Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Common Law 11 months, she wants half

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Common Law 11 months, she wants half

    I'm in a bit of a bind here and I'd like some feedback on just how deep a hole might be in.

    Our common law relationship has broken down after 11 months together. We bought a house together as co-owners and joint tenants and moved in together in Nov. 2009. She always maintained that she was not the kind of person that would try to take half my house if our relationship broke down but she did not want to move in together with me as the sole owner and able to, in a worst case, throw her out. So, we bought the house together.

    Now we've come to an end and she is entrenched in her position that she wants half the value of the house - for which I provided 100% of the down payment, closing costs and legal fees as well as the sole payor of the mortgage and property taxes to date.

    Does anyone have any insights or experience with this and a possible way out? I cannot afford to buy her out, and I do not relish the idea of losing half the money I put into the house.

    Help - Mark

  • #2
    Google "Unjust Enrichment". Go to Canlii and use that as search term. Read about it. Calm down. Tell her to go jump in the lake.

    The fact that you put her name on the property weakens your case but it doesn't destroy it. You have a case, but you have to argue it well. Don't depend on the internet, go to a proper divorce lawyer with experience in contentious property issues.

    Comment


    • #3
      Common Law 11 months, she wants half

      Thanks Mess. I appreciate the input. I'm heartened that as a responded to my post you're familiar with Canlii. I'm familiar with "unjust enrichment" as I have researched Canlii and found this reference many times in different contexts. I was unsure if this could be used as a "two-way" street as all of the jurisprudence I've found related to arguments in support of the greater having been unjustly enriched by the activities or contributions of the lesser.

      If unjust enrichment an be used to argue that her demand for half would unjustly enrich her at my expense, then this is a little light at the end of the tunnel.

      I can't tell from your reply how experienced you are in this sort of thing Mess but, on the off chance that you are a professional with experience, can you provide some insight into whether you believe Gaunt v. Woudenberg (also in Canlii - Ontario Superior Court 2005) could be considered precedent case law where eerily similar facts and circumstances exist?

      Mark

      Comment


      • #4
        Tell her to get bent.

        If you can prove that you paid the down payment on the house (bank records should show it), you are entitled to receive that money back in the event of equalization. She would be entitled to any increase in value of the house since date of purchase, as she was a co-owner.

        It works out like this:

        (Value of the house now - purchase price) - your deposit = amount to be distributed.

        I would simply tell her "no, you are entitled to 1/2 of any growth in the value of house over and above the purchase price from the date of purchase. You are not entitled to 1/2 of my deposit. Should you want to proceed in this manner, I suggest you get a lawyer, cause I'll see you in court."

        Comment


        • #5
          Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, assuming you're in Ontario, common law is defined as:

          "For Ontario family law purposes, you must cohabit 3 years, or have a child and a relationship of some permanence."

          You don't say in your post that you have children together so I am assuming you don't and that may change the way your house issue gets sorted out.

          Comment


          • #6
            hii

            Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
            Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, assuming you're in Ontario, common law is defined as:

            "For Ontario family law purposes, you must cohabit 3 years, or have a child and a relationship of some permanence."

            You don't say in your post that you have children together so I am assuming you don't and that may change the way your house issue gets sorted out.

            True Blinkandiamgone but she is on the title which makes her claim prominent

            Comment


            • #7
              Perhaps, but not as a common law spouse I don't believe. If the financials were provided 100% by him and he has proof of that then her name being on the titel would hold a loss less weight, I would think.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by blinkandimgone View Post
                Perhaps, but not as a common law spouse I don't believe. If the financials were provided 100% by him and he has proof of that then her name being on the titel would hold a loss less weight, I would think.
                Yes but she is listed as co-owner/joint tenant so if they were common law or not it doesn't matter. She is legally half owner of the house no matter what the personal relationship is.

                Comment


                • #9
                  There is no matrimonial home in a common law relationship so that part just doesn't matter. They could be business partners or relatives who lived in different towns and decided to buy a cottage together.

                  The issue is, They agreed to buy a house jointly, 11 months later the partnership breaks down, but one party has not invested a cent in the property.

                  The spoken intention was that the joint ownership was to protect her tenancy. This will be tough because by you couldn't have thrown her out arbitrarily anyway, she has some protections as a resident of the building. You obviously didn't realize this, so you went ahead and signed over half ownership without checking your rights with a lawyer.

