Chance of success of court order to force sale ?

xylophone

The joint tenancy has been severed, you have both accepted this and there is now a tenancy in common.

In the absence of any Deed of Trust indicating to the contrary, your interests in the property must now be regarded as 50/50?

https://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/knowledge/legal-articles/2014/01/21/orders-sale-property-joint-ownership/

griff450

xylophone wrote: »

The joint tenancy has been severed, you have both accepted this and there is now a tenancy in common.

In the absence of any Deed of Trust indicating to the contrary, your interests in the property must now be regarded as 50/50?

https://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/knowledge/legal-articles/2014/01/21/orders-sale-property-joint-ownership/

Thats what I thought, but there have been cases under the Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, where one person has argued their contributions on mortgage payments, renovations e.t.c have entitled them to a higher amount of equity / sale proceeds.

It would be a trusts case and not family, and a court does have the power to alter shares.

However I have yet to find a case where someone has claimed a member of their family doing work entitles them to more equity in the property, the work was obviously intended to benefit both of us as we were engaged at the time.

Granted the value has gone up due to the work, but she did not do any of it, nor finance any of it !

I think I'm going to have to foot a bill for some specialist advice, the solicitor im using is a junior and as good has been so far, I think I need someone with some experience in cases of this nature. The only advice offered is a court "may" or this "could" happen, I really need someone who can tell me my chances of success against a claim of this nature.

steampowered

Your solicitor may be concerned that the father may have gained an interest in the land through a legal concept called "proprietary estoppel". See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_estoppel.

Proprietary estoppel would require the father to demonstrate that a clear assurance was given that he would acquire a right in the property.

Based on what you have said so far, while it is possible for your father to allege that a verbal assurance was given, it sounds unlikely to me that this would be successful in demonstrating this.

I completely agree that you need someone to give you a steer as to your chances of success. You should ask your solicitor in the first instance. Although if there is any doubt you may find that the solicitor encourages you to seek an opinion from a barrister.

FBaby

What timescales are you talking about here? How long ago was the house purchase and when was the work done and finished?

You keep saying that his intervention was a gift to both, which is a meaningless statement as he could say it was a gift to his daughter you just happened to benefit from because you also lived there. Either way, it's not really a defendable argument.

How much of what he claims is his labour and how much of it is actual financial? How much did you put it financially?

Also, you say that you are now tenants in common having changed it from being joint tenants. Assume this is on a 50/50 basis? Why was this changed and was it after the work had taken place?

griff450

FBaby wrote: »

What timescales are you talking about here? How long ago was the house purchase and when was the work done and finished?

You keep saying that his intervention was a gift to both, which is a meaningless statement as he could say it was a gift to his daughter you just happened to benefit from because you also lived there. Either way, it's not really a defendable argument.

How much of what he claims is his labour and how much of it is actual financial? How much did you put it financially?

Also, you say that you are now tenants in common having changed it from being joint tenants. Assume this is on a 50/50 basis? Why was this changed and was it after the work had taken place?

I'm still detailing the exact figures, but around 8.5K, I also paid legal fees over 10k. The majority is "his" labour .. comes to this figure by saying "if you got someone into do this it would probably have cost you 50k" nothing has been itemised. I also did a fair bit of work myself of which I have video evidence, shall i retrospectively charge a day rate ?

There is a paper trail for some of this money, the rest is cash transactions because well builders love their cash.

Completed purchase in July 2016 (the work was finished at the end of Aug, it actually started before completion), relationship ended in July 2017 and changed to tennants in common on advise of my solicitor.

The intention was fairly clear, we were engaged (had been together for a long time) and the work was done to benefit both.

If a declaration of trust was put forward at the time to say he was going to help with the work but it was for the strict benefit of his daughter and it would entitle her to a massive equity stake in the property, do you think I would have gone ahead with that ? No. Would hardly have been very trusting of a future son in law.

It is 50/50, Im no expert and I will need to speak to a barrister to see if this has any chance of success.

griff450

FBaby wrote: »

You keep saying that his intervention was a gift to both, which is a meaningless statement as he could say it was a gift to his daughter you just happened to benefit from because you also lived there. Either way, it's not really a defendable argument.

Its up to her to prove the intention was for the work done to benefit her and her only.

Given the circumstances I think that is ridiculous and pretty hard to do.