Buying out a partner

diystarter7

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

tightauldgit said:

From what you've written it seems like you are saying you will give him back what he has put in and he is saying he wants his share of the actual equity? 

If so I have to say I agree with him. If the value of his investment has grown over time then he's entitled to benefit from that growth, not just to receive back what he put in.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your OP though

So sad to read so many threads like this, sorry about your situ OP

I agree with the above post and that's how I've read your post.

Sadly, I have to agree with the above post but if I was a judge and it went to court, I'd agree with you.

Don't feel sorry for the OP they could have got a deed of trust to document exactly what would happen in the event of a sale, they could have even owned different percentages of the property.

They have chosen not to do this so they are both entitled to 50% of the property.

Thanks. To be clear, I've read o various site that agreements of that and similar are worthless if you've been together for more than a couple of years.

Noneforit999

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

tightauldgit said:

From what you've written it seems like you are saying you will give him back what he has put in and he is saying he wants his share of the actual equity? 

If so I have to say I agree with him. If the value of his investment has grown over time then he's entitled to benefit from that growth, not just to receive back what he put in.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your OP though

So sad to read so many threads like this, sorry about your situ OP

I agree with the above post and that's how I've read your post.

Sadly, I have to agree with the above post but if I was a judge and it went to court, I'd agree with you.

Don't feel sorry for the OP they could have got a deed of trust to document exactly what would happen in the event of a sale, they could have even owned different percentages of the property.

They have chosen not to do this so they are both entitled to 50% of the property.

OP needs to confirm if the partner does in fact own part of the house.

Him providing equity is only applicable if he actually does own part of the house. 

If the house and mortgage was solely in her name and he simply paid some of the mortgage over X years, its a different story

RogerBareford

diystarter7 said:

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

tightauldgit said:

From what you've written it seems like you are saying you will give him back what he has put in and he is saying he wants his share of the actual equity? 

If so I have to say I agree with him. If the value of his investment has grown over time then he's entitled to benefit from that growth, not just to receive back what he put in.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your OP though

So sad to read so many threads like this, sorry about your situ OP

I agree with the above post and that's how I've read your post.

Sadly, I have to agree with the above post but if I was a judge and it went to court, I'd agree with you.

Don't feel sorry for the OP they could have got a deed of trust to document exactly what would happen in the event of a sale, they could have even owned different percentages of the property.

They have chosen not to do this so they are both entitled to 50% of the property.

Thanks. To be clear, I've read o various site that agreements of that and similar are worthless if you've been together for more than a couple of years.

A deed of trust isn't just an "agreement" when drawn up properly it is a legally binding document that both parties sign which should be registered with the land registry. No matter how long your together it doesn't make the agreement worthless (unless that is part of the agreement for that to happen).

diystarter7

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

tightauldgit said:

From what you've written it seems like you are saying you will give him back what he has put in and he is saying he wants his share of the actual equity? 

If so I have to say I agree with him. If the value of his investment has grown over time then he's entitled to benefit from that growth, not just to receive back what he put in.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your OP though

So sad to read so many threads like this, sorry about your situ OP

I agree with the above post and that's how I've read your post.

Sadly, I have to agree with the above post but if I was a judge and it went to court, I'd agree with you.

Don't feel sorry for the OP they could have got a deed of trust to document exactly what would happen in the event of a sale, they could have even owned different percentages of the property.

They have chosen not to do this so they are both entitled to 50% of the property.

Thanks. To be clear, I've read o various site that agreements of that and similar are worthless if you've been together for more than a couple of years.

A deed of trust isn't just an "agreement" when drawn up properly it is a legally binding document that both parties sign which should be registered with the land registry. No matter how long your together it doesn't make the agreement worthless (unless that is part of the agreement for that to happen).

Many thanks, I wrongly assumed there was nothing like it.

You or someone else can answer this. If I was to receive a gift from someone for lets say 10/50k etc and for argument sake lets say I'd been married 15 years. How could I safeguard that money if it was not in the property that we live in or used it to improve or pay off momortgae?

RogerBareford

diystarter7 said:

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

RogerBareford said:

diystarter7 said:

tightauldgit said:

From what you've written it seems like you are saying you will give him back what he has put in and he is saying he wants his share of the actual equity? 

