybe totally mute if she cannot get a mortgage to pay you out.
With a bit of luck you could both end up renting again as she will need to sell with selling costs coming out of the profit.( you may have some money in the bank) but you will end up paying Lord Rich of London,s BTL mortgage for the next 25/30 years