Can she stop him selling?

Chrissy

Question:-

My friend bought a house with her bf.
They have 1 child together.
They've now split up but are still living in the same house.

The bf wants to sell the house, split the money & go their separate ways.
My friend doesn't have a problem with this, but she just wants to buy his share off him & continue to live there, with their child without him.

For some reason, he's insisting on not doing this, & instead putting the house up for public sale where she'll have to compete with everyone else for the house. (This has been her home for quite some time, everything in the house has her little stamp on it, from kitchen to flooring)

Is there any way that she can stop him from doing this, & insist she buys him out of the house?

The Clown Man

Contact a Solicitor.

No one here is going to be able to help you unless they are Solicitors who enjoy giving free advice. And I doubt there are many of those.

py2006

I hate hearing about these kinda situations as they tend to favour the woman.

Its awkward now that there is a child involved.

If the house is in her name aswell and she wants to keep it then its a real sticky situation.

If they are married he is screwed! Basicially she gets the lot!

(actually, don't quote me on that. I am not certain what the legal implications are of this nowadays.)

I know my mate bought this house, met a girl and married her. The house was totally his and soley in his name. But as soon as they got married he would have to get her signature of permission in front of a solicitor to sell the house. Even though she had made no financial contributions to the house. And I think she would be entitiled to half the money aswell! All that for a signed piece of paper on the wedding day!

Chrissy

They're not married & she doesn't want 'the lot'.
Basically, she wants to get the house valued & pay him 1/2 of the value & then keep the house for herself.

He wants to sell it & put his ex & child out of their home, for what can only seem to be for awkwardness sake.

smiles

Or for a better price.... which is what she doesnt want, or so you said yourself.

Raytown Rocks

I know if they were married he would have to wait untill the child was 18 before the house could be sold, as it is the family home not sure if its the same for co-habitating(spelling) couples.
She should go to a solicitor, plain and simple.

Why wont he just buy her share if she is agreeing to do so, sound a bit like he wants to make life difficult!

Chef

tinkerbell

If he wants to put it up for sale, then it's probably coz he knows he'll get a lot more money out of it that way, than if she just pays for his half. The house may have gone up by a huge amount in value since they bought.

Get a solicitor on the case.

Kinetic^

The house will have to be remortgaged by her and then he's given his half less his part of the original mortgage.

He's just being awkward and petyy by not letting her by his half of house from him.

py2006

Chrissy wrote:

They're not married & she doesn't want 'the lot'.
Basically, she wants to get the house valued & pay him 1/2 of the value & then keep the house for herself.

He wants to sell it & put his ex & child out of their home, for what can only seem to be for awkwardness sake.

But wouldn't she be getting half the money from the sale of the house? So she could buy her own house with that? Or is he looking to take all the money for himself?

Chrissy

smiles wrote:

Or for a better price.... which is what she doesnt want, or so you said yourself.

Well, yes, she needs all the money she can get, but if it comes to the bit, family will jump in as much as they can to make sure she gets it.

I nearly think at this stage he'd sell it to anyone but her just to be awkward.

I don't care what his feelings are towards her now, but he adores his child & you think regardless of a 'potential' extra bit of cash, he'd do right by the child.

Just seems unfair.

Think she is going to see a solicitor, was just wondering if anyone went through something similar or knew of someone who did, & what the outcome was.

py2006

But if its an extra 100,000 then its an extra 50,000 for her and the child!!

House prices have shot up 150,000 in 3 years in some cases!

I wouldn't dimiss it entirely!

Chrissy

py2006 wrote:

But wouldn't she be getting half the money from the sale of the house? So she could buy her own house with that? Or is he looking to take all the money for himself?

Yes, but that's her home & the only home her child has known, it's beside to where shes always lived & there's nowhere else near there available now.

I don't know if she'd get a mortgage on her own (I'm not up in that sort of thing, maybe she would)
Maybe after she got 1/2 back there'd be practically nothing left after paying off the mortgage on it, leaving her unable to buy another house.

Ah, I don't know.
He just seems very twisted to me.

seamus

The idea of Common Law wife kicks in at this point. Because there's a child involved, even if the house is fully in his name, he cannot sell the house out from underneath her and the child. Since I assume she is on the deeds, he cannot sell at all without her consent.

I wouldn't know much more than that. Don't think anyone but a solicitor could advise at this point.

py2006

I wonder, perhaps he wants to keep the house too but he can't if she wants it.

And he would never get the house if it came down to a legal battle.

Chrissy

py2006 wrote:

I wonder, perhaps he wants to keep the house too but he can't if she wants it.

And he would never get the house if it came down to a legal battle.

No, he doesn't want the house.
He's not from that area & it's in a rural area where all the neighbours stick together.
He'd never be welcome there & they'd make sure he knows it.

He just wants out, but wants to be as twisted doing it, imo

Chrissy

Thanks Seamus,

That's very interesting.
Don't think she knows that.

Will get her to mention that to the solicitor.

Thanks for your help

py2006

seamus wrote:

The idea of Common Law wife kicks in at this point. Because there's a child involved, even if the house is fully in his name, he cannot sell the house out from underneath her and the child. Since I assume she is on the deeds, he cannot sell at all without her consent.

I wouldn't know much more than that. Don't think anyone but a solicitor could advise at this point.

Hmm, I thought that was only if they were married that he couldn't sell it from under her!

Oh, perhaps the child makes the difference in this case!

Richard Edwards

if shes not married and not on the deeds then its his house and he can throw her and her kid out. she can get maintenance and stuff but she cant stay if he doesnt want her to.

The Corinthian

Firstly there are three possible explanations (or combination thereof) for his behaviour.

