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 totally agree with @madaboutpurple . This actually occurred to me yesterday too. Is it not worth contacting someone like Rip Off Britain just to see what they say?

I think there are many other scenarios that people would reach for first here, apart from the one you mention: comfortable entitled middle class woman trying to chuck out poor elderly man.

People are well aware of how misogynists ply their trade, even elderly ones, and that is what exactly is happening here.

This is also very topical because of the changes coming to the rights of cohabitees....see how far this could go, if the law isn't tightened - protection for house guests!

What I really don't understand is why the onus is on the OP to get him out by proving he has no right to be there, and pay the associated costs, rather than her being able to just lock him out then the onus and costs be on him to prove he should be allowed back in? Why is OP facing costs of potentially £100k and he isn't? Especially as he apparently has no money? It's all so clearly unfair to OP. There's no way she should have to capitulate due to lack of funds when he can therefore 'win' by default.

@Easilyforgotten because he isn’t in contest with OP, he is in contest with the estate. It happens that the place he is currently living has OP’s name on the deeds, but because of the relative recency of the gift of this house to OP from the aunt, it’s not entirely separate from the estate.

As the judge considers him in some way to be a dependent of the estate, he also has a claim
for legal costs against the estate

A parallel would be if a man had a son and a daughter and the DD had extra needs and lived at home but the man left his estate all to his son. The DD would be likely to be deemed a dependent and have a claim on the estate regardless of the will.

Because FWB is elderly, has limited financial means, nowhere else to live and has overepresented his relationship with the aunt, the judge has considered him to be a dependent.

That’s my understanding anyway!

But he's not related like in your example. He's just a random guy. That should make all the difference and I don't understand why it doesn't. I also think as he as 5 children, it's hardly the case that he has nowhere else to live - he's got no shortage of his own family to sponge off. What I'd be worried about now is him doing something even more CF loopy like leaving the house to his DC in his will and them continuing with the madness. Wouldn't put anything past him.

Have you spoken to Land Registry about putting a warning marker on the property?
Im concerned that either he or his relatives may try and get loans secured on it.
(I've had a marker on my land registry record because I've been victim of a scam).

@pinkdelight I disagree with the judge but that’s what I understand the reasoning to be. I agree mine is not a perfect parallel.

The dependency would die with the dependent so he could not will the house or other assets to anyone.

Popping in to wish you luck with your IVF procedure.

@SheilaFentiman Thank you for that, but I still don't understand why the OP's estate should be expected to house this random person. Why is he deemed to be a dependent of 2 completely unrelated people when he has other family? I obviously don't expect you to understand the Judges reasoning but it is all so wrong.

He would be facing similar costs to push this to full trial. I don't know how he is paying his legal bills at the moment. I cannot recoup my costs even if I win because he has no money to pay.

My sister would also be facing big costs because he has named her in the case.

He's not a dependant of the OP and her sister. He's claiming to be a dependant of the aunt because he was in a relationship with her and she (according to him) asked him to stay in her house. He's challenging the aunt's will because it did not make any provision for him. There are limited grounds for challenging a will but being a financial dependant is one.

I will try talking to them. See what they say.

Yes that is the concept. It's just that he is exaggerating and claiming things last min so we didn't have time to counter.

I sympathize with you completely, Interestingly, I'm in a similar yet very different situation, it involves my esDH and our marital home. I won't go into details, it'd be a novel. Like you, I've explored the legal costs and 'maneuvers' needed to get him out so the house can be sold and, also like you, have discovered the costs are exorbitant. We're both retired and he's a raging alcoholic. For me, I'm better off financially just 'waiting him out' until he dies.

I'm in the US and my state's laws are very different to the UK's as far as removing someone from a home, even the marital home and would involve multiple court cases running into 5 figures each.

Neither would I which is why this need trying up extremely tightly if he does stay there.

I put that on when he first moved in. I didn't trust him then. I just didn't realise how bad it could get.

Thank you. I will update as things go.

They are not your costs though? They are the estate costs?

I’d start legal proceedings. Find someone cheaper to take it to court just to get case heard. Evict him so you can at least sell your house. (Unless case can be heard in a year).
if it costs £50k to the estate well so be it. You get 50% of £50k less of the estate in the end . But you can move on with life without this man in it.

This.

He is claiming that they cohabited. She spent about 2 or 3 months of the year there overall. Not in one chunk.

He also claims that she made him dependent on her for housing so he has a right to that being continued. This rests on the idea she still had a say in the house. She kinda did, it was mostly her holiday home. I just don't agree that giving someone a temporary place to stay is the same as giving them rights over your estate.

He also claims she promised him he could stay there. This I do not believe at all. There is no way she would do so without talking to me.

They are estate costs but it could end up costing more than the house is worth. Also I can't use estate money until it is settled.

I can't just cut the bill by using someone cheaper or not to that extent. Barristers for something like this are very expensive. Because my sister would need defence as well it could easily run to 150k or 200k. Add that to the amount already spent and it is more than the house is worth. Then I have another year of stress for what? One judge has been a misogynistic idiot what if I get another one?

It really sticks in my throat to settle but I am scared not to.

Selfishly I want this over. I want to move on.

So sorry to hear this. It is crap. If you ever want to talk then DM me.

I know a lot of people here say to fight and on one level I really want to. The cost however and my sensible head tell me that this is one battle where winning would end up a pyrrhic victory.

Not selfish at all to want this over OP ❤️

Has anyone else clocked that long-running thread where the OP got battered for saying that she wouldn't be letting relatives stay for free in her holiday home, as a matter of course? It's been a complete pile on, for the most part, with posters saying of course if THEY had a holiday home friends and family would be more than welcome to stay whenever etc.

I won't be doing this, but someone should point them to this thread and what might happen when doing someone a favour goes wrong.

Thanks! I may take you up on that!

I agree as far as a pyrrhic victory. There are some times when doing something 'for the principle of the thing' just isn't sensible when you don't have the money to continue what may be a useless effort.

And I'm not criticizing other posters exactly, but it's very easy for them to encourage you to fight on when it's not their money being spent. I've faced that in my situation. Funny though, none of those who are encouraging me to 'fight on' are willing to pony up any money 'on a contingency basis' lol.

All we can do is gather legal knowledge from solicitors/attorneys as to costs and possible success and weigh that up against the money we have and decide if we think it's worth the expense. If it is, we fight on. If it is not, we make the best of it we can. Because winning may not be everything, but losing certainly is if you don't have money to burn.

I am sending thoughts that he pops his clogs as soon as possible. This is so terrible for OP.