Hello, my name is***** am a qualified lawyer and I will be assisting you with your question today.
How long after agreeing to give you the money did your friend request it back? Thank you
Hi there. Thank you for your request for a phone call. I am unable to talk at the moment as I am in court today but if you provide the information requested, I will review the relevant information and laws and get back to you as soon as I can. Please do not respond to this message after you have provided the information as it will just push your question to the back of the queue and you may experience unnecessary delays. Thank you
Hi there, a court would very closely look at any claims that such an amount was given as a gift because of t being rather large. It is rare for people to just give gifts of that scale so a certain degree of scrutiny will be expected to determine whether this was indeed a gift or not. You do not need a formal loan agreement to have this treated as a loan – it could have been a loan simply based on what was agreed verbally between you and your intentions at the time. So it will come down to your personal witness evidence.
When it comes to assessing factual disputes, where it is essentially one person’s word against another’s, the courts have developed certain tests that would be applied that would help them decide how much weight to attach to each side's evidence. As a general rule, the following are some of the more widely used tests:
· Demeanour - includes matters such as a person’s conduct, manner, bearing, behaviour, delivery and inflexion. They are matters of impression, which are not necessarily revealed by reading a transcript of evidence. It is the more 'personal' side of the individual providing the evidence
· Inconsistency – mainly to do with any apparent inconsistencies in a person’s evidence
· Probability – this would ask of the evidence as a whole, or of a particular part of it: whose account is more probable in the circumstances?
So the courts will apply these or other similar tests in coming to a decision that they believe is fair in the circumstances. That does not mean it is factually the right one, but what has been judged to be the fairest outcome based on all available information.
As to forcing you to sell the house, that may not actually happen – this is not a secured loan which is charged against the property so he cannot automatically force you to do this and a court will very rarely force someone out of their house to repay a loan, so do not worry too much about this at this stage but you will have to potentially have to defend a claim if it proceeds.
Hi there, sorry as I was not the advisor who picked up the call option I cannot call you but will reply here instead. All of the evidence you have mentioned will go towards your case to argue that this was a gift rather than a loan, but will not in itself guarantee that a court decides the same. Legally there is nothing stopping the person from challenging this and taking the matter further and letting a court decide who is right and who is wrong. So if he is going to do so then you will have no option but tod defend such a claim – however as he is the one claiming the burden of proving that this was a loan is on him and he needs to provide the evidence to convince the court of that.
Whether he paid the money to you or the lender will not really make a difference as what matters is still what his intentions were at the time. I doubt that undue influence would come into it in these cirucmstances
No problem at all
a relationship of trust and confidence is not just created by one of the parties admitting to such. This is a legal principle which would be created based on the overall relationship, the way you treated each other, basically looking at the overall situation...not just an allegation it was such a relationship and a subsequent acknowledgement. In other words only a court can decide whether such a relationship was formally in place