Legal rights for a 20 yr. commonlaw relationship?

[wondergirl]

IMHO (and keep in mind, wondergirl, I am not a lawyer) the unjust enrichment and the resulting trust should cancel each other out, and the simplest way to save $50,000 on lawyers would be split the property 50/50, even if it doesn't work out to the penny. However that requires that both parties want to save legal costs and get it over with.

I know that that won't happen, being that he will definitely fight for full ownership on the home regardless of the joint tenant ownership. My thoughts on this are he is expecting to offer approx. 20 percent of what I am claiming with no SS included. Keep in mind also that he currently owes me 6500 dollars for the sale of the cattle which had happened about a month ago, and he did not pay that because he states that my deposition to him stated this payment requirement. . This is neither here nor there I guess, but...it shows his intent to pay as little as he feels he can get away with.

[wondergirl]

Re: the equity...

The home is basically free and clear except for a very small mortgage left on it of 10,000 which in my deposition is deducted from the split and also deducting the percentage of if he would sell the house (what the costs would be in real estate agent/paperwork/etc) My lawyer accounted for that.

[wondergirl]

This is definitely confusing regarding the house in the sense that different beliefs in what happens to a "joint tenant" property. As I sit here and think about all of this the designation of joint tenant seems to have not alot of substance to it in my case.

[standing on the sidelines]

This is definitely confusing regarding the house in the sense that different beliefs in what happens to a "joint tenant" property. As I sit here and think about all of this the designation of joint tenant seems to have not alot of substance to it in my case.

If you would have been legally married it would be a lot more black and white.

[wondergirl]

If you would have been legally married it would be a lot more black and white.

Yes, I agree with that. It is a sad state of affairs that 20 years of devotion, caring, support means nothing when it comes to commonlaw relationships and the law

[Mess]

Forget about it being a "house" for a minute.

This is a business. It is a farm, etc. The business includes the physical property, equipment, produce, debts, receivables, etc. etc.

You and your ex are joint owners of the business. However he made 100% of the financial investment in the business.

The question is how you split the current value of the business. You made an investment of labour. From your description you did all the work, however I think your ex will argue against that. You mentioned the sale of cattle, for example. Who handled the sale? Who provided the money to purchase in the first place? Where did cost of feed, etc. come from?

You certainly should and will be compensated for your labour, but I am saying to keep in mind that your ex will also detail every penny he put into the business.

Again, the business also provided you with housing, and all living expenses, so it is not as though you did not receive ongoing payment for your labour. Of course you put in more than you took out, but the question is, how much?

Because the cash investment was so one-sided it would be absurd, on the surface, to just assume a 50/50 split because of joint ownership.

If your ex were willing to negotiate and settle, you could save a lot of legal fees. Hopefully the process will not eat up all the value of the property. That said, both of you have to be willing to see both sides of this and do a fair accounting. This was not a marriage and the property is not marital property, it should be treated as a business and split up fairly.

[standing on the sidelines]

Forget about it being a "house" for a minute.

This is a business. It is a farm, etc. The business includes the physical property, equipment, produce, debts, receivables, etc. etc.

You and your ex are joint owners of the business. However he made 100% of the financial investment in the business.

The question is how you split the current value of the business. You made an investment of labour. From your description you did all the work, however I think your ex will argue against that. You mentioned the sale of cattle, for example. Who handled the sale? Who provided the money to purchase in the first place? Where did cost of feed, etc. come from?

You certainly should and will be compensated for your labour, but I am saying to keep in mind that your ex will also detail every penny he put into the business.

Again, the business also provided you with housing, and all living expenses, so it is not as though you did not receive ongoing payment for your labour. Of course you put in more than you took out, but the question is, how much?

Because the cash investment was so one-sided it would be absurd, on the surface, to just assume a 50/50 split because of joint ownership.

If your ex were willing to negotiate and settle, you could save a lot of legal fees. Hopefully the process will not eat up all the value of the property. That said, both of you have to be willing to see both sides of this and do a fair accounting. This was not a marriage and the property is not marital property, it should be treated as a business and split up fairly.

very good post. I wonder how much the other person put down as a downpayment

[wondergirl]

as stated, he put down payment and has always paid for everything.
The financial manipulation in our relationship was always the de facto.

Here's a small example. If for instance I needed to go grocery shopping, pick up stuff for myself or him..etc, I would always have to ask for an "allowance" and I was never given money for myself on any regular basis other than small amounts here and there "if I asked"

Mess: Your posts are very helpful, and I definitely appreciate your input in this thread

[standing on the sidelines]

as stated, he put down payment and has always paid for everything.
The financial manipulation in our relationship was always the de facto.

