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

@Manxexile not necessarily - a friend of mine had to defend a nonsense case from a prior business partner, said business partner having charmed a solicitor into advising her and writing various letters on her behalf. More because he felt sorry for her than because he felt she had a good case and therefore expected to get paid.

They met at a reunion thing.

No form on this. I think that he has done more in the getting good deals in divorce line previously. His ex-wives all seem to be more financially stable and earn more than him.

He has disclosed several years of bank statements from which you can see him spending his share of the money he got from his previous house (his ex bought him out). We are talking about 80k from memory.

Aunts friends from uni all know him. I know who his exes are including the affair partners and illegitimate children. None of his exes are dead so pretty sure he hasn't tried this before.

Will happily check but as I say I know a fair amount about him. His family had money previously and without being too outing I know he and his siblings got a LOT of money from the family home. Think in the millions for each child.

The house he is in didn't go through probate as it was already in my name. My Aunt's main house has completed probate and is being sold.

Officially he is after the money from the main house. Unofficially he wants the house I own.

I wanted to enforce this time but they were very strong that I shouldn't. Hopefully it doesn't get any longer. At this rate though I have no chance of getting it on the market before the market dips quieter over winter.

I don't understand it. In his financial statement it said something about the rest of the money he has he potentially owes to his solicitor. I have queried it.

Officially he is after the money from the main house.

Oh, I didn't realise that, I don't think you've mentioned that before.

In that case, I really can't understand why your solicitors are making such a meal of it.

I actually would be inclined to evict him and leave it for him to sue your aunt's estate if that is what he wants to do.

I think you've had poor legal advice, this is much simpler than you first described with him claiming that he has a right to live in your house.

He is an expert at selling the sob story so this is possibly the situation. I expect to many people he knows I am being painted as some vengeful, greedy woman ignoring her aunts clear wishes.

Trust me I am very aware. However they do at least try to get me some as well.

He was in a relationship that broke down. Lived with his partner who bought him out of the house after a while.

Yes she used it as a holiday home.

He acknowledged me as his landlord in writing which I have put in my evidence.

The mirror wills thing has made me think a bit. I mean hopefully never happen but I am aware of cases when one partner died and the other was intestate so it went to her family not his children.

Yes. I do think he is trying to stall and make things just take forever. Unfortunately that is all to easy with the legal system.

I am sure I have said this a few times. My lawyers talked about an early strike out proposal but then the burden of proof changes. Hence we are just letting it grind through slowly as the most likely way of getting what I need in the end.

Exactly this. We had a different but similar scenario. The barrister was worth her weight in gold but at the end of the day the CF ended up with a big chunk of money. Two thirds of which went into the lawyers pockets, which though awful, was a kind of sick 'win' in my mind. If he has even a thread of a chance, you'd be best going to mediation (I think they will insist anyway, the lawyers) and offer a payoff of some kind.

No, you said originally that he wanted to stay in the house and that's what his claim was about but now you say that unofficially he wants to stay in the house.

If he's made no official claim on the house, then evict him.

It is complicated I may not being clear in my explanations but I will give it my best try.

He wants to stay in the house. He has said this officially through his lawyer and unofficially to me.

The house however is not part of the estate so he cannot challenge the will for it as the will does not include it.

Therefore he is saying that the estate should support him for the rest of his life.

At the moment he has not stated what this should look like. He has made no suggestion other than he keeps the house and the estate pays for him in some unspecified way.

Hopefully that clears things up.

I have been advised not to chuck him out as it is possible that the court will take exception to me changing things before the hearing and say that the estate has to pay his rent.

I am willing to do mediation but he won't give up on the house. I offered money.

The trouble with many of the posts on this thread (including some of my own, no doubt!) is that they assume the other party is a rational actor.

Of course mediation or a settlement would be a good idea, of course he should never have been advised to go to court etc etc... But ultimately he is going to do whatever the hell he is going to do, because the alternative (where he has to leave the house he has an unreasonable belief to be 'his' for life) is more unbearable to him than a 'sensible' approach.

And if he dies with legal debts, I doubt he sees that as his problem.

The house however is not part of the estate so he cannot challenge the will for it as the will does not include it.

Yes, this is what we have all been telling you but you said that your lawyer told you he might have a claim on it when clearly he doesn't.

The aunt died and left nothing to him. She wasn't supporting him when she was alive. He is not a dependent, he has no claim on her estate.

Your house is nothing to do with any of that and you have a court order to evict him.

What actually is the court hearing in August about and why does it involve you?

I am sorry if I have phrased things badly at times. I am trying to respond to people but maybe I am not being 100% clear and accurate. All I can say is that this is way outside my area of expertise.

The lawyer doesn't say anything about a claim on the house. They said that if I evicted him he could possibly claim for living expenses until the case is settled.

They said it was better to leave him there than put a judges back up.

It is about if he can claim from the estate while the case is being decided.

This is still nothing to do with your house.

If it gets delayed again, chuck him out. This is not a capricious move - the one legal issue that has been resolved is that you are legally allowed to evict him. There is only so long the court can expect you to wait.

I'd chance it if I were you and also consider getting a second opinion.

"Possibly" - based on what you've written here, it seems unlikely.

Get a percentage likelihood off of them, but it can't be more than 30% and I think that's pushing it.

Oh it is unlikely. Absolutely.

That said when assessing risk the is a gains loss calculation. If I evict the gain is I can get the house on the market sooner although realistically the gain is I can start the process for bayliffs/high court enforcement officers sooner. The loss is the risk that I could put myself thousands of pounds out of pocket.

If I don't evict the gain is that I can look good to the court (respecting the process), there is no chance of really nasty bills, and I may be able to avoid paying for bailiffs if he accepts the courts decision. The loss is that I can't put the house on the market and realise the money. However even if I did sell the house the money will have to sit in an account until this is finished. So the loss is actually just annoyance to me.

This decision is pretty easy. I get people saying to evict him. I want him gone. I want the house gone. I want to remember a genuine, kind, loving woman who was closer and more supportive of me than my own mother without stressing about this situation. I so want this done.

I will not let emotions drive me though. I have to be sensible and level headed to play the long game. There is no place for emotions in legal cases.

OP, you seem confused about the legal advice you’ve received from your solicitor. Are they not confirming their advice to you in writing?

If you have a possession order you’ll be able enforce that if he fails to vacate the property by the date ordered. You simply instruct High Court enforcement officers to physically evict him.

As far as the claim on the estate goes, he is entitled to bring a claim under the Inheritance Act if he is either (1) an unmarried partner who lived with your aunt for at least 2 years prior to her death or (2) he was being financially maintained by your aunt (partially or fully) prior to her death. If she had provided rent free accommodation to him, then it is arguable that she was financially maintaining him.

It sounds like he’s issued a claim form. Has he served Particulars of Claim yet? You’ll need to file a Defence to the claim setting out why you say he is not entitled to any part of the estate. If he has no resources of his own to house himself, and your aunt was effectively supporting him, why do you say he is not entitled to reasonable provision from her estate?

Has your solicitor suggested making a Part 36 offer? In your shoes, unless I was absolutely certain that I’d win the case, I’d formally offer him a lump sum settlement of money. There are cost consequences for him if he fails to beat your offer at trial and so it will put him under pressure to agree a settlement. A negotiated settlement also removes the uncertainty of litigation and the ongoing legal fees.