Claiming a loan as a gift

marshalex

bris wrote: »

Are you seriously looking to claim hours worked on the house should be payable? Will the GF be paid for the hours spent cooking and cleaning in any of the houses they have lived in?


It doesn't work like that, this looks like a 50/50 split to me, the courts aren't going to accept a payment arrangement for work carried out on what is the family home.


They will look at the years they spent together as a cohabitating couple and not allow any old excuse to deny a fair split.


As for the loan if nothing is in writing it's their word against hers and their word isn't exactly unbiased so that could go ether way with the probability not looking good without any agreement in writing sighrn by all parties concerned.

What a sexist argument! Why do you assume she did all the cooking and cleaning (they had a cleaner and split the cooking FYI, as most modern couples do).

If it wasn’t for her dumping him on the day they moved in I’d be inclined to take the offer and run for the hills, but why should she profit from his hard work? He put the hours in making the house habitable, he’s the one who sacrificed his earnings, why shouldn’t he be compensated now it’s effectively now a business transaction. If they paid someone to do the renovations it would have been split fairly, why shouldn’t it be in this case?

shortcrust

I agree that her recognising the loan for a 50/50 split is a really good outcome, considering the worst case scenario. In my unbiased opinion it’s also fair.

Absolute madness to loan anyone that sort of money with nothing to document it.

[Deleted User]

How is the property owned? Tenants in common, if yes, what split, or joint tenants? Is there a mortgage involved, if yes, what did the mortgage lender think the money was, a loan or a gift?

The fact that you were gifted or loaned any money when you bought your property is not evidence of the money received by your BIL and his GF being a loan.

I also agree that 2 years spent living with in-laws would be a penance.

marshalex

Lover_of_Lycra wrote: »

How is the property owned? Tenants in common, if yes, what split, or joint tenants? Is there a mortgage involved, if yes, what did the mortgage lender think the money was, a loan or a gift?

The fact that you were gifted or loaned any money when you bought your property is not evidence of the money received by your BIL and his GF being a loan.

I also agree that 2 years spent living with in-laws would be a penance.

No mortgage (bought cash as property wasn’t able to be mortgaged due to the extensive renovations needed), hence the offer. Tenants in common I believe.

Why is it a penance? I would have thought saving thousands on rent/bills at their expense (again) is hardly a penance?

My logic (flawed or not) was that why would a gift be given to one sibling over another without any form of discussion, acknowledgement?

[Deleted User]

marshalex wrote: »

My logic (flawed or not) was that why would a gift be given to one sibling over another without any form of discussion, acknowledgement?

It's very common. Need, preference, favouritism, pity, begging.

Families have all sorts of peculiarities.

[Deleted User]

marshalex wrote: »

No mortgage (bought cash as property wasn’t able to be mortgaged due to the extensive renovations needed), hence the offer. Tenants in common I believe.

Why is it a penance? I would have thought saving thousands on rent/bills at their expense (again) is hardly a penance?

My logic (flawed or not) was that why would a gift be given to one sibling over another without any form of discussion, acknowledgement?

There's more to life than money and saving a few thousand pounds would not entice me to give up my own space to move into the in-laws house for years. The inconvenience would not be worth the savings.

Your logic makes not one jot of difference when it comes to proving whether this money was a loan or a gift. Lots of parents don't treat their offspring equally when it comes to financial matters.

Your in-laws could easily have formalised the loan, taken a charge out against the property even, but all they have now is a case of she said/he said, and the ex gf is willing to pay them back out of the equity. As a tenant in common she is entitled to whatever equity share she owns so if they own it 50/50 she is legally entitled to 50% of the equity. Your in-laws should bite her hand off and accept the offer.

marshalex

Lover_of_Lycra wrote: »

There's more to life than money and saving a few thousand pounds would not entice me to give up my own space to move into the in-laws house for years. The inconvenience would not be worth the savings.

Your logic makes not one jot of difference when it comes to proving whether this money was a loan or a gift. Lots of parents don't treat their offspring equally when it comes to financial matters.

Your in-laws could easily have formalised the loan, taken a charge out against the property even, but all they have now is a case of she said/he said, and the ex gf is willing to pay them back out of the equity. As a tenant in common she is entitled to whatever equity share she owns so if they own it 50/50 she is legally entitled to 50% of the equity. Your in-laws should bite her hand off and accept the offer.

I’m assuming the charge would need to have been made at the time of purchase?

[Deleted User]

marshalex wrote: »

I’m assuming the charge would need to have been made at the time of purchase?

Not necessarily but you would need the owners to agree to it being a secured loan and I don't see the ex-gf agreeing to that, do you? Why even go to the bother when she is offering to return the in-laws money to them?

marshalex

More intrigued than anything. Know there’d be no agreement from her. Cut losses live and learn it seems!

jimbo26

I think the offer is reasonable. The house purchase and renovation was a joint enterprise regardless of who actually installed the kitchen or put up some tiles. She could get funny and say the loan was to her ex and that should be paid out of his half of the sale.

This way both come out of it with half the equity (minus the loan which they have paid off half each).

Put it down to experience and a life lesson.