Mum's boyfriend kicking her out of their home after 24 years

[heathspeedwell]

Just found out that my mum's partner has sold their house and is kicking her out. She doesn't know yet.

They aren't married but she invested £25k into their first home, which they bought for £125k. Her name has never been on the deeds.

They have moved house four times and their current home is worth maybe £800k. She's done loads of DIY and they have also had lodgers that she has done the work for. She paid £30k for the kitchen last year.

My mum's boyfriend's son (whom I have thought of as a stepbrother) has said that his dad plans to give my mum back the £25k from their first house. We are both shocked that his dad is being so mean.

Although they are not married I can't believe that he can get away with just giving her the £25k. If she can prove she bought the kitchen does that give her any rights at all?

Hoping that someone can give me advice on what my mum should do. Is it better if she stays in the house until they reach a fair settlement or is she better to get away as soon as possible?

@goadyolddough this, plus any value her DIY has added.

I'm willing to bet that partner has enjoyed a quarter of a century of 'wife-services' too, cooking shopping cleaning, as well as caring for him recently.

Would be wondering if he's got another work-woman waiting in the wings.

Your mother needs to see a family law lawyer ASAP. Mumsnet can give you advice based on our own experiences but it's not professional advice. Your mum has been in a long partnership, invested a lot of her personal money and work in the property.

Genuinely, she needs to see a family law lawyer.

With DIY she did that willingly, he didn't as far as we know ask her to. She took it upon herself. It was foolish of her to DIY to a home that isn't even hers, to a home she had no legal right to. It's like staying with friends for a holiday and while you're there you put in nice work to the garden. Of course you're not entitled to part of the sale of the house! That's the risk you take when you shack up with someone with zero legal protections and not even on the deed. It's the whole point of why marriage exists. If you don't buy into marriage you don't get the protections and rights. It's really that simple. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I don't feel OP's mum should be compensated for DIY, she was foolish and gets what she deserves imo. Harsh but it's the truth.

Her being married before, you'd think she especially would know how important marriage is, or if not marriage make sure you're on the deeds. She should have known better, having been married before. That's what I don't understand.

The more I think about it, the more it seems mum's ex knew exactly what he was doing. He comes from another country so at least 3 years out of 5 my mum paid for him and his kids to fly there - long haul flights by business class so we're looking at £10 to £12k just to get there, let alone hotels and spending money.

My mum was the one who looked after the lodgers, and more recently Air B&B guests. She made the effort to get up to make them breakfast and wash the sheets etc. She's more outgoing than her ex so she did all meet and greet too, which has meant she had very little time to herself or to see her own family over the last two decades.

She really thought they were going to grow old together - it's such a dick move to try to kick her out just before Christmas.

She invested time and money into a house that wasn't even hers. No lawyer will tell her she is entitled to anything while she was shacking up in her boyfriend's house because she's not entitled to one single penny bar her initial deposit. In fact, suggesting she see a lawyer who will only tell her what we're all telling her, is telling her to waste even more money.

Yes it is a dick move from him, but regardless of all she did, she still willingly chose a) not to marry him and b) not even get her name on the deeds.

That's all on her. Her ex is doing nothing wrong legally. Your mother has no claim. She willingly chose to be used like this. She chose it. The ex is a dick but it's his house, not hers. He's in the right legally (though not morally).

So she has effectively lived with him rent-free for 24 years? I can see this from both sides. She needs proper legal advice now.

@heathspeedwell she needs to stay in the house, document all this stuff (flights etc, unpaid work as airbnb host, deposit contribution etc). Get the money before he changes the locks on her. Sounds like he got someone else. What a CF. Can you go stay with her there?

She has monumentally stupid not making sure she was legally entitled to what she put into the relationship.

Why on earth will her choosing to pay for things for him like a holiday now equal to a share in a house she's not contributing to the mortgage for (for 24 years!)?

That is very bad advice. She has absolutely no right to be in the house, let alone stay there. He can get the police to evict her as a trespasser. She does not need to be told to break the law and stay in someone's home.

unpaid work as airbnb host

FFS! Do people think real courts are like Judge Judy? Not even Judge Judy will touch something with no receipts. Look at her episodes, if there is no proof she throws it out.

