Rights re: sale on death?

franklee

nebari wrote: »

Franklee - thanks for the advice. Pretty much as some of my friends have been saying. Didn't want to go down this route if possible, but may have to.

Understandable but you won't get what you want by being a pushover I'm afraid. Uncle is looking after no1 so you will have to do the same.

franklee

nebari wrote: »

I'm seeing a solicitor later this week (hopefully) - just trying to get all options discussed beforehand so that I can go in an not have to go through a number of options that are relevant.

You want the solicitor to suggest options which a good one will do after you explain the setup and how it occurred.

Cheeky_Monkey

The only problem I can foresee with going down the asking for rent route is how would the OP enforce it? They could just ignore it!

Mojisola

nebari wrote: »

Mojisola - Me dying before him wouldn't be likely (touch wood) as he is in his eighties and I have just hit forty. If that were to happen, it would not be a problem - I don't care if she inherited it all then, as my life insurance would sort out my wife and kids, and address the situation for my daughter.

So would that proposal be an option?

There's a lot of young people who don't expect to die dying every day but the chances are higher that your uncle will go first.

The proposal about making the ownership joint means that he will be leaving his partner very vulnerable. A house that's owned as joint tenants is completely owned by both (or more) owners. When the first one dies, the property is not part of their estate because it is now owned by the other owner.

You cannot have the property owned as joint tenants and then say 50% of it belongs to the person who has died.

nebari

Mojisola - Ok, I understand we both own all of it, and on his death I will own all of it by myself.

Couldn't a DOT state that I have to sell the property on his death, and then give half the proceeds to his partner? This would be the criteria for the transfer to TIC.

franklee

Mojisola wrote: »

The proposal about making the ownership TIC means that he will be leaving his partner very vulnerable. A house that's owned as TIC is completely owned by both (or more) owners. When the first one dies, the property is not part of their estate because it is now owned by the other owner.

You cannot have the property owned as TIC and then say 50% of it belongs to the person who has died.

Surely you are describing joint tenants here.

Mojisola

nebari wrote: »

Mojisola - Ok, I understand we both own all of it, and on his death I will own all of it by myself.

Couldn't a DOT state that I have to sell the property on his death, and then give half the proceeds to his partner? This would be the criteria for the transfer to TIC.

You should take legal advice on that.

If I was your uncle's partner, I'd try to stop him changing the ownership; but, if you do become jiont tenants, she could just stay in the house after his death. You wouldn't be able to sell the house without vacant possession and you'd have to spend a lot of money and time on forcing her out.

nebari

Sorry, I meant joint tenants. Trying to feed the kids whilst typing. ;-)

Mojisola

franklee wrote: »

Surely you are describing joint tenants here.

Thanks - have changed the other post.

Cheeky_Monkey

OP - if you have owned 50% of the house/flat for the last 20 years, have you ever been asked/volunteered to pay anything towards maintenance/improvements?