Partner abandoned house - does she have a share?

Puddingface

00ec25 wrote: »

by "partner" do you mean married to the cousin or not?

are they his kids or not?

your post lacks keys details in amongst the rest of the guff.

No and No - thought my language made that clear, as davidmcn observed.

00ec25 wrote: »

Yes she is a legal owner so is entitled to something, yes she has a claim, how big a claim depends in part on the answers to the above questions...

given she is most likely now ensconced with someone else in a property she may well own I doubt she'll be too pleased to be "reminded" that she has committed SDLT tax fraud when buying and not declaring the fact she owns a second property. It may be in her interest to walk away and continue to forget- although his problem will be the fact her signature may be required on the sale document for the Land Registry.

Interesting observation, but I strongly doubt she was the sort of person who would ever end up as a house owner unless it didn't involve her parting with any funds (as it did with my cousin).

Puddingface

getmore4less wrote: »

legal owner does not mean she is entitled to anything,

beneficial ownership determines the interest in the property.

His and her names are on the LR proprietorship register together. I guess that means she is technically a beneficial owner?

getmore4less wrote: »

One scenario is she has died and no one is claiming any beneficial interest(because no one knows) get the death certificate and she is removed from the legal title.

She would be about 59 or 60 now - pretty unlikely she's expired yet. If she has then I would imagine her children, or even a subsequent partner, would have a claim.

molerat

A couple of years ago I traced someone who I last saw in 1970. Had heard nothing about them since, not a clue whether they had moved away from the area and if or when they were married nor their married name. Took me a couple of days on the keyboard.

Guest101

Puddingface wrote: »

His and her names are on the LR proprietorship register together. I guess that means she is technically a beneficial owner?


She would be about 59 or 60 now - pretty unlikely she's expired yet. If she has then I would imagine her children, or even a subsequent partner, would have a claim.

as joint tenants, the whole property woul dbecome his

00ec25

Puddingface wrote: »

No and No - thought my language made that clear, as davidmcn observed.

and the number of times people use partner instead of married spouse means it is always worth checking

Puddingface wrote: »

His and her names are on the LR proprietorship register together. I guess that means she is technically a beneficial owner?

the Land Registry records who is the legal owner. The Land registry does not hold details of what the beneficial interest may be for either person except in so far as follows:

as you have stated that both him and her are "owners" then both have an underlying beneficial interest. What that means in reality depends on whether the ownership is as Joint Tenants or as Tenants in Common.

For JT each person has 100% beneficial interest by definition and therefore upon death of one the other simply carries on as 100% owner

for TIC there is a "restriction" recorded at the land registry but that is all they know. The details of the actual split will not necessarily be known by the LR as it should be recorded by a separate legal documents as either a declaration or deed of trust listing what the actual shares (the benefit) each has in the property.

read this:
http://blog.landregistry.gov.uk/legal-estates-beneficial-interests-whats-difference/

Puddingface

Guest101 wrote: »

as joint tenants, the whole property woul dbecome his

So is the converse true then as well? If he expired first would the property become hers rather than part of his estate?

Puddingface

00ec25 wrote: »

and the number of times people use partner instead of married spouse means it is always worth checking

as you have stated that both him and her are "owners" then both have an underlying beneficial interest. What that means in reality depends on whether the ownership is as Joint Tenants or as Tenants in Common.

For JT each person has 100% beneficial interest by definition and therefore upon death of one the other simply carries on as 100% owner

Is there any way of determining from the LR entry whether it is JT or TIC? Which is the more common method of resitering in joint name, and would this apply back as far as the early 1980s.

00ec25

Puddingface wrote: »

So is the converse true then as well? If he expired first would the property become hers rather than part of his estate?

if owned as Joint tenants then yes, if she is the survivor she is the only owner still left alive so it is all hers

https://www.gov.uk/joint-property-ownership/overview
this is very basic stuff that you must make sure you understand as it has huge implications. If owned as Joint Tenants it is impossible for him to leave his "share" of the property to anyone as it is a fundamental principle of JT that there are no individual shares which can be given to anyone else under the terms of a will. You can only leave a share to someone in a will if you own it as Tenants In Common

Puddingface wrote: »

Is there any way of determining from the LR entry whether it is JT or TIC? Which is the more common method of resitering in joint name, and would this apply back as far as the early 1980s.

possibly not if that long ago, but you won't know unless you spend £3 and find out

note carefully - use the .GOV website to get to the Land Registry. Do not use one of the many scam websites which have names very similar to land registry but are nothing to do with the government's one and will charge you a lot more than £3 for the same info

https://www.gov.uk/get-information-about-property-and-land/search-the-register

kingstreet

Have a read of Jones v Kernott;-

http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed89312

Guest101

Puddingface wrote: »

So is the converse true then as well? If he expired first would the property become hers rather than part of his estate?

Yes, ofcourse. That's what joint tenants mean. They both own 100% of the property