I entered into a verbal contract regarding lending money to buy property. One party agreed to pay me back over a period of 4 years but only paid some of the money. The other party paid me the remaining money. The party who defaulted on the payment is now (2 years later) insisting he pays the remaining amount so that he gets his full share. Is the party who paid the remaining amount entitled to refute this?
You'll doubtless get your answer, and soon, from people more educated than I, but one question. WTF were you thinking loaning what seems to be substantial amounts of money over time without a written agreement? That's how you end up in situations like this! Have you never seen 'Judge Judy'????
I could be way off the mark here, but ISTR that contracts regarding property (unlike all other contracts) HAVE to be in writing. So I would say that no-one here has any rights or entitlements they could enforce in law.
I'd assume you thought he/she was entirely trustworthy, ie, a friend, for future reference, there's an old sayng thats worth remembering, 'If you lend money to a friend, be prepared to lose either the money or the friend'. and as warbler intimates, the same rule applies to family as well.