At the moment the BIL's will be sitting down with the FIL and presenting him with the "facts" of what could have happened if I was a nasty piece of work. Trying to show him that I have been more than reasonable and patient in trusting him to do what is right. But I'm not entirely sure if this would just give the FIL the information he needs to consolidate a defence or if it will make him actually sit up and take notice? I'm not sure what sort of defence he could come up with? His two primary assertions of what the arrangement / agreement was are both shot to bits. 1. Renting - Breaks the law, tax evasion. 2. Inheritance - Potential criminal fraud if motive can be shown to deceive and defraud (which it can be). Civil case based on Part Performance (again fully proven). Logic and reason breakdown of this position (unconscionable contract and conduct). Still probably worth a last ditched effort to avoid the potential of high cost litigation. If it does not work then at least I tried, we will then need to evaluate what to do next. This is why I was curious about the criminal approach, if i can't afford to take action the maybe the state can bring action against them, but then there is the potential for them to go to gaol which is not something we want. I was more thinking along the lines that it might reveal some things that would strengthen any civil action we take against them that would work towards a summary judgement in our favour. At the end of the day it will come down to cost, given the amount we are seeking I know that in a civil action every court level decision will be challenged right up to the High Court of Australia. Knowing this I can not feasibly see a way that we could afford to follow through on any initial action, even though we would win at the District Court and then the Supreme Court levels I have no doubt that it would be taken to the High Court and challenged on some technicality of law or case history. And this is not uncommon, there is so much case history that shows a reversal of decision based on a technicality at law, or a different interpretation on a doctrine of Part Performance or Estopple etc. Which could result in the PIL winning and means that we are lumped with not just the loss of claim but potentially all the court and lawyer costs associated on both sides, potentially a phenomenal amount of money for nothing. So it essentially results in them getting away with it because we are poor, given other family health considerations that I have to weigh into the mix maybe I just need to admit defeat now and realise that I stuffed up big time in trusting someone I though was trustworthy. And that is probably the bit that stings most, how could a father and mother do that to their own daughter, son in law and grand children? What sort of people are they that portray themselves to be upright and honourable people and then do this to their own? This is what completely bewilders me. So sadly it seems that the law literally does not afford justice, justice only comes at great cost. Thanks Rod and others for your thoughts and feedback. They have been greatly appreciated and helped me work through the process of rationalising what to do and how to go about it. For now that is all, I will give it one last ditched effort for the PIL to see reason, beyond that I have nothing. Thanks again.