Do i get half of the proceeds?

[kittyfisher]

I bought a property with my ex 5 years ago my name is on the deeds. I left him for someone else shortly after, so he has paid the mortgage and bills etc. I have since found that he is selling up and it is worth 4 x what we bought it for. Am i right in thinking that i get half the proceeds of the sale? Even though i did'nt live there and never contributed?

[Ethel]

Don't be greedy!

You should get back whatever you have paid in, plus relative inflation.

[Loosehead]

in theory after deductions of what you should have been paying in the interim. so deduct 4+ years worth of mortgage, insurance etc, there may be 2 bob left for you.

Seriously you walked out on him and paid nothing and you expect some of the proceeds, I don't know the guy but I'd say he had a lucky escape!

[dzug]

You get:

whatever you can amicably agree with him

or whatever a court awards you if you can't agree

A starting point is half the (net) proceeds of the sale. Given that he's paid all the bills, I would think that that would be reduced, maybe considerably, by the court.

If you are half owner as you suggest he can't sell it without your permission or a court order. Seems you have the poor sucker over a barrel.

[kittyfisher]

My solicitor is has informed him that i wont be signing to agree a sale of the property unless he agrees that im provided with 50% of the net proceeds of the sale.

Do i have to prove i put anythig into the property? Or is it him that has to prove that i didn't put anything in? (moneywise)

[Loosehead]

what a money grubbing &^%$� you are!

Don't you realise if you force him to fight you with lawyers you both lose and the lawyers win. You dumped him 5 years ago and paid nothing, leave him alone and sign the forms. I'd bulldoze it before I'd give you any money.

[Pea Pod]

Its women like you that give us all a bad name.

[redcrx]

i find it appalling that you could even consider asking for any proceeds.
You left him and obviously got on with your life, let him get on with his and sign over the house to him for selling.
If he was having it reposessed im sure youd be up in arms about being landed with half the debt, dont be greedy.

[badgerchops]

the poor g1t, why didn't he take you of the deeds. what a fool. for christ sake do the decent thing and walk away. Ask him to pay for your solicitors costs for your removal of your name from the deeds because you shouldnt have to pay for that but do not take HIS money. its his home, not yours, you left him shortly after getting the mortgage and deserve nothing. At what point do you think you deserve, either financially or morally half of the house.

What goes around comes around and all that.......

[MustafaTickl]

Your solicitor is correct and you are acting correctly. You do not have to prove anything at all. You invested some money five years ago and it was a wise investment from which you are now about to reap a decent and perfectly proper profit. The fact that your ex may have invested more to reach the same profit is neither here nor there - we can all spend our money how we want. In taking your profit you are both legally and morally correct, and there really is nothing else to say about it.

[kittyfisher]

You see the thing is, it was a 100% mortgage, that he has paid himself, i've never paid anything towards the property. So really, i have invested nothing . All the bills were in his name and paid from his account. Nothing even had my name on. Only the deeds and mortgage account.

[Ethel]

Bet you're solicitor can't believe his luck.

You'll have to pay his bill at the end of all this - no wonder he's urging you to claim.

[redcrx]

then as youve admitted that he paid for everything from the start then what is your reason for asking about your claim to any share?
Cant you see this is unfair?

[MustafaTickl]

There is nothing unfair about it at all. Kitty is named as an equal owner and is entitled to half the proceeds. The ex has delayed Kitty from getting at her half for five years, and has paid money to the mortgage lender as a form of rent for five years benefit of occupation. It is not as if he has had nothing for his money, he has lived there for five years. There is nothing legally or morally wrong or unfair with Kitty having half.

[Ethel]

Mustafa - half of nothing is nothing!

She has put NOTHING in. She has lost NOTHING. Not one penny towards maintenance - NOTHING.

Would you be so keen for her to pay half the debts if the mortgage and other bills had not been paid?

And kitty - if you are getting legal advice from a solicitor, as you claim, why on earth are you asking a bunch of strangers?

[MustafaTickl]

The crux is ownership, Ethel. Several times in my business career I have completed housing developments and have been left with odd bits of land for which I paid nothing. A long time later other developers have come along and wanted access over them. I have sold, but for an outrageous price. They are called "ransom strips". And so here. Kitty has part ownership so can demand and expect to receive half the proceeds. "Ransom" if you like. But the ex occupied the place for five years and the mortgage equals rent, so he is not hard done by. It's just that Kitty is lucky.

[PFA]

"To put it very simply - take it to court and both your sol's enjoy a NICE bonus....!!!!

If you ex strikes a deal with his sol - like a 25% for all - then happy days for the sol. I mean really happy days. Assume the property is worth 500000 - 25% appx 125K - now that is a nice piece of pocket money.

If your ex's sol is clever enough he could even work out a p/t hearing with your sol and the both might strike a deal!!!

How....well...ask your ex to post on this site... ; )"*


* No part herein should be considered as legal advice and be used as a basis for an argument. This is provided as an AS IS and does not surmount to advice.

[lady_p_gold]

There are two issues here, legal and moral. Legally you are entitled to it as Mustafa says, however whether you feel it is right is something that you will have to decide. One could argue that your ex should have had the brains to see this one coming and should have sorted it out long ago. For all those thinking of buying a house together read this and some of the posts in Law and you need to be very careful.

[Catso]

Yes, legally you might have a claim.

However, unless you are really keen to run up a nice legal bill, possibly as large (or even larger than) the amount you're going to get, you should come to an 'amicable' agreement.

Ask him for a few �10,000s - which you might well get - and be very grateful for it.

Remember that solicitors always encourage you to pursue your fight, even if you've no chance, as they get paid whether you win or lose.

[Pippa68]

This beggars belief and I agree with the posters who are disgusted.

If your ex has his head screwed on the right way and a solicitor who is a rottweiler, he may be able to insist on an indemnity to make sure you can't get your thieving hands on the money. If he is nice, you may get a little of the profit..but as already has been mentioned that may get swallowed up in legal bills.

Put it this way, if the property had been in negative equity and had to be reposessed due to non payments would you like to be hounded for the cash as yuo are on the mortgage? I speak from personal experience, you can have it both ways you know...

Hopefully your ex has learned from this.

[MustafaTickl]

There are no "large legal bills". There is nothing to go to court about - there is nothing to argue about. Kitty legally has part ownership, it matters not one jot how she came by it. The ex has occupied the property for five years and the mortgage equals rent, so everybody's happy there. Now it is to be sold and Kitty is entitled to her half. All quite straightforward and all quite honest both morally and legally.