My mum was the one who looked after the lodgers, and more recently Air B&B guests. She made the effort to get up to make them breakfast and wash the sheets etc. She's more outgoing than her ex so she did all meet and greet too, which has meant she had very little time to herself or to see her own family over the last two decades.

Was she paid for all this work she did?

And how many lodgers did they have that they prevented her seeing her own family?

The more I think about it, the more it seems mum's ex knew exactly what he was doing.

Perhaps he did, but equally your mother must have known the consequences of the decisions she made. No one forced her to stay, pay for renovations / flights or take on the majority of the work for the lodgers and B+B guests.

Is it a shit situation, yes. But it's one that she played a part in creating.

Exactly, I can't believe the absolute bs people are spewing on here. She is legally entitled to zero! She stayed rent free in someone else's house, now she wants a share of it? And people are acting like courts are like Small Claims Tribunals, she could go to Small Claims I suppose but she cannot claim for rockeries, for wallpaper, for flights, for hosting etc. Do people really truly think like this?

Iam are you a solicitor? You are the one providing incorrect advice. The mother may well have a claim as posted up thread so she needs proper specialised advice on that.

Her decision to work as an AirbBnB host has nothing to do with what she's legally entitled to in a split.

There was a thread on here a year or so back, where someone's elderly mum lived with her partner for I think it was 30 years and though she wasn't married and likewise was not on the deeds to the home, the late partner's children turfed her out when doing probate (I don't think he had a Will if memory serves). She'd lived in that home for 30 years and had spent a lot on it. She was thrown out of it. And got zero.

She got legal advice and she was entitled to zero. After 30 years and having put 70 odd thousand into it. Chucked out by his kids, with zero.

This is the OP's mum's position. Telling her mum to spend money on a lawyer for when she is entitled to zero is just telling her to waste more money.

I am not providing incorrect advice at all, I am correcting incorrect advice. Situations similar to this have popped up on Mumsnet time and time and time again. Each time, with legal advice, they are told they are entitled to zero. We know this well enough know.

Read TooTrustings post. This isn’t my area but certainly remember resulting and constructive trusts from my law degree.

You may have a beneficial interest in property if you improve it / believe you will get a share of it for your efforts. You have to fight for it though so not to be relied on but definitely worth exploring.

Maybe the law will recognise her contribution and say she's entitled to a share of his assets now, maybe it won't. What is clear at the moment to me (as a layperson) is that it will cost a small fortune in legal fees and mediation to sort this out, with no guarantee of a good result for OP's mum.

Compare this with the very small (comparatively) cost of a register office wedding/civil partnership, or the zero cost (financially) of simply saying right at the outset 'If we're buying this jointly I should be on the deeds'.

If the partner says in response to that 'No, can't agree on that, you're not putting any money in' and/or 'I don't want to get married, it's just a piece of paper' there's your answer, right at the start. He doesn't see you as a life partner, and he doesn't feel any obligation to look after you financially. Consider very carefully whether that's a good basis for a long-term relationship.

Absolutely Gasp. Far easier than a potentially risky and costly battle at the other end of life.

That's false.

If she was on the deeds, yes. But since she's not, she has no claim. She at least needs to have proof in the form of a document or even receipts that she improved it. Absence of either of those things, it's a legal fact that she is not entitled to a penny. Fighting for something she is not entitled to will just be a waste of her time and leaving her out of pocket.

The problem she has if that cases like this is they can go anywhere are long and expensive. Sometimes you’ve got to work out is it better for her to say go ok my 25k plus the 30k kitchen and I leave or to fight and end up with possibly nothing if they both drag it out long enough to eat all the money that she could maybe be entitled too.

she would need to prove all the money she put it and a £2 plate and a holiday won’t count. It will be the big things on the actual house like the kitchen. They will also look into the fact she didn’t pay any kind of rent and he could possibly use the fact she didn’t want to legally marry or have paperwork set up to show that she didn’t want nor had plans to actually claim the house as these things where offered too her and as a one divorced women she clearly knew the legality’s of her situation with what protects that can offer her.