Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

AIBU- Sister is angry i wont sell my share of the house!

190 replies

CollegeDoctor · 20/10/2021 00:43

DH and I are in great need of the hive mind. So last year due to issues with our father, we , my mother and brother and I. Purchased a home for my mother to live in. We asked dear sister to contribute, however she had'nt got the money at the time so could'nt. SO fast forward a year and a pandemic and the property value has increased by £40,000. Dsister came back and asked if she could purchase the house from us, i stupidly said yes and that she could do it at the price we bought at. (i really didnt think she would get all her ducks in a row)

Fast forward 2 months and she has and now wants to proceed to conveyancing. I know i was wrong to lead her on and promise, but i don't want to sell as the property is certain to continuing appreciating. What should i do ? What would you do?
Dsister is very angry that i have wasted her time.

OP posts:
redspook · 20/10/2021 09:50

The first question (as others have pointed out) is whether the mother and brother's interests are protected by a Declaration of Trust and restrictions on the title to the property. If so, OP cannot transfer the legal title to the house without their consent and all parties with a current interest need to agree.
If that is not the case, mother and brother need legal advice about protecting their shares.
Is sister planning to get a mortgage? That might be tricky if she isn't going to live there are and other parties have a share - if she has raised cash, the situation is simpler.
What do mother and brother think? Would they be happy for sister to buy a 25% share, with a (new) Declaration of Trust stating that OP and her DH hold the property on trust for everyone? The gain for the current owners could be within their annual CGT allowance, depending on other gains during the year.
In that scenario, it is not necessary to transfer the legal title.
If sister buys a 25% share at current market value, that's fair to all parties however that may not be what she wants.
A Declaration of Trust is essential here to set out who is responsible for outgoings and repairs, what happens if one party wants to sell their share etc. If there isn't one currently I would be very surprised, as the solicitor who dealt with the purchase should have ensured that this was the case.

Legitimatesalvage · 20/10/2021 09:50

@Bluntness100

A verbal agreement in this context is usually legally binding. I doubt she will do down th legal route of that though. Or would she?

Bottom line is it’s beyond a shitty thing to do. And to know she’s off getting her self sorted. When you had no intention of following through, you blatantly lied to her face.

Appalling.

Nope. People pull out of house sales all the time. You're not legally bound.

Also, a verbal agreement is as good as the paper it is written on. Non-existent.

TractorAndHeadphones · 20/10/2021 09:51

@Bluntness100

A verbal agreement in this context is usually legally binding. I doubt she will do down th legal route of that though. Or would she?

Bottom line is it’s beyond a shitty thing to do. And to know she’s off getting her self sorted. When you had no intention of following through, you blatantly lied to her face.

Appalling.

How can a verbal agreement be legally binding but gazumping be legal? Also if there were no other witnesses it’d be impossible to prove.
PinkWaferBiscuit · 20/10/2021 09:53

Also, a verbal agreement is as good as the paper it is written on. Non-existent.

Cool someone better tell the OPs mother and brother that because everything I'm reading and the OPs reluctance to answer questions suggests they only have a verbal contract that they own a third of the property...

titchy · 20/10/2021 09:53

So come on then, if you've been totally honourable, is the property that your mum and brother helped purchase in YOURS and YOUR HUSBANDS names?

Sorry OP you sound dodgy as fuck. Hmm

KayKayWat · 20/10/2021 10:00

Tough one.

You took the initial risk/fronted the capital, so it seems a bit rich for her to waltz in and take over now that it's appreciating - especially paying the originally and instantly making a large profit.

But on the other hand, you've given your word and I think the fact you have three properties in total means that your loss is much less than hers will be if you pull out, as she hasn't got a single foot on the ladder currently.

CSJobseeker · 20/10/2021 10:03

@KayKayWat

Tough one.

You took the initial risk/fronted the capital, so it seems a bit rich for her to waltz in and take over now that it's appreciating - especially paying the originally and instantly making a large profit.

But on the other hand, you've given your word and I think the fact you have three properties in total means that your loss is much less than hers will be if you pull out, as she hasn't got a single foot on the ladder currently.

Did the OP take the initial risk? The OP is legally the owner of the house, but the mum and brother stumped up a chunk of the cash.

I'd say the mum and brother were the ones who took a risk here, because the OP's word is worth the square root of bugger all.

turnabouttime · 20/10/2021 10:04

@madisonbridges

You thought it was ok to send your sister on a wild goose chase because it made you look good. And you thought it was OK to sell your share of the house to your sister unsure of whether she'd turf your mother out or not. And you think I'm being unreasonable?
Calm down. Too many assumptions in your attack
PinkWaferBiscuit · 20/10/2021 10:10

I'd say the mum and brother were the ones who took a risk here, because the OP's word is worth the square root of bugger all.

Exactly and at present it seems the OPs word is literally their only protection for a very large chunk of money.

LetHimHaveIt · 20/10/2021 10:10

Absolutely no assumptions made at all. OP herself has said 'I thought i would look like the good sister offering to sell but known she might not come up with the funds' and 'i don't think she would turf her out'. So @madisonbridgesnwas absolutely correct in her 'attack' - OP did think she'd make herself looks good, and wasn't certain her sister wouldn't try and turf her mother out.

