Family & Relationships1 min ago
Estoppel Question Advise Needed
Me and my partner live in my parents house for 15 years now they want me out in the past on numerous occasions they have promised me and my partner the house but nothing on paper
The deeds are in there name and we have never paid any rent or mortgage but we have spent money on the property over 10 years about 15k . Do I have any chance of keeping the house or staying here we have 2 children the solicitor had advised me of estoppel saying that you parents have broken there promise?Additional DetailsI forgot to mention me and my husband are separated know he is saying that no promise was made I have a witness to the promise but we did apply for local housing housing register waiting for a house will that have any significance ?
As the landlords are saying one of the conditions of staying there was that you stay on the hosing register.
In other words we did not reply to our detriment can this act bee taken like this ?
The deeds are in there name and we have never paid any rent or mortgage but we have spent money on the property over 10 years about 15k . Do I have any chance of keeping the house or staying here we have 2 children the solicitor had advised me of estoppel saying that you parents have broken there promise?Additional DetailsI forgot to mention me and my husband are separated know he is saying that no promise was made I have a witness to the promise but we did apply for local housing housing register waiting for a house will that have any significance ?
As the landlords are saying one of the conditions of staying there was that you stay on the hosing register.
In other words we did not reply to our detriment can this act bee taken like this ?
Answers
Exactly, Tiger - you sort it out before you divorce, to prevent all this dirt being dished afterwards. Read what you've pasted: you will lose important rights to make any claims on property or finances. The property doesn't belong to your ex, so you can't claim from him. You haven't divorced your in-laws, they are nothing to do with it. They've been more than...
23:03 Thu 16th Jan 2014
If it comes to reading Tyger or Barmaid -
BM comes out on top.
her last posts are:
If you have a solicitor who can get counsel's advice that quickly and can form an opinion about trial without even seeing you at this stage why on god's sweet earth are you bothering to ask random strangers on a forum?!
20:33 Sat 18th
Barmaid
£13k? No idea where that came from. Triple it and add some and you are getting close.
BM comes out on top.
her last posts are:
If you have a solicitor who can get counsel's advice that quickly and can form an opinion about trial without even seeing you at this stage why on god's sweet earth are you bothering to ask random strangers on a forum?!
20:33 Sat 18th
Barmaid
£13k? No idea where that came from. Triple it and add some and you are getting close.
..and what are you suing them for? To occupy a house which has never been yours, for which you've never paid a bean apart from expected maintenance. You've had it very cushy for the last 15 years - life's not like that for most people. Get real, stop playing that you understand the court processes and terminology, and crack on with providing your OWN home for you and your children. Don't faff around any longer pursuing unachievable dreams. As has been said before, you can throw as much money as you like at solicitors and barristers - it'll be a complete waste of money.
..and by the way, if you haven't put money in your own bank account, but it's your ex-husband's from his work - isn't he going to want that back, if he put it in the account?
..and by the way, if you haven't put money in your own bank account, but it's your ex-husband's from his work - isn't he going to want that back, if he put it in the account?
Fair point LCG, but what I am saying is this.
Tiger alleges that the property was given to her and her husband. She acted to her detriment on reliance of the promise that the legal title would be theirs eventually , but in all other respects they acted for years as if it had already been gifted.
Consequently, at the time of the divorce, she believed her hubby had nowt. She did NOT believe that her hubby owned half of the property.
And there, is the massive and case destroying inconsistency since the two are mutually exclusive.
Tiger alleges that the property was given to her and her husband. She acted to her detriment on reliance of the promise that the legal title would be theirs eventually , but in all other respects they acted for years as if it had already been gifted.
Consequently, at the time of the divorce, she believed her hubby had nowt. She did NOT believe that her hubby owned half of the property.
And there, is the massive and case destroying inconsistency since the two are mutually exclusive.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Well then you are divorced. From what you previously posted I took it to mean that a financial order can be made after decree nisi and before decree absolute with some monies not being payable until after decree absolute. You can't keep going back and trying to change things and get different stuff. It's done, you're divorced, he's free, you got jack and will not get jack off your ex-husband even if he does win the lottery.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.