Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

is he entitled to anything?

85 replies

RebelRobin · 01/08/2016 21:22

My sisters boyfriend (no kids involved) has left their home. His name wasn't on the mortgage but he paid bills etc through direct debit. His name is on the electoral role and has been for at least 10 years. He now wants his share out of the house, but she says he isnt entitled to anything as his name wasnt on the mortgage. Where do they both stand on this? Can anyone advise? He basically has nowhere to live now and is sofa surfing at friends.

OP posts:

llhj · 02/08/2016 10:21

MorrisZapp please protect yourself properly. Your partner is not an utter arse at the moment but believe me, as a person said above, people change utterly and completely.
You are very naive if you think that you have protected your own interest.

MorrisZapp · 02/08/2016 10:23

Can we leave off with the 'just a girlfriend' crap? They lived together for ten years, as partners. I know many MNers are heavily invested in marriage but it's pretty outdated to keep up the 'wives are important, girlfriends aren't' in this day and age. They weren't dating, they were sharing their lives.

Joysmum · 02/08/2016 10:28

I agree with Morris

He's contributed his time and money towards their home as partners, now she wants to shaft him and see him have to start again.

I hope he has bank statements and proof of the money and work he put in so he can get his fair share of that investment through trust law.

SandyY2K · 02/08/2016 10:34

Nothing protects you like marriage, so for all intents and purposes, especially with no kids your just people in a relationship who share bills.

That's why you can just up and leave without getting divorced. You can't expect the benefits of marriage when your not married. Unless you are savvy enough to seek legal advice and get things in order.

That's my view and that's why when you split up you actually see the reality of your relationship from a legal view. You could end up with sweet FA.

If you want financial protection in a relationship then you have to take adequate legal steps to do so. It's as simple as that, otherwise you will find yourself spending what little money you have in legal battles and still end up with nothing.

I would never contribute to a mortgage if my name wasn't on the deeds.

newname99 · 02/08/2016 10:34

Morris, you can get your share of the house defined.It won't be expensive, few hundred pounds and straightforward to do.

My sisters partner died just before marriage and sadly in the eyes of the law she was just a 'girlfriend', didn't matter that they had build a life a life together.The solicitor said the length of the relationship could be 1 week or 10 years as without legality no one in law can determine if the relationship was long-standing.It was a horrendous time for her as she was legally excluded from everything as not next of kin.Fortuntately the house was in shares so she was protected from that perspective.

magoria · 02/08/2016 10:50

If he has paid for repairs and improvements and can prove this then he may have some claim.

If he has just given her cash that would be equal to rent wouldn't it?

DelphiniumBlue · 02/08/2016 10:51

I think he may have some rights, and the renovation work in particular would point to this. It appears to have been a joint enterprise from the outset. Who paid the deposit?
I'm not going to say anything about the kind of guy who manipulates the law to suit himself but then seeks its protection when it suits him. This may work against him ultimately.
She needs proper legal advice.

clam · 02/08/2016 10:59

My friend has just been through this. Her ex (boyfriend) would have had to prove that he was given reasonable expectation of emotional/financial support. That's quite hard to prove, actually.
In this case, he couldn't, and had contributed very little (hadn't worked for years or done anything around the house - true version of an MN 'cocklodger') but my friend, being a decent sort, basically paid him thousands to leave and set him up in a rental for 6 months.

brodchengretchen · 02/08/2016 10:59

Sexist or not, the exBF has no case for compensation. Electoral roll registration is irrelevant. If DS still feels unclear she should be consulting CAB or similar and family should butt out.

attsca · 02/08/2016 11:07

Morris, I do hope your partner has made a will, your position is extremely precarious if they haven't.

pearses · 02/08/2016 11:29

BumbleNova -
"you are very trusting - you legally dont have a leg to stand on"
its depressing yes - that people have no understanding of something so basic and hugely important.

You keep posting up rubbish like this like you are an authority on it. You are actually wrong. Numerous people have stated that if can prove he was paying in then he does have a case.

I have been through this, a solicitor advised that there was a claim and it didn't reach court. Was not a 50/50 split or anywhere close, just an agreement and he had to raise funds to pay.

SandyY2K · 02/08/2016 11:30

Your partner is not an utter arse at the moment but believe me, as a person said above, people change utterly and completely.

Exactly!

Why do people assume others will never change and become nasty. If that was the case nobody would cheat or become an abuser.

Who would ever marry someone that they knew was a serial cheat, an alcoholic or a wife beater.

You only have to read around here and see how the most upstanding, moral family man going, has been having an affair for years. Let alone those with hidden children.

My friends elderly father (87), just married his long term partner, because he's very ill and wants his house to go to her without question when he dies.

clam · 02/08/2016 11:34

CAB can advise.

BumbleNova · 02/08/2016 11:42

pearses I am a solicitor.

as I am sure you know, it depends hugely on the facts and the exact nature of the contribution of the boyfriend.

however - he may acquired a minor interest in the property if he has made significant financial contributions to the house - i.e. financing an extension. he will not be entitled to a share in the equity.

the OP sets out he has paid bills. that is usually not enough. I really dont care whether you believe this information or not.

