Question for a friend, trying to work out her rights.
She purchased a property in 2006 with a livable shed. His parents lent $50,000 to put a relocatable house on it.
The deal was they would get to live in the shed and pay rent (which between then and 2012 they didn't as the husband said no). She separated from her husband in 2012. At that time, the house was not worth selling as no one would come out with anything. He continued to live there till 2015 while she rented elsewhere.
He continued to let his parents live there rent free and at times, tenanted the shed (as his parents moved into the house). She has requested numerous times for them to start paying rent and for the money from the tenant to be paid to the mortgage.
When she went for property settlement in 2017 when the market had increased significantly, after much legal expense, he agreed to buy her out for $80,000. He never did. Since she went for settlement, he basically stopped paying the mortgage and it is currently $33,000 in arrears (with the bank on their tails). He also stopped paying the rates in 2013 (they are $5700 in arrears). Since April 2018, he has been living there again and still paying nothing
They have a buyer and they are working out the split. He is saying that because she has not paid into it since 2012 that she is not entitled to half. What is the precedent please for when there is a house that one person lives in?
He says the split should be $50K parents and $55K for each of them ($160K left over after paying everything). He says if she does not agree to this that he will fight her till there is nothing left after legal bills (admitting he will do it out of spite)
We feel that is the mortgage/rates were paid up, that would be fair, but given they aren't, it should not be her responsibility to lose a portion of her equity to pay the arrears. We propose $50K parents, $22K him, $77K her.
Help me please
She purchased a property in 2006 with a livable shed. His parents lent $50,000 to put a relocatable house on it.
The deal was they would get to live in the shed and pay rent (which between then and 2012 they didn't as the husband said no). She separated from her husband in 2012. At that time, the house was not worth selling as no one would come out with anything. He continued to live there till 2015 while she rented elsewhere.
He continued to let his parents live there rent free and at times, tenanted the shed (as his parents moved into the house). She has requested numerous times for them to start paying rent and for the money from the tenant to be paid to the mortgage.
When she went for property settlement in 2017 when the market had increased significantly, after much legal expense, he agreed to buy her out for $80,000. He never did. Since she went for settlement, he basically stopped paying the mortgage and it is currently $33,000 in arrears (with the bank on their tails). He also stopped paying the rates in 2013 (they are $5700 in arrears). Since April 2018, he has been living there again and still paying nothing
They have a buyer and they are working out the split. He is saying that because she has not paid into it since 2012 that she is not entitled to half. What is the precedent please for when there is a house that one person lives in?
He says the split should be $50K parents and $55K for each of them ($160K left over after paying everything). He says if she does not agree to this that he will fight her till there is nothing left after legal bills (admitting he will do it out of spite)
We feel that is the mortgage/rates were paid up, that would be fair, but given they aren't, it should not be her responsibility to lose a portion of her equity to pay the arrears. We propose $50K parents, $22K him, $77K her.
Help me please