Here's a small example. If for instance I needed to go grocery shopping, pick up stuff for myself or him..etc, I would always have to ask for an "allowance" and I was never given money for myself on any regular basis other than small amounts here and there "if I asked"

Mess: Your posts are very helpful, and I definitely appreciate your input in this thread

obviously the perks of living with him outweighed the cons or else you would have done something a long time ago. You had the right to have a job and earn your own money, you made the choice not to. Doesnt mean you get get rewarded for that now. That being said I still do believe you deserve something but when it comes down to it, the judge will decide.

How about this, ask him to give you a settlement of something to help you until you get yourself back on your feet, say 20k?? Choose a number that you think is fair and is reasonable. He may decide to settle with you in order to avoid court, legal fees and to just get it done and over with.

[wretchedotis]

arabian: Alanon is indeed where i've been in the past, and to some extent it helps those in need in times of crisis..but, you have to realize that the concept of a higher power doesn't apply to everyone's beliefs..and in their case the word "God" is used way too much for my liking. but...that really doesn't have anything to do with all of this...Detachment works

I think you have misunderstood the 12 steps.

One does not need to believe in "God' to understand that there is a higher power than 'yourself', and to release some aspect of control to that end. Call it 'fate', 'karma', 'science'... whatever you like.

[arabian]

I think you would be very lucky to get a small amount of money to set yourself up in another place. You have admitted to knowingly going along with his scheme to put the house under your name so the ex wife didn't find out. Your first posts denied this and now you have admitted to have actively participating in it. That kind of puzzles me. You say you the house was purchased 10 yrs into the relationship. I think you are talking out of both sides of your face right now and don't quite know what to make of it.

[Mess]

Whether or not there was "scheme" regarding the previous ex doesn't change the situation now. The property was bought after the man broke up his previous marriage, it has been run as a business (farming), she provided free labour, the property was conciously made joint and there can be no other reason for that other than acknowledging their relationship and her contribution.

wondergirl is co-owner of the property. This is fact. wondergirl was partner in the business and provided labour and was not fully compensated and had no opportunity to build her own savings throughout the relationship. This is fact. I see no supporting facts or reasons to show that it should only be a "small amount."

The ex may owe his previous wife additional money due to fraudulent disclosure. The fact that wondergirl was aware and participated does not obligate her under Family Law. The previous equalization was between the ex and his previous wife. The most that could be argued is that he had an undischarged liability and this should be subtracted from the asset.

[standing on the sidelines]

what size was this farm??? How many acres, how many cattle etc? Was it an actual working farm or was it a hobby farm?

You do deserve to get something but farm hands do not get paid the big bucks. Between the free food, shelter etc I think you made out better then if you would have had to pay for that stuff out of a farm hands wage.

Was depreciation of the machinery etc done for income tax? Was the income from the sale of any livestock in the past reported as income ? Just trying to figure out if it was run as a business or what. You can say it was but if you didnt treat it like that at tax time you could be looking at an audit that may cost you more then you realize and you would be on the hook for it.

[arabian]

Standing has a very good point. In this case the tax returns might be able to shed some light on things. Big difference between a hobby farm and a working farm. Spousal support looks at all sort of things on an individual basis: need, entitlement, payor's income and ability to pay, payee's likelihood of supporting herself. In a marriage any property acquired during the marriage, regardless of who paid for it, becomes joint. Not sure about common law entitlement. Best case scenario 50% of property less his downpayment? If not a working farm and if the taxes do not show any farm business then machinery might have been depreciated as tools of trade? Lots of people do that and get away with it. Best to get copies of all tax returns for past 5 yrs if you can.

[standing on the sidelines]

Standing has a very good point. In this case the tax returns might be able to shed some light on things. Big difference between a hobby farm and a working farm. Spousal support looks at all sort of things on an individual basis: need, entitlement, payor's income and ability to pay, payee's likelihood of supporting herself. In a marriage any property acquired during the marriage, regardless of who paid for it, becomes joint. Not sure about common law entitlement. Best case scenario 50% of property less his downpayment? If not a working farm and if the taxes do not show any farm business then machinery might have been depreciated as tools of trade? Lots of people do that and get away with it. Best to get copies of all tax returns for past 5 yrs if you can.

my parents had a 100 acre farm and my mom stayed at home to raise us and do the farm chores. They had to keep every receipt for animal food, animal sales and purchases and equipment. They had an accountant do the income tax and all that stuff was reported.

The main question was the farm making money or not??? I am not sure but I think a business can only show a loss for so many years.