Calm down, indeed. How supercilious.

KayKayWat · 20/10/2021 10:10

Did the OP take the initial risk? The OP is legally the owner of the house, but the mum and brother stumped up a chunk of the cash.

Compared to her sister she did. House could've depreciated in which case sister mightn't have been interested.

CSJobseeker · 20/10/2021 10:13

It's all there in OP's posts. The one thing that the OP has been conspicuously silent on is the legal protection that her mum and brother have in relation to their 'share' of the property. Because it's non-existent

PinkWaferBiscuit · 20/10/2021 10:14

Compared to her sister she did. House could've depreciated in which case sister mightn't have been interested.

Presumably if the sister had taken the opportunity at the same time as her mum and brother she too wouldn't be on the deeds. Sounds like she had a lucky escape at the time.

Whether or not the house depreciates the fact remains only the OP and her husband actually own it so they are the ones taking the least risk as they have something tangible to show for their investment.

CSJobseeker · 20/10/2021 10:16

@KayKayWat

Did the OP take the initial risk? The OP is legally the owner of the house, but the mum and brother stumped up a chunk of the cash.

Compared to her sister she did. House could've depreciated in which case sister mightn't have been interested.

Even if the house depreciated, OP would only be taking a risk if it fell below the value that SHE put into the house (i.e. the original price, less what her mum and brother put in).

She didn't pay full price, but her and her DH are the only owners on the deeds. If I bought a house valued at £200k, but I only actually have to pay £100k for it because I get generous donors to stump up the rest, my capital would only be at risk if the value fell below £100k.

CSJobseeker · 20/10/2021 10:16

Presumably if the sister had taken the opportunity at the same time as her mum and brother she too wouldn't be on the deeds. Sounds like she had a lucky escape at the time.

Yes, she's better off out of it.

Kiduknot · 20/10/2021 10:20

It might be an option to let her buy into 1/4 if it’s a family investment. But you need to get the agreement of the others.

KaycePollard · 20/10/2021 10:20

Your mother and brother have no protection in this scheme. Selling the house to your sister makes the situation even more precarious. Rather than worry about disappointing her, I would worry about your mother and brother losing their investment. Protecting that needs to be your priority.

This.

It seems clear your sister wants to make a fast pound or two.

No-one can force you to sell in the circumstances you describe. But you need to sort out the security of tenure for your mother.

Bluntness100 · 20/10/2021 10:23

House purchasing is a different process. The law is quite clear though.

www.glaisyers.com/does-a-verbal-contract-hold-up-in-court/

Bluntness100 · 20/10/2021 10:25

I think the reason it’s different for house purchasing is this

An offer: One of the parties needs to have promised to enter into a contract on the basis of set terms that are specific, complete and capable of being accepted.
An acceptance of that offer: Acceptance must be made unequivocally, meaning the contract is not subject to further negotiations.

Offers to buy a house are subject to survey and contract, it’s very different.

itsallgoingpearshaped · 20/10/2021 10:28

So she refused to throw in when the property was purchased originally, saw that it was a good investment and she was 'missing out', and now wants to replace you in the good investment?

Nope.

CollegeDoctor86 · 20/10/2021 10:36

Oh ok more comments.!

To answer but a few of the questions.

  1. the property is in DH and my name
  2. prior to this error of judgement on my part, my word was my bond and a contract was drawn up stipulating the amount each individual put in and their share.
  1. i genuinely couldn't bring myself to let my sister down and that is what led us on this path. I should have just said no, instead of letting her chase after a moving goal post.
  1. I aim to put everything right. Family is important to me and i want to make everything right.
  1. i can absorb the financial hit and hopefully move on and not do business or property with family again.
Bluntness100 · 20/10/2021 10:38

@itsallgoingpearshaped

So she refused to throw in when the property was purchased originally, saw that it was a good investment and she was 'missing out', and now wants to replace you in the good investment?

Nope.

You’re missing the point, besides the fact she did want in but couldn’t afford it initially the point is she asked the op if she’d sell it to her, the op not only agreed, she even agreed the price, and the op had no intention of ever selling it to her. That’s the issue. Now the sister is sorted and ready to proceed the op has basically had to lie again and say she changed her mind, and the sister is rightfully angry.

The op should never have lied in the first place and led her sister on.

knittingaddict · 20/10/2021 10:38

1. the property is in DH and my name

Why?

Other family members paid towards this house. How are they protected?

DumbestBlonde · 20/10/2021 10:40

I am sure something like this happened on Real Housewives of Beverly Hills (Kim and Kyle & Mauricio). It did not go well.

CSJobseeker · 20/10/2021 10:52

2. prior to this error of judgement on my part, my word was my bond and a contract was drawn up stipulating the amount each individual put in and their share.

Sorry, what?

Either a) your word was your bond, or b) you had a proper contract in place. They aren't the same thing.

And if this is all set up legitimately, why did you not consult your mum and brother about the sale? You may have a contract of some form with them, but your sister doesn't.

Swipe left for the next trending thread