Update to AIBU to refuse Aunt's fwb claim on her estate.

[Sleepneededprettyplease]

Posting here because it is where I put the first thread.

A brief summery is that my Aunt died and her FWB is trying to say that he is entitled to part of her estate because she had asked me to allow him to stay in a house she had invested in for me. Anyway if you want the full story feel free to read what I put on the first thread.

Anyway the main thing is that he is now sueing in the courts. I need a bit of a hand hold please. My lawyers have suggested getting a barristers opinion so I am just waiting for that. I wouldn't even mind if it was possible to just go to mediation but he wants the house for the rest of his life and won't consider anything else.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5505433-aibu-to-refuse-aunts-fwb-claim-on-her-estate?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

I don't know how he has found this solicitor. I half think it might be a friend of a friend thing. I also don't know how he is paying. It is one of the aspects that worries me

OP has explained why she isn’t doing something like this. She already has a court date and has been advised to wait until then.

Ok..

Eta - it worked for a friend of mine. And I might say - advised to wait by whom? Lawyers? Well that's a shock.. Of course they make no money if Op gets him out without a prolonged court case.

I’ve only recently found your thread, I’m sorry you’ve had a stressful time of it but how wonderful that you can proceed with IVF regardless - probably better that way than directly linking it to the outcome of this situation.

It sounds like the legal case around your house is already settled (understand you are under advice not to enforce yet but that is not something that will change) and so his claim for dependency based on living in a house you own is weak.

I’m curious about:

• whether he was one of the friends she left a smaller gift to in the will
• when the will was last updated
• if she had time to update the will if she wanted (I.e. did she know she was life-threateningly ill in the months before her death)

All of these questions are linked because they tell a story about how your aunt did not consider him a dependent. A small gift or no gift suggests he was never considered close enough let alone a dependent. A recent will - or the time to change the will if she wanted - shows that she had the opportunity to make provision for him but didn’t. Not something you would do if you considered someone a dependent.

It might be a lot more sensible to pay him off. Litigation is very expensive. I'd offer £8k Part 36 and take it from there.

• whether he was one of the friends she left a smaller gift to in the will

no gift In the will. He isn't mentioned. It is an old will predating when they reconnected.

• when the will was last updated

Ages ago. Probably more than 20 years. It has provision in case I couldn't be executor if I was under 18. I am now in my 30's.

• if she had time to update the will if she wanted (I.e. did she know she was life-threateningly ill in the months before her death)

Yes Plenty of time. She knew she was seriously ill for about 6 months. We hoped that she would be able to have an operation but it turned out to not be possible. She knew this and the fact it was probably weeks, months if we were lucky, about 6 weeks before her death. She lost capacity to make those sort of decisions maybe 2 days before her death. She discussed many things in that time with me. He visited her at my house a bit. She made no mention of providing for him, changing her will or anything else. She did say it was nice of him to visit.

Rather than a case, they feel they’ve found their cash cow.

Good luck come the hearing. I’m sure with everything you’ve posted and how clear it is, the CF gets chucked out on his arse and finds himself liable for the legal bills he cannot afford. Sweet poetic justice!

I have tried to do this but he seems determined to stay in the house for life. Something I am not willing to agree to.

That would be amazing.

Perhaps it won’t even get to the point where anything needs to be argued, but the fact she didn’t pass suddenly and had the opportunity to make provision for him if she wanted - but then didn’t - speaks volumes. It must weaken the case of contesting the will.

I don’t know about now, but 30 year’s ago I knew someone who had been renting a place for probably about ten years (maybe more). His landlady lived next door (it was a large house and she converted a piece into the flat he lived in). They had a very good relationship (not fwb, she was elderly and he did her shopping or garden etc when she couldn’t manage).

When she passed away the family ordered his eviction, but it turned out he had some pretty robust rights (I don’t know what they were). I do know they had to pay him a settlement to vacate, which he used as a deposit to buy his own property.

It could have been down to the length of time he was there. He wasn’t a CF or anything, it was all legally above board. Anyway as I say this was mid 90s (can’t believe that makes it 30 year’s ago) but there was obviously some tenant rights. He had a rent book though, and this was probably an important factor. Does this guy have a paper trail of paying rent, if not I doubt he’ll have a case.

Just come across this - and I admit I have only read OPs posts.

What a situation. My OH friend had a similar situation - with is fathers gf after he died. They were only together like a year, and about 6months before he passed she and her kid (not the mans) moved in. He died quickly from Asbestosis. She laid claim to the house - and cos she had the kid she got it (despite the kid now being his!!). And the sons had to pay her legal costs. This was in Scotland.

Absolutely appalling.

Not necessary. I have a court order for possession but I just have to be careful so that I don't make things harder in the court case where he is trying to challenge her will.

Pre 1989 all tenancies were assured tenancies - so creating sitting tenants who could only be evicted for failure to pay rent. They were lucky to be able to get rid of him at all.

Anyway you don't have any control over the courts, don't worry, leave it to your lawyers and proceed with what is going on and that is that. If you don't want to deal with it, the man parts with a whole house for which repairs you might be legally obliged.

Who ever loses pays the other sides costs it could run into thousands

I don’t think he wanted to be deliberately bloody minded about it. He accepted a settlement which he used as a deposit to buy a small property. He was aware of his rights though.

Was it a Part 36 offer. It's important because it means he will become liable for your costs unless he is successful in getting over 8k in court.

Just chipping in to add my sympathy @Sleepneededprettyplease.

Not an exactly analagous situation but re bailiffs and your worry about them - my DH let out his parents' property for some years after they died, and had no trouble with tenants until the proverbial one from hell appeared. A court-ordered eviction was eventually the only resort and bailiffs were needed to get him out.

Yes, it was long-winded and time-consuming, but largely a matter of processes and DH didn’t need to be physically there. In the event the tenant did a moonlight flit the day before eviction was due (leaving the place in a terrible state and lots of furniture behind, plus the discovery by then that he was a serial offender, but that’s by the bye).

But just to reassure you, if it comes to that point, it’s really not that scary. Another one here rooting for you all the way.

Did he try and contest the possession proceedings, OP, or just ignore them?

Slightly off topic but a male relative of mine got divorced. His ex-wife got one of these "no win no fee" lawyers and they kept demanding more and more for spousal maintenance, settlement, etc. refused all his very offers, dragging stuff on and they pushed the whole thing to the court and barristers point. It was chucked out very quickly and she was awarded £1 a year spousal maintenance
She did tell a friend later that she felt, with hindsight, the solicitors pushed her further than she should have gone because they were focussed on the fees they would get if he conceded under the pressure.
Hopefully your case will go the same way

What do you mean he is defering court costs? If he loses who is going to pay their bills and what solicitors would take on someone like this?

Problem is he ends up claiming he has no money if he loses. And the solicitor loses as well. Unless he is trying to claim his costs against the Aunt's estate as he isnt just a random trying his luck.

OP has said a few times that she thinks this is some kind of a friend of a friend.

Some people have charisma to spin a hard luck story that overrides objective professional judgement!

No because he never paid any. Even the nominal amount he was meant to.