Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Legal matters

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.

Can brother in law force us to sell?

258 replies

teaandbuns · 02/06/2019 11:51

This is long and complicated... apologies in advance, and thanks for reading.

My OH and I bought a house with my mother in law. We paid the mortgage, all bills, looked after everything including her. She provided the deposit through the sale of her own house. Her name was not on the deeds.

Four years on, MIL died. It happened rather suddenly, in late 2017. OH has one brother, resident in the US for donkey's years. They have never been close.

BIL wants his inheritance, which is mostly the proceeds from the sale of their mother's house, and is therefore tied up in our home. She owned about a 36 percent share of the place so we owe him about 18 percent of the total current value. There is no legal paperwork covering any of this (we did consult a solicitor before MIL died but he was making it all so convoluted there wouldn't have been anything left once his fees had been paid) but we are quite clear that we owe BIL that percentage and I don't think there's any argument on that front.

The problem is timing. BIL is well off (owns properties in New York), and as Brexit is obviously knocking the UK economy and house prices, we suggested waiting for things to improve before selling (he would of course benefit from any price improvement). He seemed OK with this at first but has since changed his mind.

We put the house on the market in March, as soon as we realised he didn't in fact want to wait. Things rapidly turned nasty (he doesn't believe we're really trying to sell and keeps suggesting we're up to all sorts, including having forced his mum to sign secret documents in our favour (not the case!)). We remortgaged as much as we could and released £60k, which we offered to give him while we try to raise the rest, but for some reason he refused that. (We owe him about £175k in total.)

He is demanding to be kept in the loop with the estate agents, to know about all viewings etc.

We are at our wits' end. We've never tried to lie or cheat. In fact we worked our bums off getting the house in perfect order for sale. There have been no proceedable offers, and all we're getting is demands to know when he'll be paid. I could of course show him all the emails I exchange with the agents but who is he - who stood back and watched me change his mother's colostomy bag when he visited while she was sick - to decide I can't be trusted and need to prove myself to him? It's bad enough having an unwanted house move hanging over you, plus the worry about where you'll go, without having this man barking demands and accusations from across the pond. You might wonder why if we have nothing to hide we don't just show him the correspondence - but I don't think it would end there. Judging by his behaviour so far, he'd be all over the agents, trying to get the price dropped and running the sale from afar.

We don't have much equity - the house needed a lot of work and we probably paid too much for it - and of course if we do manage to sell we will have to pay stamp duty and moving costs so we'll be limping off with not a lot to show for the last few years.

On top of that we'll be putting our eight-year-old daughter through a house move not long after she lost her live-in grandma - a major bereavement for her as she can't remember a time when they didn't live together and they were very close.

We put the house straight up for sale and have done our best. But all we've had in return is bullying, and it's making us feel like taking the house off the market.

My question is, do we actually HAVE to sell the house right now? The split is roughly 1/5 ownership to BIL vs 4/5 to us, so do we really have to do what he says and be bullied into selling at a terrible time? Even if we sell at the full asking price (which we won't) we'll be losing out a lot. Can he force us to accept a low offer or drop the price until someone eventually buys? What's the state of play?

At the moment we're jumping when BIL says jump - but is that right?

The estate is currently with a different solicitor who is looking after applying for probate, but she represents the estate (and both brothers are executors) so she wouldn't be able to act for us.

We have obviously reached a stage where we do need legal advice and will start looking for another solicitor on Monday. Meanwhile I wondered if anyone could offer their thoughts as I feel like I've read the whole internet and can't find anyone who's in the same situation as us!

Thank you.

OP posts:
IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 05/06/2019 12:51

You really do need to see a good solicitor. I don't believe his 18% should give him greater say over the house than your majority share and I think him turning down your offer of 70k upfront will not work in his favour since a court can see you are trying to resolve this. But the sooner you get proper legal help the better.

RandomMess · 05/06/2019 12:51

I really don't think he would be able to take you to court and force the sale before Nov 2020 if he goes ahead self rep anyway and let him waste his money!!!!

He really does sound despicable.

Parents were told they'd need to pay for a barrister etc so it just isn't worth it however upsetting it is that the current occupant stole the savings (dementia of the deceased) and pushed by greedy relatives refused to move into entirely more suitable accommodation where they would be better looked after.

4legsandawaggytail · 05/06/2019 13:14

@teaandbuns What Jaxhog said is a very valid point.
If her name was not on the deeds then legally do you actually owe him anything? You can't give away someone else's property.

"This is the point really. You (and he) may feel you morally owe him something, but he has no legal claim. Don't sell up until YOU want to. Then, by all means give him a share if you still feel you want to."

I would add why would you want to, he's being an arse.

If you do, take into consideration all the cost involved including the fact that a care home would have cost around £1000 a week and you took on that role. Include the house improvements which increased the value of the house and the legal fee.

prh47bridge · 05/06/2019 13:17

but who does OP have to acknowledge that to in order for it to be legally binding

Try looking up "resulting trusts" and "constructive trusts". In essence, as MIL contributed towards the purchase of the property she has acquired an interest in that proportion of the property. If the OP wanted to deny that (which she doesn't), she would have to show that MIL's contribution was intended as a gift or a loan.

