He now owns the house. Is there anything we can do?

[Toomuchgrief23]

MIL sadly passed away 6weeks ago.
She and my FIL separated over 30yrs ago, started divorce proceedings but recently realised they didn't have the decree absolute. FIL wanted to remarry and so was eager for the divorce to be finalised quickly so suggested 'sorting' the house at a later stage, and whilst there was lots of talk about this in recent years and solicitors appointed and paid, nothing seems to have been done.
We are now in the situation where he owns 100% of my MIL's home and is suggesting that it is split 3 ways between him, DH and SIL, however is very clear that final say will be his and this is not something he has to do. DH and SIL were happy enough with this arrangement
SIL wants to buy the house, but tonight FIL has said that it will be put on the market as he has an idea of a minimum amount he wants from the sale (more than 1/3 of valued price) and doesn't seem to care that the family want it to remain within the family due to sentimental reasons.

Is there anything that can be done in this scenario as legally FIL is the owner? If DH and SIL were to fight it in court is it likely to go anywhere?

Any advice would be much appreciated, we are all still grieving and this is the last thing we want to be dealing with at the moment.

well its not a side issue if the house should have been sorted out during the recent divorce and the FIL lied about it/no solicitor checked the marital house/what assets both parties had?

as this issue should have come to light then.

(i am assuming you can't keep a degree absolute in your pocket for 30 years and then just file it to finish the divorce process? some updating/re-checking would be needed at that point)

OP also said
DH thinks his mum mentioned that there was a financial order which mentions the house as part of the original divorce (only decree nisi received) but then this was not considered as part of the recent divorce as FIL said that there were no assets to be considered in the proceedings.

If an order was made at decree nisi stage 30 years ago that dealt with the house that needs to be found as it may well be binding eg if it directed a transfer to MIL notwithstanding that the transfer of legal title (at Land Registry) hadn't ever occurred.

If a decree absolute was just applied for recently now, and the financial order had been made 30 years ago then FIL was potentially correct in saying no financials to be dealt with at that time although the transfer still hasn’t been implemented.

OP I would look for court paperwork on the divorce and ascertain if there was an order made 30 years ago. That will be crucial.

You pretty much can as long as you file a statement that the parties have not reconciled and you explain reason for the delay to which “forgot about it” would have been acceptable.

but from the opening post (about the actual, recent divorce)

FIL wanted to remarry and so was eager for the divorce to be finalised quickly so suggested 'sorting' the house at a later stage, and whilst there was lots of talk about this in recent years and solicitors appointed and paid, nothing seems to have been done.

so they were aware the house was NOT sorted - and solicitors were paid - what did they do/what advice was given about the house.

as i'd expect very clearly written advice - IF YOU DO NOT SORT THE HOUSE, HE WILL HAVE IT ON YOUR DEATH.

In fact, a letter saying "we sever the joint tennancy" - would have taken 5 mins to write and send and would have at least protected 50% of the house.

so that advice seems crucial to find or raise with MIL's solicitor.

It’s interesting that everyone keeps saying severing the joint tenancy would have given the DC 50% to share but FIL is offering 66%.

I'd be very surprised if there was a financial order at the time the divorce started 30 years ago as the FIL doesn't sound like the sort of person who would have signed over the house in it's entirety without being bought out. It's a shame as a decent lawyer back then probably could have got MIL most of the equity or at least recommended to swap to tenants in common.

I think the FIL is pushing back a bit and asking for a higher share than a third as he now realises that his children would have only got 25% each if the house had been held as tenants in common.

yes

but thats because he is offering a share and then withdrawing that offer. best to know the minimum you can get legally so you know what your options are.

Its unclear if he wants more than 1/3 - OR that he thinks the house is actually worth (long term, after a bit of work) say £600k and so he'd get £200k but the current MV is say £500k so he wants to wait until his 1/3 his £200k.

or he may say - well sell NOW but i want £200k of the £500k (that i'd get if we wait) therefore i need 40% to sell now. (which may be reasonable if this 100% his and any money is a GIFT to the 2 kids.

@burnoutbabe whilst I think it is worth investigation what happened 30 years ago, as it stands legally FIL gets the whole house.

It’s not unreasonable for FIL to test the market. We all know valuations are not an exact science and can be under or over the final sales price. A property is only worth what someone is prepared to pay for it.

But grabby op; he’s been more than fair. And it’s fine to put it on the market to find its true value. The sister can then decide if she wishes to pay that or not.

I get that you're trying to find out what's what, and how the law operates but I'd be a bit careful about sighing and letting it go quiet, as now there is a new wife on the scene you only need FIL to fall under a bus and then the whole thing potentially belongs to her 😬

it sounded like the divorce/solictors etc were all very recent - to finalise the not actually done 30 year old divorce.

That part is worth pursuing - rather than what happened 30 years ago.

A different way of looking into this is that when they bought the house, presumably they paid a joint deposit, and you say he paid towards it for 5 years until they split up? So your DM had the benefit of his contribution for the remaining years rather than buying him out, which is what she should have done.

Not picking on you particularly but people keep posting this. OP clearly states that after offering a third share to each child, he then changed his mind saying he had a figure in mind that was greater than the third he'd originally agreed to accept for himself, that he wants this amount and will put it on the open market overpriced to see if he can get it that way. The implication being that if nobody pays his over inflated price for the house, the children will end up with less.

Perhaps his new wife heard his plans to split by thirds, asked if he's crazy and pointed out if that house was divided at divorce he'd have got half, telling him to take half now.

What a predicament. I hope they are able to keep the house in the family. Is their father utterly indifferent to those wishes on the part of his children?