"You latched on to me and think you're more than you are"

[PigmyAcne]

That is what my lovely dp has just said to me. All because I asked if we could try and get. "Our" house in both our names as I'm contributing to it every month yet only his name is on the mortgage/deeds.

So yeah ... I apparently latched onto him and think I'm more than I am as a result.

Never felt so shit in all my life.

Captain - morally entitled? Yes. Legally entitled? No.

The laws of equity are basically about moral entitlement.

I'm sorry but it is impossible for anyone on here to say categorically that she has no legal rights here because it is all fact sensitive. There may have been representations he made or actions she took that may give rise to equitable claims.

No one here can give you definite legal advice. It is possible that you may have some kind of claim and you should see a solicitor even just for peace of mind.

Anyway - the law changes because people test it. Google the cases of Eves v Eves and Gissing v Gissing (not relevant here factually) but you'll see the marvelous things that equity can do by way of constructive trust. All I'm saying is that the Defendants in both of those cases would have been given legal advice one way and had a bit of a shock in the Court of Appeal.

I know there may not be any legal entitlement, I thought the OP had said he'd offered to 'buy her out' or something. Sorry if I misread.

And I've just realised that was addressed to a different Captain I think I need to namechange again

Hi Pigmy. Was on your other thread yesterday. You know this can't continue. He has no respect for you. As I said before, if he is like this now, what would he be like if you ever had children with him? Walking away may leave you with nothing financially, but you will be a wiser woman with an open future beckoning.

Lol, sorry CaptainA!

Ask him if he will buy you out, to the amount of your deposit. If he won't, stop paying rent until you have recouped that amount. And look for somewhere else to live. He doesn't sound like the sort of person you would want to become more dependent on or attached to through children.

I can't get this whole thread to load so not sure if any other lawyers have weighed in already. I'm not a property rights specialist but am quite certain that English common law has recognised certain situations in which regular contributions towards mortgage payments -on a mutual understanding that this was creating shared (not necessarily equal value) rights in the property- led to a constructive trust and was construed as such by the court. Why? Because, as in this case, there was a common intention of shared ownership upon which the OP relied to her detriment. Some PPs who talked about OP only having lodger's rights or not understanding why OP should go to a solicitor are, frankly, talking bollocks. OP, definitely see a lawyer asap. Good luck.

Pigmy is entitled to more than the original 2K she has put in: at my reckoning, it is the 2K + the interest for the time that this has been invested; the ongoing contributions to the mortgage + the interest, as well as the maintenance, decoration and whatever the 'etc' is in this case (+/- interest). As another poster said, this is an investment, and as an investor, that is what I would be looking to get back from this twat. If you had put this money into a high interest account, you would be expecting the initial investment + whatever interest accrued in that time period.

Except she's not on any paperwork. Even her £2000 towards the deposit has a legal status of gift.....

And the 2000 towards original deposit does NOT have legal status of a gift. Facepalm. OP, get off Mumsnet and go see a solicitor. Seriously.

What Finola said.

Let this thread be a lesson to all women who sleepwalk, or not, into living with an unmarried partner with no legal protection.

You may love him, but love you more.

Walk away when a person won't marry or see a solicitor for legal rights, that's not a partnership.

Nor is 50/50 unless you are both earning equally. That is a flatmate, not a partner.

Burnama - lawyer or not - what What 'English Common Law' rights exactly do you think the OP has?

She's lived with the bloke for only two years and put in two grand initially - nothing on paper - all voluntary. She's not on the mortgage, she's not married to the bloke, she doesn't have any kids by him. All she's got is him supposedly telling her it's 'our house' ..... right up until she asks to be put on the mortgage and he basically tells her to fuck off.

It would cost her two grand in bloody legal fees to try and get back the two grand she paid in!

I lived with mine for 11 years, had two kids by him, worked the whole time I lived there in a joint business and put thousands into property renovations, despite which all I would have been entitled to, had I chosen to fight it, would have been half of any increased equity - and in order to get that I would have to prove how I had contributed to that increase - every receipt, bill, payment etc.

So I'm fascinated to hear how 'English Common Law' is going to help the OP but couldn't help me and thousands more like me?

Thanks for the advice everyone. He paid me the initial £2k rather than doing a deed of trust.

Now, last night all I said was " when the mortgage is up for renewal can we try and get it in both names?" At that point he went nuts, kept telling me he's worked hard for years to enable him to buy a house and I think I can just turn up on a shit wage and have the same. That's when the "latching on" comment came in and a "you think you're minted and you're not".

It's ok, in his divorce papers he was down as constantly telling his ex that she was lucky he kept a roof over her head and clothes on her back etc so the Bastard hasn't changed.

I never wanted half of the house, I just want my contributions to be recognised (not just the deposit but everything since) and I want some legal rights. He either doesn't understand this or doesn't give a shit. I think the latter.

Time to move on. The more I get to know him the more I dislike him. I'll rent and buy my own little castle when the time is right. Rather that then live with someone with delusions of grandeur.