ThatsMyStapler · 02/08/2016 11:46

" I know many MNers are heavily invested in marriage but it's pretty outdated to keep up the 'wives are important, girlfriends aren't' in this day and age. They weren't dating, they were sharing their lives."

Not according to the Law of the land they arent. Dont want the protection marriage gives you , fine, dont get married, want the protection? either go through hoops to get it or get married

picklypopcorn · 02/08/2016 11:47

If he was renting the house from her, then moved out.. would he be "entitled" to all the rent and bills he'd paid over the years? No! He's paid his bills etc in order to live there, just because he's been in a relationship with her for the last 10 years does not entitle him to be reimbursed for backdated living costs!

pearses · 02/08/2016 11:58

Bumblenova, that is exactly the point - it is dependant on the facts and nature of contribution. He renovated the house, has been in it the whole time she owned it (10 years) and contributed financially.

He has a stronger claim than most would have and from the sounds of it, can prove it.

You last post says exactly what I believe, based on my experience, which is why I don't understand you giving advice that legally he doesn't have a leg to stand on..

Either way, no hard feelings - doing nothing is a not a good idea, see a solicitor.

mrsfuzzy · 02/08/2016 12:01

is this a reverse ? [being a bit dim admittedly].

clam · 02/08/2016 12:02

I think him renovating the house makes this one a little more tricky, actually. Why does the sister not think she 'owes' him for this at least?

Coffeethrowtrampbitch · 02/08/2016 12:09

Can I ask if the posters who think he is morally entitled to money from the house think he should give some of it to his ex wife?

She lost out on a claim to any of his money which he put into his new partner's house in her name only.

If he had kept that money in his name, she would have been entitled to a share because they were divorcing.

pearses · 02/08/2016 12:12

Can I ask if the posters who think he is morally entitled to money from the house think he should give some of it to his ex wife?

Oh that's some good thinking outside the box there! I don't know the answer, but great point!

pearses · 02/08/2016 12:26

Had a think about it Coffeethrowtrampbitch. Love the point, however, he is entitled to claim but the ex isn't.

Why would she be? What I don't get is, what claim would she have had if he had put his name on it in the first place - assuming they were actually split?

Has anyone bought a house and thought, I hope my ex doesn't appear and take a share of it?

He does deserve his share though. The GF deserves more for taking the financial risk, maybe much more, but nothing is not fair for 10 years investment.

cexuwaleozbu · 02/08/2016 12:46

He's certainly not entitled to half but perhaps has a moral right to something as he put in physical work on the renovation. Also did he put in any of the capital when it was bought?

If he put in capital then he should get that back plus a percentage increase on that capital proportional to the increase in equity the mortgagee has gained (so e.g. if it was bought for £200k with each putting in £10k towards deposit, and it is now worth £250k then it would be fair for him to have £35k now - which the mortgagee would have to release by remortgaging)

If there was no capital invested then he has not shared any of the risks of home ownership but should still benefit from the renovation work. They should get a friendly estate agent to give a value of the house as-is and a theoretical value of what it would have been worth had the renovations never been done. Assuming that the costs and efforts of the renovations were fairly evenly divided it would be fair for him to get half the difference.

But him having paid money for his bills and accommodation for 10 years does not give anyone any rights over the property - it doesn't matter that he can prove he paid in. There are millions of renters in the same position who don't for a moment expect their payments should give them ownership of the property that they live in.

SandyY2K · 02/08/2016 13:06

Not according to the Law of the land they arent. Dont want the protection marriage gives you , fine, dont get married, want the protection? either go through hoops to get it or get married.

Very true.

You can't have it both ways.
Rather than wondering whether you are entiltled to a share of the home or not, I would advise anyone in the BFs position to get married or sort it out in another way legally.

It's all well and good wanting to label marriage as a prehistoric concept, but the truth is that it isn't. If you think it makes no difference, you can see how financially vulnerable you could be without the legal protection that comes with being married.

Just the same way you could be a SAHM, give up your career and if the marriage ends, you aren't entitled to spousal support or you start a legal battle to prove you were 'as good as married'. The law won't care much about how you view your relationship at this point.

If you cohabit, then you need to be very real about the implications for you, in the event of a split or death. This is especially important if you are not earning, the lower earner or do not have a joint mortgage.

If your home is in your boyfriend or girlfriend's name, if they die, their family can get you out of there.

Get better informed if marriage is not your thing, as you could find yourself up the creek without a paddle and that's the last thing you need when you've just lost a loved one.

OP - If for argument sake your sister was still in a relationship with him and she passed away, the house would go to your parents, or siblings. He would be viewed as a boyfriend and if he wanted any money, it would be a legal battle. He would have no automatic legal claim.

My friend was engaged and living with her fiancé. He died very suddenly and his family were quick to swoop in regarding his share of the house. Except my friend had a "joint tenants' mortgage and not 'tenants in common' one.

With the latter his share would go to his NOK. With the former it became hers automatically.

I don't see on what grounds the Ex wife would get a claim on anything - not that I actually think he should either, but even if he was on the mortgage it's nothing to do with his Ex as they are divorced. At least we think so.

bimbobaggins · 02/08/2016 14:31

Nothing does protect you like marriage. There is no such thing as common law partner in the eyes of the law. Separated from my partner almost two years ago , unmarried.

Flip

1 2 3 4