trying to evict adult stepchild

[DionneEz]

This is my dilemma. The property is a marital home with my husband from whom I am now separated.

Before the separation, his adult son (21) was living with us. My husband has now left the property but insists that his adult son remain with me. This has been nearly 2 years.

At first I was accommodating, as my husband still pays half the mortgage, I pay all of the bills.

The stepson living here was not an issue at first, but now I can no longer cope as he basically stays indoors on his phone all day. The only time he comes out of his room is to collect his Ubereats.

I asked him about getting a job and contributing something financially towards the bills and I was given a story about how he was freelancing from home...and that his pay was intermittent.
However, I see the receipts for his Ubereats orders and they amount to about £20 daily, which is about £500 a month. When he does leave the house, he takes a £7 cab to the station when he can get the bus, which costs £2 or even walk as it is only 10 mins away...so clearly he has funds to splurge but he doesn't feel he has to contribute to the running of the house since his father owns half.

So the scenario is that I have a nearly 22-year-old man 24/7 in my house who refuses to lift a finger to do anything in terms of chores and doesn't contribute financially. I recently had to stop him using my toothpaste and bath soap because I was like you can buy your own surely.
I do go into the office 3 times a week and have errands and stuff to run on weekends but will come back to clean my house as this guy does absolutely nothing. When I was on hols for 3 weeks, he didn't even take the bins out. Yet his father insists that as he owns the house as well., he has every right to dictate who lives there. Is this true?

Anyway, I have given stepson notice even though he is not a tenant. The notice has now passed but he is still here and has no intention of leaving. I know the next step is to change the locks when he leaves which is rare but can his father come and let him in again and will I be breaking any laws if I lock the father out as well? Father doesn't live there and does not pay any bills..just half the mortgage but as the resident homeowner shouldn't my rights surpass his?

Can you cite any cases where the courts have used the articles you specified against individuals rather than the state?

Yeah, that’s a fantastic idea. And then watch out for your abusive ex deciding to show you that he has rights too by bowling up with his suitcase, ready to move back in, until you buy him out. Try complaining then about your human rights.

You’re playing with fire here, and if you don’t get legal advice you are going to get your fingers burnt.

Your right to a peaceful home life is not a right to a peaceful life under the circumstances you want without regard to the rights of the other home owner. You have a several routes to a home life that doesn’t include your ex’s son, so your rights aren’t being breached. You not following the legal process to gain sole use of your home is not you having your human rights breached.

But what would realistically happen if you did just boot him out though? Would his father actually come and let him back in? If you don't think that would happen I'd just do it

Again. this is not about my husband moving in or not. I never mentioned that my ex-needing my consent.

It is about him forcing me to live with his son when he himself is not here. I, as a small woman shouldn't be living with a volatile 6.4ft young man who can fly off the handle at any minute.

Ex forcing me to live with an unemployed adult which he himself would not tolerate is a breach of my human rights which states I should have the right to a peaceful home life. UK courts quote article 8 in their judgments against people often.

You say no one is forcing me to live here, but I have an obligation to live here as this where I pay the mortgage and bills. Are you suggesting I move out and still keep paying for this unemployed adult to occupy my home?

As mentioned the mortgage is at a low rate and expires in 2027, I'll buy him out then. I am not going to remortagge now to potentially end up with a 5k per month mortgage which I won't be able to pay. For now his son, who has nothing to do with the mortgage needs to leave.

Something’s not right here. He’s not related to you. You don’t want him there and he doesn’t pay utilities or clean. You have to see a lawyer. This is bizarre to me and to others reading this thread. Get a lawyer at least to force payment of the utilities. Can’t you take a vacation for a week and turn the utilities. If they’re in your name no one would be able to turn them back on.

As mentioned the mortgage is at a low rate and expires in 2027, I'll buy him out then. I am not going to remortagge now to potentially end up with a 5k per month mortgage which I won't be able to pay

But won’t the house (and therefore your husbands share) be worth much more by then?

It does feel, OP, that you’re angry and looking for a fight, and the easy solution isn’t a sufficient outlet for your anger.