                  I am saying she is unjustly enriched because she has achieved half ownership of a property with no investment of her own. Her ownership has resulted purely from your input. Flip this over in your mind for a second, lets say she went to court and got exclusive possession based on some fake charge of domestic assault and got your thrown out. So now due to your work and money, she has a house. You didn't see the connection to other cases of unjust enrichment but the facts of it are really the same. If she claims half the value with 0 input, this is the same issue as someone else claiming 100% of the value with only 90% input, it is still unjust enrichment.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Mess, Blink, Standing et al,

                    Thank you for the input. I was never under the illusion that I would be able to end this and extricate myself from this easily and painlessly however, until recently, I did suffer under the illusion that she would stand by her word at the beginning of the purchase process that she wasn't the type of person that lay claim to half just because she was on the title. My bad.

                    Things are slighly less muddy now than. I may not be facing financial armageddon here but it's still going to severely impact me. I guess what I have to decide now is if I want to swallow my inherent sense that this is unjust and unfair and try to buy her out for between $5K - $10-K or spend between $5K - $10K fighting this in the hope I can find a good divorce lawyer that can convince a judge that her claim is unjust and unfair and she has no legitimate claim to trust in the house on the basis of her own statements.

                    Please keep your comments, observations and opinions coming, I find them both interesting and valuable. Thanks.

                    Mark

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      All you should be doing is making her an offer for 1/2 of any increase in value of the home over the purchase price, together with any down payment she provided towards the house. If she says no, that she is entitled to half of the entire equity of the house, suggest that she speak to a lawyer because you are not willing to agree to unjustly enriching her.

                      Put your offer to buy her out at the current Fair Market Value of the house, minus purchase price and leave it at that. She will lose horribly in court should it actually make it that far. Chances are she is just trying to bully you into giving her extra coin that she doesn't deserve and isn't entitled to. So call her bluff and make her talk to a lawyer who will hopefully set her straight about what she is actually entitled to.

                      Should she actually take you to court, you provide them with your written offer to her to buy her out at FMV - purchase price + any down payment she provided, and ask for costs of the action, because she is wasting the courts time.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Also, are you sure she's not a man, because what she's doing takes balls

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks Hammer,

                          I have to admit, the emotional side of me finds the idea of countering her obscene 50% claim with an equally obscene low-ball offer and tellng her to take or see you in court and try to stick her with costs, to be an attractive one.

                          However, the rational side of me says it's a high-risk move. I've coming to the point where I'm resigned to the fact that this is going to cost me so I'm biting the bullet and seeking legal advice.

                          Mark

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mark Grant View Post
                            Thanks Hammer,

                            I have to admit, the emotional side of me finds the idea of countering her obscene 50% claim with an equally obscene low-ball offer
                            If you make an unreasonable offer to her, she may use it as evidence that you are not negotiating in good faith and try to stick you with costs. Make any offer fair and reasonable based on the current FMV of the house. Leave her to try and argue to a court why she should be entitled to 50% of funds that were never hers.

                            and tellng her to take or see you in court and try to stick her with costs, to be an attractive one.
                            I would make 1, maybe 2 offers to her based on appraised value of the house. Most realtors will do an appraisal for free. But seriously, tell her you are not willing to consider any funds you personally contributed to the purchase of the house in any offer to her or from her. Any offer from her that does include your deposit will be summarily declined.

                            However, the rational side of me says it's a high-risk move. I've coming to the point where I'm resigned to the fact that this is going to cost me so I'm biting the bullet and seeking legal advice.
                            Mark
                            Speak to a lawyer if you must and have them send her an offer to buy her out. Though, part of me would rather sit tight and do nothing outside of getting the house appraised and then making her an offer on that, taking into consideration the calculations previously mentioned. Let her waste the money on a lawyer first.

                            Also, on a side note. Be sure not to engage her in any sort of argument and I may suggest getting a digital voice recorder. Once she knows you are not going to rollover, she may get nasty and hit you with a false DV claim and get you kicked out of your house until this is settled. Personally, I wouldn't speak to her at all. All communication would be via email.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Mark;

                              Being you weren't together long enough for this relationship to become common-law, I suggest finding a law firm that is experienced in both family law AND litigation.

                              "When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail". Likewise, a lawyer that specializes in family law will look at your situation from a family law perspective.

                              I'm in a similar situation. I hope it turns out to be the 'slam-dunk' that most here think it will be.

                              K.

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X