1. He wants the best possible price for the house. If it’s a closed sale to her at a preferential price, he’ll lose out financially.
2. He wants to use this as leverage vis-a-vi parental rights. Fathers have SFA parental rights if not married and on the birth cert (and very few if they are). He may want to use the house as a means to extract assurances of visitation rights, custody, etc.
3. It’s personal. For example she has a new boyfriend and he can’t bare to think of him moving in the moment he moves out.

Irish law tends to favour the woman in such cases, however her case is a lot weaker given they are not married. Seeking advice from a Solicitor would be my first port of call and, if she wants to get ruthless about it, using the kid as a bargaining tool would be next on the list.

If she’s already doing the latter, then you probably have your answer.

seamus wrote:

The idea of Common Law wife kicks in at this point.

No, that’s English law you’re thinking of. Doesn’t exist in Irish law.

BaZmO*

py2006 wrote:

But if its an extra 100,000 then its an extra 50,000 for her and the child!!

House prices have shot up 150,000 in 3 years in some cases!

I wouldn't dimiss it entirely!

I don't think that's where the guy is coming from. If they were to split the house or in general if somebody is buying a friend/partner/whatever out of their half of a property, what happens is that they get a valuation of the property done by an Estate Agent and then the person doing the buying gives the other person half of what the present day value of the houseis.

The problem with that is, in today's housing market the valuation price and selling price differ greatly and i reckon that's what they guy has a problem with. But tbh, you would think that for the sake of his kid he would just take half of what it's worth and then just go on his way. Unless of course the girl is trying to only give him half of what the property was worth say 5 years ago, and we all know what kinda shortfall there would be there. Money brings out the worst in people.

Nevyn

It sounds like the house and the mortguage is in both thier names.
But a lot depends on how the house was set up by the solicitor that did the buying for them.
If the house is set up as tenants in common then he can take her to court to have the house sold.
If the house was set up as a family home and the signed a declaration to that extent it can't be sold until the child is 18.
She would be best get intouch with that solictor and find out the status of the house and where she stands legally.
Yes he is being an ass wanting her out of the house and upseting her life and that of the child, sounds like he is lashing out as his world has changed/fallen apart and he wants thiers to as well.

BoozyBabe

Some reply did make me think though:-

If both names are on the deed, he wants to sell, she doesn't:-

Surely the house can't be sold until an agreement is reached anyway?
Is that not correct?

I mean, if she 1/2 owns the house, can he force her to put it up for sale, even if she doesn't want to?

Chrissy

BaZmO* wrote:

Unless of course the girl is trying to only give him half of what the property was worth say 5 years ago, and we all know what kinda shortfall there would be there. Money brings out the worst in people.

No, she wants to get a current day valuation & give him 1/2 of that

Chrissy

Thanks Thaedydal.
That's very helpful

Richard Edwards

is her name on the deeds? yes=good 'cos nothing can happen without her agreement

if not, has she contributed to the mortgage payments? yes=good 'cos she has a case to claim part ownership

SarahMc

The Family Home Act doesn't apply to them as they were not married. Getting solicitors involved is going to cost of LOT of money. Is there any way he would go to mediation to try to sort it out? Have they agreed maintenance, access, guardianship etc?
Family Mediation Service (Dublin) Tel: (01) 634 4320.
There are branches throughout the country.

KdjaCL

Is his name on the kids birth cert?
If yes she has a house until the child is 16 as he is obliged to pay for housing until then.

Again everything is correct cant be sold without her consent, a judge will say "sort it out yourselfs" but she could sit on her ass and let him pay his half and be legally right too.


kdjac

constitutionus

well as far as i know if its a family home he cant turf em out. this would still be in effect if they were only renting the place and refused to pay rent . thats why most appartment letters WONT let to families, the courts are full of this stuff.
any judge worth his salt would actually bar him from the house before allowing him to sell the house. my guess is you'll end up in the family law courts. because your not married and both names are on the deeds it'll go easier because its a dispute between two co owners.

there IS a small chance if he wins though that she could be forced to sell the house and if she refuses to sign the contract the sherrif can be authorised in her stead (this nearly happened to my brother) but from what you said she seems to be trying to be very reasonable and i cant see ANY judge tossing a mother and kid out of the family home IF the guy is compensated at the going rate. the conscern here will be for the kids well being and they dont want to disrupt their routine as much as possible.

jimmycrackcorm

look! a solicitor is the only answer to this. What's the point asking for opinions here? I certtainly wouldn't lose a few grand over making a decision based on an opinion here.....

dingding

What about the maintanance and education of his child. Surely he has a moral if not a legal responsibility to support his child.

Victor

I makes sense for her to talk to a solicitor.

What they can do is each appoint an estate agent to value the house and have them appoint a third. A mid-point is then struck, putting a value on the house. She pays him this, once the mortgage is cleared.

If that amount is too rich for her, it can go on the open market, she can even bid for it.

It makes sense not to sell openly as the estate agent and solicitor fees will be much higher and stamp duty would be much higher. If she buys from him, she only has to pay stamp duty on his half.

The Corinthian

dingding wrote:

What about the maintanance and education of his child. Surely he has a moral if not a legal responsibility to support his child.

Where was maintanance and education of his child mentioned here?

padser

There are some legal questions asked regulrarly on boards that people with a passing knowledge of the law, or law students can give pretty good and accurate answers to. This imo is def not one of them.

Its an extremely complex situation. The answer may be spelled out in the deeds that were signed which we dont have access to. Even if the answer is in the deeds, and gives him the right to sell his share unilaterally, some form of estoppell may well come into effect to protect the rights of the ex gf and child.

Bottom line is that i doubt you will find anyone here capable of giving a definitive answer, especially without looking at the documents.