You are not really listening to people because you’ve made up the law as to what you think is right. It’s best you get professional advice on your ex’s rights over the property.
also - maybe you can port your good interest rate to another house purchase?

Ignore the people who are basically telling you to put up and shut up! They wouldn’t like it if it happened to them, I think you’ve got a leg to stand on regarding this situation, imagine if the roles where reversed and your daughter lived with him because u own the house? Or if home owners move there kids in there properties because “that’s there mums house” I don’t think it works like that, got nothing to do with the SS and he needs to leave !

So you are choosing to just complain rather than take action because you want to keep your low interest rate? You need legal advice first and foremost, but you may have to make a choice between the current situation with low mortgage rate, or disentangling and possibly paying higher mortgage rates.

Also OP you have every right to complain and put your anger on this forum and ask for advice,its what mumsnet is all about, but seek a solicitor and go from there

I wouldn't suggest her leaving the house for a week and leaving the house to the intruder (which is what he is) for a week. The last thing OP should be doing is going away and leaving the house even for a week. Would you really suggest a homeowner leave an intruder alone in the house without her there?

You denying your ex the right to use his property as he pleases (i.e. by having his son there) breaches his rights (not his human rights, unless the state did this without good reason).

This is why you need either his agreement or a court order to stop him using the property as he pleases. Because if the state allowed you to deny him use of his property without considering if there was good reason to do so, the state would be breaching his article 1 rights.

(And, unfortunately, your desire to minimise your mortgage costs is unlikely to be considered a good reason for a court to make any order against your ex’s wishes that disadvantages your ex, unless there were some quid pro quo for him).

Sometimes, the Govt has to deliver its human rights obligations by providing a means of legal remedy to the victims of crimes and civil law breaches. That need for legal remedy is what the courts will be recognising in the cases you mention.

In Maya Forstater vs Center for Global Development, the judge referred to the right to freedom of expression and freedom of belief in the Human Rights Act to justify his decision to consider whether Maya's beliefs that she was sacked for expressing were "worthy of respect in a democratic society" (WORIADS), and to rule that her beliefs are WORIADS and her employer would therefore act illegally in sacking her for them. That doesn't mean that CGD breached Maya's human rights by sacking her (they didn't), it means that the State would have breached Maya's human rights if the judge had decided that CGD had the right to ban staff from expressing WORIADS beliefs on their own social media outside of work.

To give a deliberately exaggerated hypothetical example: if Parliament voted to decriminalise GBH, that would be a violation of your human right to freedom from cruel and inhumane treatment because there would be no legal remedy available to you if someone cut your fingers off. The person cutting your fingers off wouldn't have violated your human rights: the State would have done by removing your ability to make a police report, removing your option to take up a private prosecution, and absolving the police of having to investigate the case and refer it to the CPS.

You already have a means of legal remedy to resolve the situation with your SS: it's called "divorcing his father". I'm not sure about TOLATA because that's not something that comes up in the employment tribunals that I end up following (thanks, FWR vipers). But you can definitely divorce, it would free you from him forever, and the State isn't stopping you from doing that.

Get legal advice, finalise your divorce, by ex-h out, then kick your step son out.

That's literally the only legal path of recourse you can take.

So we are saying that co owning a house says you can have someone live there the co owner doesn’t want to who has no interest in the house at all. Becuase that is ridiculous

yes the ex would have a right to live there but he can’t dictate another adult does - bexause whst precedent would that set for those owning a house

and nothing says the ex wants his son there just he doesn’t want him with him?

he is a squatter someone who is now living there without paying rent or any agreement either with the OP or her ex. That is how he should be treated

Couldn’t your ex just go to court and force the sale of your home if you kick his son out? If he does that you would literally have no choice you’d have to sell up or buy out so I think you clutching onto your low percentage isn’t going to help in the long run especially if this is about control.

You’re just not getting it, are you?