If her name was not on the deeds then legally do you actually owe him anything

Please see the contributions from Collaborate on this thread. On the information posted here the OP does legally owe him 36% of the value of the property.

eddielizzard · 05/06/2019 13:22

Jeez I really don't like your BIL. What an absolute tosser. Utter arsehole. Happy for you to care for his mum until the end, and those words absolutely do not convey the deep emotional and physical strain of doing that. Then to quite happily see you out of your house, I have no words really. Well, I do. And none of them are complementary.

mummmy2017 · 05/06/2019 13:27

You need to see what you can claim back for your MIL living with you rent and bill free..

Because it now seems she leant you the money. Which you have to pay back....
Is the document actually legal . Ask the solicitor...
Your MIL does not own part of your home..
You just owe the share of Loan to BIL... So no he can't make you sell..
What he can do is sue you for the money you owe him.

You don't need to put the house up for sale till he takes you to court....

ChicCroissant · 05/06/2019 13:32

This has been posted before. I can see the BIL's point, he's waited over a year already and I can see that you have put the house on the market now and are not proposing to give him a pile of bricks instead (was that you?)

I agree that you need proper legal advice but I don't think the lack of a timescale written in to the will is going to help you. Best of luck with it, OP.

prh47bridge · 05/06/2019 14:09

You need to see what you can claim back for your MIL living with you rent and bill free

Nothing.

Because it now seems she leant you the money. Which you have to pay back

I don't know where you get that from. The OP says it was an investment in the house to be repayable after her death. That is not a loan.

Is the document actually legal

It doesn't have to be a legal contract. It is evidence of intention, which is enough to create a trust.

Your MIL does not own part of your home

Yes she does - or at least, she did until she died. Her share became part of her estate and half of her share now belongs to BIL.

There has been good advice on this thread from lawyers. Why do people who don't know the law continue to pile on with "advice" that is incorrect? In what way is that helping the OP?

teaandbuns · 05/06/2019 15:12

prh47bridge, you make a lot of sense. And you're confirming what we've believed since the beginning really.

Like I've said, it's just about timing really. Whether he can force the sale now, or whether he can force us to drop the price. Our daughter has been through enough (frankly, so have I, and so has DH) recently without having to move house as well.

I'm talking to a contentious probate lawyer in the morning.

OP posts:
IWannaSeeHowItEnds · 05/06/2019 15:23

TBF the OP isn't entirely clear. On the one hand she said there was no letter from mil stating whether this money was a loan, then says she and DH wrote a letter outlining mils share. Maybe when mil put in her will about her share of dh's house, maybe she just meant the initial money given was to be split.
I don't think mil intended for her son to have to sell his home (at potentially less than the full value) in order that his brother can claim his 18%. Seems harsh and unfair.

TeacupDrama · 05/06/2019 15:40

you maybe able to reduce the 175K ever so slightly
say the house cost 1 million ( just to make number easy) MIL owns 360K of that and hence BIL now owns 180K
however if house is now worth 1.1million how much of the 100K increase is because of rising prices and how much due to improvenents, if 50K can be reasonably attributed to improvements then the BIL is only entiled to 18% of 50K rather than 100K ie 189K instead of 198K so just a difference of 9K so not a lot in the grand scheme
also the costs of selling need to come out of the 36% share that was MIL before the remainder is shared between your DH and BIL
if it is being marketed at a reasonable figure I don't think there is much BIL can do if however it is priced so it doesn't sell then maybe he can, but if it is advertised at a decent price and has only been on market a couple of months he won't be able to do anything yet
however i'm no legal expert

mummmy2017 · 05/06/2019 18:20

Until the OP mentioned it there was no paperwork .
The MIL is not on the deed....Therefore she did not own the house legally...
The money is invested in the house, but is it a gift, a loan or an investment?
If investment then all the expenses of the house till MIL should have been shared and the mortgage expenses until the house is sold...
If it was an interest free loan.... Then only the Loan amount is repayable, but it if there is no proper legal documents, then it might legally be classed as a gift....both parties should have signed.
It is possible to claim for living expenses, from an estate,. As OP kept her MIL for free and so it cost to keep her.

Having done three different wills and estates in last 4 years, this things do happen..... And can be claimed....

Collaborate · 05/06/2019 18:27

@mummmy2017 If you read OP's posts on this thread you will see that there is in fact paperwork. It is from OP and her husband to acknowledge the MIL had an interest in the property.

Given the interest of MIL has already been acknowledged I/m astounded that some are still trying to claim otherwise.

mummmy2017 · 05/06/2019 18:37

The written paper has only recently been mentioned....
I am saying the OP needs to confirm the legal position ... Which means different things..

A gift...
An investment then in which case then there may be expenses which can be claimed.

Or was it simply an interest free loan?....
If it was a loan then the increase in the house is disregarded.

Collaborate · 05/06/2019 19:12

No. You're wrong in your understanding of the law.