Fontella - sorry to hear that in your case things didn't work out. I am a lawyer but not a property rights specialist, as mentioned. However I did study land and trusts law during my degree. My advice to the OP stands and what I mentioned above is pretty basic co-habitation/constructive trust law and IMO it is worth it for the OP to seek further advice on the facts of her case. Whether she chooses to do so is her call. Also not clear on your use of "" around English common law. That is a pretty standard phrase. It means law that is administered by the courts according to earlier case law precedent - as opposed to statutes/ Acts of Parliament. By using the phrase "common law" I meant to show that there have been plenty of judgements in favour of co-habiting unmarried partners who contributed in a material way to household payments, etc. and relied to their detriment on false assurances.

Pigmy he sounds very bitter....you are so better out of it....

Good luck

So I'm fascinated to hear how 'English Common Law' is going to help the OP but couldn't help me and thousands more like me?

It's not common law; it's equity!!!

As I said above, google Eves v Eves and Gissing v Gissing to see examples of equity in action. It all depends on the facts of the case.

I wish people would stop saying categorically OP has no rights. We just don't know; we don't and can't have the full facts & never would do here. It's like trying to diagnose a medical condition over the internet. You could make "a best guess" but you may be way off track.

Solicitors need the whole history - for example emails, her detailed account of conversations/misrepresentations; what she did; whether she relied on his representations; what she paid; where it was paid to etc etc.

OP should see a solicitor. Even if the end point is just, this is how you go about recovering your £2k + interest, it is better she takes proper legal advice.

Not exactly Burmana - you told us we were 'talking bollocks'.

You were the one who referred to 'English Common Law' and that's why I put the quotes around it.

My experience and the experience of plenty like me is that 'English Common Law' can do fuck all for people in our position unless we are able to prove through protracted legal process how we have contributed - with detailed example - dates, payments, receipts and so on, why we are deserving of a share of the increased equity - and that's all it will be a share of - the increase in value of a property during the time we have been living in it and contributing to it.

There may well be 'cases where there have been judgements in favour of co-habiting unmarried partners', but I bet there are many thousands more where they got sweet F.A. and thousands more still where they didn't even attempt a legal challenge because the chances of winning were so remote.

Since the OP's most recent post, I'm not clear whether or not she actually got her two grand deposit back or not, but if he has paid that back to her, then she's got even less chance of winning any kind of legal case against him. She would just be seeking recompense for her contribution to the property in the two years she's been living in it.

She wanted her contributions to be recognised by having her name added to the mortgage and he's told her 'no'. What's a solicitor going to do for her exactly? Force him to add her name or force him to pay her something for the two years' she's lived there?

OP, sounds like you've made a good decision. You haven't mentioned if you have DCs, i assume not.

Take your £2 and use it as deposit on a rental, and between now and then, pay nothing towards the house. Cancel any standing orders /direct debits etc. Is your name on any of the bills or just his? Then they are his bills, his debts.

Just leave, men like that are just too terrified of being ripped off to be able to be loving when push comes to shove. They might want to have a relationship, but just aren't able to commit to taking a risk. You can't have a risk free relationship.

What's a solicitor going to do for her exactly? Force him to add her name or force him to pay her something for the two years' she's lived there?

Er....advise her as to her legal options.

That maybe just about recovery of £2k, maybe a claim on the equity in the house, maybe an argument about a constructive trust.

This is almost the same as someone saying "I've got a small brown lump on my arm" and everyone piling in going "it's just a mole don't worry" or "it's definitely cancer". Fact is no one here can know.

It's not common law; it's equity!!!

I never brought up Common Law - the solicitor on here did. I just repeated it back to her. You got an issue with that have a go at her, not me.

I've said all along, that the only thing she would have a claim on is the equity - the increase in the value of the property from when she moved in, until now. But she will have to prove right down to receipt level, how and where she has contributed to that increase in equity. I know. I've been there and so have plenty of other unmarried women. It's a nightmare process and for the overwhelming majority of women in this situation one that is almost impossible to prove unless you have kept meticulous records of every penny you have spent. Maybe the OP has, in which case - go for it and good luck.

However, she's lived in the house for only two years. If she lived anywhere she'd have to pay rent, utilities, repairs etc. and all that is factored in and deducted from any settlement she may receive.

Personally, I don't think she's got a cat in hell's chance and would be far better served to just cut her losses and walk away before she spends one penny more.

Totally agree with Fontella. The difference between a medical question and a legal question is that your GP won't charge you to tell you what's wrong. A solicitor certainly will, and we're not talking anything like an amount of money that will be worth the OPs time and effort.
Really pleased you've already got the £2k back OP. Now scarper.

What an unpleasant man :(

At least you found out now, only two years in rather than a whole life wasted on this selfish fucker. Small consolation at the moment I know...

what font and ness said. do not waste money on a solicitor .
take the 2k and run.

Oh great you've already got the 2k?

look on the sunk costs as rent plus an important life lesson, and dump dump dump!

Psychobitch - you posted earlier today and I misread your post! Because you're married, you're in a very different position to the OP, and would certainly have a claim on the property if you were to separate. There'd be a lot of factors that would come into play, but it would be an asset that would be considered within the divorce settlement.

Can laminate flooring be removed and re-fitted elsewhere? You mention that was one of the things you'd paid for. I'd remove everything it was humanly possible to remove (that'd you've paid for, obviously), even if it was just to make a point.

You may not be minted but you'll be a damn sight better off once you've kicked him into touch.