It is about him forcing me to live with his son when he himself is not here. I, as a small woman shouldn't be living with a volatile 6.4ft young man who can fly off the handle at any minute I completely agree with you that your situation is shit. I understand why you wouldn’t want him living there. But unless you have a legally qualified person confirming that your ex has no legal right to install a member of his family in a property that he has a 40% share in, then there is sod all that you can do about it. That doesn’t mean that you have to let him access the WiFi, or that you can’t put a padlock on the fridge and kitchen cupboards. But it does mean that you can’t just chuck him out unless you want to face the legal repercussions for that, which could well involve your abusive ex moving back in to reassert his control.

Ex forcing me to live with an unemployed adult which he himself would not tolerate is a breach of my human rights which states I should have the right to a peaceful home life. UK courts quote article 8 in their judgments against people often As my dear old nan used to say, fuck my old boots. IT IS NOT A BREACH OF YOUR HUMAN RIGHTS. The Human Rights is a legal document. You can’t just decide something is a breach of your rights simply because you don’t like it. In your case, there is no article of the Human Rights Act that says your ex cannot install his son in a property he partially owns because you don’t like it.

You say no one is forcing me to live here, but I have an obligation to live here as this where I pay the mortgage and bills. Are you suggesting I move out and still keep paying for this unemployed adult to occupy my home? You don’t have an obligation to live there. You have a desire to live there. That’s completely different. And no, I’m not suggesting you move out, but you would not be paying for him to occupy your home. You’re paying for you to occupy your home. His father is paying for him to occupy your home.

As mentioned the mortgage is at a low rate and expires in 2027, I'll buy him out then. I am not going to remortagge now to potentially end up with a 5k per month mortgage which I won't be able to pay. For now his son, who has nothing to do with the mortgage needs to leave I understand that it’s financially more convenient for you to remortgage in 2027. But I reiterate, unless you get legal advice confirming that his father cannot install him in your home in his place, then there is nothing you can do. And if you do get an order forcing him out of the property, are you prepared for your abusive ex to move back in?

But OP is not asking ‘I am in this situation, would you like it if you were in this situation?’, she is asking ‘legally, what can I do?’.

It sounds awful. But currently it also sounds completely legal. But yes, awful. I feel for her. I am glad I’m not in this situation. And she’s been told to seek legal advice. So she’s going to the Citizens Advice Bureau 😵‍💫.

Are you a lawyer?

Yes, this too. When the police or the prison service or the NHS or a state school are found to have violated someone's human rights, these organisations are all what we call "public bodies", they are either part of the State or they are contracted to work for the State directly and explicitly treated in law as part of the State. OP's husband isn't a public body.

This thread is reminiscent of when certain people try to argue that lesbians who won't date anyone with a penis are being discriminatory and cite the Equality Act 2010 list of protected characteristics. The Equality Act doesn't apply to individuals in their lives outside of work...

Why do you keep repeating a variation of this? No one is saying it's fair, but that's not what you asked.
You need to be the sole owner, nothing else will give you the result you want, no matter how much you think it should.

yes the ex would have a right to live there but he can’t dictate another adult does - bexause whst precedent would that set for those owning a house @Tiswa reverse the situation. By your logic, the ex husband would be able to bar the OP from having a lodger to help pay the bills, or restrict any of her family members staying with her.

@TeaNtoast25 Ignore the people who are basically telling you to put up and shut up! They wouldn’t like it if it happened to them, I think you’ve got a leg to stand on regarding this situation, imagine if the roles where reversed and your daughter lived with him because u own the house? Or if home owners move there kids in there properties because “that’s there mums house” I don’t think it works like that, got nothing to do with the SS and he needs to leave! Nobody is telling her to put up and shut up. Literally nobody at all. What she’s being told is that him being there does not breach her human rights, which is true, and that she needs advice from a legally qualified person before she decides to take the law into her own hands to chuck him out and ends up having to sell her property to pay legal bills.

So we are saying that co owning a house says you can have someone live there the co owner doesn’t want to who has no interest in the house at all.

Isn't that basically how blended families work? If I entered into a civil partnership and co-owned a house with a mother who wanted her adult daughter to live in the house, I'd either have to accept it, sell my share of the house to my wife and leave, or buy her out. I wouldn't be able to say "no, your DD can't live here".

This BTW is part of why I never married or civil-partnered.