The question is, what was agreed between the MIL on one hand, and OP and her husband on the other, at the time that the investment was made, OP has already confirmed that MIL was to preserve an interest. She said that in her very first post 3 days ago :

She owned about a 36 percent share of the place so we owe him about 18 percent of the total current value. ... we are quite clear that we owe BIL that percentage and I don't think there's any argument on that front.

Also on Sunday OP stated that her and her husband even drew up a will for MIL, and I am sure it mentioned her interest in the house.

To what extent do you consider that a will drawn up by OP and her H in which they attempted to bequeath MIL's interest in their home is not fantastic evidence that she actually possessed that interest?

Also on Sunday at 14:11 OP wrote:
we have put in writing many times that her share of the house is 36% and that he will be owed half that after her death. There was also a will (albeit seemingly invalid, and albeit drafted by me and OH as nobody else seemed to think it mattered) that states that she wanted him to have half. Not exactly only just been mentioned.

Yesterday at 17:37 OP posted that:

it is mentioned in her will as 'my share of DS1s house. Remember this is the actual draft will that OP and her H drew up.

Further clarity today at 12:44
We do have papers proving that it was intended as an investment in the house that would be paid back after her death. There's a document written by me and OH outlining the percentage arrangement. It was provided to BIL before he turned nasty and is also with the solicitor looking after probate.

So OP has confirmed the legal position. Everyone just needs to RTFT.

OP's question is about what BIL can do to force a sale.

He'd have to apply to court for an order for sale under the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act. The first problem he has is that it is the duty of the executors to make this application. OP's H is an executor. There may have to be an action to remove OP's H as an executor for failing to administer the estate properly - this would be very hard for BIL to prove if the advice of the estate agent is being followed.

The second problem he has is that the court can only order that the property be placed on the market for sale at a certain asking price, and then manage that process if there is any dispute. If OP follows the advice of the estate agent I am sure that BIL would be strongly advised by any lawyer that he could achieve nothing more by applying to court, and would most likely see his application dismissed with costs. To be honest I'm not sure that he'd get anywhere in the dispute between the two executors, which is a hurdle he'd have to overcome before anything else.

Tinkobell · 05/06/2019 19:45

I thought the normal route with getting a price for a property for claims to an estate or calculation of probate was to obtain x 3 valuations and take the average.
There's a lot of talk on this thread about somehow shrugging off the brothers claim since MILs name does not appear on the deed. However, it is morally wrong. This house is worth nearly £1M. The OP just needs to sell up, get a smaller home (which I'm sure will be just fine for 3 people) and give the man his inheritance FFS! Nevermind, ducking and diving, just pay the bloody charmless guy his inheritance. If the MIL hadn't wanted him to get a penny, she'd have written him off her will, be she didn't. And that's just tough. The OP and her partner MUST have a reasonable income otherwise they wouldn't have been able to secure a large mortgage on a high value home from a lender in the first place.
Send the BIL the estate agents particulars for the house and tell him no more comms until the place has exchanged contract of sale. Completion normally 4 weeks after. He will just have to bloody wait. But don't try and dodge giving someone their inheritance.

Collaborate · 05/06/2019 20:03

@Tinkobell You don't just need to RTFT but read the first post in it. OP is not denying BIL his share. BIL is upset the property isn't selling fast enough and OP sought advice over that.

Anyway, this is Legal and not AIBU (these days it can be hard to tell the difference).

Halo84 · 05/06/2019 20:17

Collaborate, there are HL cases which have held opposite to your post. I would hazard a guess your barrister was aware of those cases as well.

At the end of the day, facts matter. That is why OP should see a lawyer and take all the paperwork, including everything related to the estate, with her.

TanMateix · 05/06/2019 21:12

Collaborate is a very respected law professional in Mumsnet, she has kindly provided plenty of legal advice for years.

Collaborate · 05/06/2019 21:20

@Halo84 Please post links.

mummmy2017 · 05/06/2019 22:16

Can I ask, there must be other assets of the estate,. Would there not be enought to give brother more?.

Halo84 · 06/06/2019 00:11

I’m not going to cite all the cases. But, I suggest you read the obiter re indirect contributions in Stack v Dowden.

If decisions were so cut and dried, a huge number of litigators would have no livelihood.

Collaborate · 06/06/2019 00:36

Stack v Dowden has nothing to do with my opinion in OP's case. I have said nothing about indirect contributions. MIL made direct contribution. Can't you see that?

The thing people have been questioning, which is not what OP came on here to ask, was whether or not MIL ever had an equitable interest. The intention of the parties is the crucial thing here. Give me a SC decision that refutes what I've said and I'll gladly listen. But I don't think you can.

Collaborate · 06/06/2019 00:39

And this is the only reference in Stack v Dowden to indirect contributions.

I think that indirect contributions, such as making improvements which added significant value to the property, or a complete pooling of resources in both time and money so that it did not matter who paid for what during their relationship, ought to be taken into account as well as financial contributions made directly towards the purchase of the property.

Do please explain how that could possibly be contrary to what I have said.

Halo84 · 06/06/2019 00:54

Indirect contributions have been made by OP-mortgage payments, taxes (I assume), improvements.

Swipe left for the next trending thread