Advice needed re:property sale

Tipustyger

The guy is on the mortgage too. However, he has never paid any of it and my dad has met all costs. That is why it seems a little unfair for him to demand half without taking into account what my father has already contributed. My father has offered half after costs are taken into account but that has been refused.

Has anyone used the national mediation service? I'm thinking of using them.

mightymouse

Hi

Have you obtained a copy of the mortgage application.

If he is on as joint mortgagor follow the advice given by flying solo.

hearts

If he is on the Deeds he is joint owner. No argument. If he wants money from the sale he is not going to bother with Mediation.
As has been said above you have no option but to put it down to a very stupid mistake and pay him his 32k.
The 1.5k sounds low when compared to the 150k the house is now worth but assuming it was bought on say a 95% Mortgage then the initial investment was only 2.5k so his input was large in comparison with your dads. Even if it was 85% his input was still big.
What has the property been used for? 10 years and no income from it?
32k sounds like he is taking half of profits minus running costs.

SquatNow

Go to court. Any judge with half a brain will look at the evidence and see he's pulling a fast one.

BobProperty

Unless this guy agrees to arbitration and goes through with it, which sounds unlikely, then I have to agree with SquatNow ( :eek: goes looking for a more suitable smilie) and you won't get this sorted without going to court.

flying_solo_2

"The 1.5k sounds low when compared to the 150k the house is now worth but assuming it was bought on say a 95% Mortgage then the initial investment was only 2.5k so his input was large in comparison with your dads."
As cleverly deduced by hearts!!
And of course the mortgage fairies input the repayments of the 95% mortgage!!!!!!! :mad:

hearts

flying_solo wrote: »

"The 1.5k sounds low when compared to the 150k the house is now worth but assuming it was bought on say a 95% Mortgage then the initial investment was only 2.5k so his input was large in comparison with your dads."
As cleverly deduced by hearts!!
And of course the mortgage fairies input the repayments of the 95% mortgage!!!!!!! :mad:

"The property has been used by my parents as a non-residential adult education centre since it was bought"

Was this a business from which they earned and made mortgage payments?

Somebody had to be using the house bright lad. Someone had use and therefore was or should have been paying. If not why not?

A 45k mortgage at an average of 6% = 27k over 10 years.
100k profit - 27k = leaves 71k split 2 ways 35.5k each.
Now you could work into it the interest you might have got had you invested the 27k which would take the 32k asked for down a bit more and also maintanance and council tax if payable.

There are always 2 sides to every story. We have heard one. Im not disbelieving the OP Im just trying to see what the other guy sees. ;-)
I tend not to make judgements till I know all the facts sorry.
Good luck.;)

flying_solo_2

Fair comment hearts :beer: but on the flip side
" Was this a business from which they earned and made mortgage payments?

Somebody had to be using the house bright lad. Someone had use and therefore was or should have been paying. If not why not? "

Had this property/business not been used and maintained where would the profit/equity be? This guy could have been looking at massive debt i'm sure his attitude towards a 50/50 split would be very different had that scenario occurred! Im more inclined to see the other guy is well aware of this but is once again relying on the gullability of the op's dad.;)

Tipustyger

No profit has been made as the education centre was run by my dad. Those attending were charged nominal sums (a couple of £s a week) and these were put towards the running of the centre. As far as I know, the guy has not contributed financially or practically other than the original sum.

hearts

flying_solo wrote: »

Fair comment hearts :beer: but on the flip side
" Was this a business from which they earned and made mortgage payments?

Somebody had to be using the house bright lad. Someone had use and therefore was or should have been paying. If not why not? "

Had this property/business not been used and maintained where would the profit/equity be? This guy could have been looking at massive debt i'm sure his attitude towards a 50/50 split would be very different had that scenario occurred! Im more inclined to see the other guy is well aware of this but is once again relying on the gullability of the op's dad.;)

I see your point m8. I was just thinking that maybe we are not hearing the full story. Money or the prospect of it makes people do bad things.
For Instance.
The other guys story may be.
I was asked by my then friend if I wanted to invest in a property. He said he would maintain it and pay the mortgage and I would be a silent partner gaining only when the property was sold.(which would explain why he is on the deeds) 10 years pass and the property is now worth far more than was expected. I ( the patner who maintaned and kept the property) don't see why I should pay him half when he only put in 1.5k. I'll try and get out of this if I can.
Obviously I'm only putting a possible alternative. The OP is probably being quite truthful.
The trouble is he mentions mediation. Now should this go to mediation and the other guy puts this forward as his side, what then?