If so I have to say I agree with him. If the value of his investment has grown over time then he's entitled to benefit from that growth, not just to receive back what he put in.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your OP though

So sad to read so many threads like this, sorry about your situ OP

I agree with the above post and that's how I've read your post.

Sadly, I have to agree with the above post but if I was a judge and it went to court, I'd agree with you.

Don't feel sorry for the OP they could have got a deed of trust to document exactly what would happen in the event of a sale, they could have even owned different percentages of the property.

They have chosen not to do this so they are both entitled to 50% of the property.

Thanks. To be clear, I've read o various site that agreements of that and similar are worthless if you've been together for more than a couple of years.

A deed of trust isn't just an "agreement" when drawn up properly it is a legally binding document that both parties sign which should be registered with the land registry. No matter how long your together it doesn't make the agreement worthless (unless that is part of the agreement for that to happen).

Many thanks, I wrongly assumed there was nothing like it.

You or someone else can answer this. If I was to receive a gift from someone for lets say 10/50k etc and for argument sake lets say I'd been married 15 years. How could I safeguard that money if it was not in the property that we live in or used it to improve or pay off momortgae?

As far as i'm aware if your married and you get divorced then the starting point for all assets is 50/50 as that is the whole point of marriage to share everything equally. In that situation the best bet would probably be to delay receiving the money until after the divorce but i'm not sure how well that would work.

NicolaEv

We are joint tenants, I initially worked out our contribution and applied that percentage to the new equity figure which would mean he would have the capital he has put in to the property and an extra £2k. 

I realise I should have obtained a deed of trust but we spoke about this and he made it clear we would do whatever was best for me and the children as it was our money that meant he was able to own property in the first place. 

We have seen an unprecedented rise in house prices, normally if a relationship broke down after a year I think most partners would just leave, if they insisted on being bought out a house would generally increase by a few thousand in 12 months not £35k so it just seems like an abnormal situation to me that perhaps shouldn’t be treated the same as other buy outs. 

NicolaEv

I have an appointment with the mortgage company to discuss potentially buying him out at £18k but when I mentioned that to him he said ‘I might not accept that anyway’ he basically doesn’t want to leave cos he sees the house as a huge investment so he would happily live here for as long as he could even though we are not romantically involved in any way and we are clashing heads regularly. I think it’s likely he won’t accept whatever I offer him just to stay in the house. 

diystarter7

NicolaEv said:

We are joint tenants, I initially worked out our contribution and applied that percentage to the new equity figure which would mean he would have the capital he has put in to the property and an extra £2k. 

I realise I should have obtained a deed of trust but we spoke about this and he made it clear we would do whatever was best for me and the children as it was our money that meant he was able to own property in the first place. 

We have seen an unprecedented rise in house prices, normally if a relationship broke down after a year I think most partners would just leave, if they insisted on being bought out a house would generally increase by a few thousand in 12 months not £35k so it just seems like an abnormal situation to me that perhaps shouldn’t be treated the same as other buy outs. 

Perhaps he feels if he had not met you he'd have a property and that would have gone up. There he must be thinking with property skyrocketing, why should he not get 50% of that.

IMO, there should be laws which give people that want to live together/marry etc where they could sign legal papers safeguarding the additional amounts one half puts into the home/business and other items. This could then have a clause of lets say ten years and after that a court would decide what the split should be. The laws would not be mandatory and up to the couple to decide.

If I was getting married in this day and age, I would not be offended if my OH asked me to sign legal papers defining who owns what in a split and I too would ask my OH. If my OH refused, the way I feel these days, there would be no marriage.

Slithery

diystarter7 said:

IMO, there should be laws which give people that want to live together/marry etc where they could sign legal papers safeguarding the additional amounts one half puts into the home/business and other items. This could then have a clause of lets say ten years and after that a court would decide what the split should be. The laws would not be mandatory and up to the couple to decide.

It already exists, it's called a 'Deed of trust'. The OP decided not to get one drawn up.

markin

If he's really not wanting to move out then your only option would be to force a sale in court, I don't think you can force him to sell just his half to you, it would have to be a full sale?