How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask tdlawyer Your Own Question
tdlawyer, Lawyer
Category: Family Law
Satisfied Customers: 1096
Experience:  Lawyer with 9 years experience of family law issues.
Type Your Family Law Question Here...
tdlawyer is online now

I am in the process of renting out my house that was bought

Customer Question

I am in the process of renting out my house that was bought with my then partner 7 years ago, he. Lived there for a year, never paid the mortgage, bills etc. if I were to sell is he entitled to half the equity or can he prevent it from being rented out?
Submitted: 4 years ago.
Category: Family Law
Expert:  tdlawyer replied 4 years ago.

tdlawyer :

Hello, thanks for your question.

tdlawyer :

My name is Tony, I can help you with this.

tdlawyer :

Are both your names on the register to the property?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : Hi Tony,
JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : yes they are both on the property, I tried to settle years ago and get the mortgage in my name but he wouldn't do it.
tdlawyer :

Okay. And did you agree who would be entitled to what when you bought the home?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : No I just had solicitors draw up the fact I paid the deposit etc. I offered him £15k about 6 years ago and told him to sign the transfer of equity form so it was solely in my name.
tdlawyer :

Do you remember when you bought the house, that you signed a transfer form at the conveyancing solicitors? There are usually three boxes asking you how to want to own the house - as joint tenants, tenants in common, or something else? Can you recall what you ticked?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : I think tenants in common.
tdlawyer :

Okay. This is the usual case for people that are not married. And if so, then did you agree anything other than 50:50?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : no I didn't
tdlawyer :

Okay. And why did he not pay half the mortgage?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : Well he said he couldn't afford it, that he took on too much with getting the house, we broke up about a year later
tdlawyer :

Okay. Well, the starting position is that you get 50:50, as this is what you agreed at the outset.

tdlawyer :

However, it's never that simple. It is possible that the Court might do something different, and recognise that he has not paid the mortgage payments.

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : If I can prove he hasn't paid is there a chance I will not have to give him anything.
JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : ?
tdlawyer :

It can be harder now, following a case called Stack -v- Dowden, in which the Court held that the legal title and declaration on the TR1 (the 50:50) is conclusive in the absence of fraud or other agreement. However, if your intentions change as time goes by, then the courts can recognise that by changing the beneficial interests (Jones -v- Kernott). Here is a really useful article on this which you will find very interesting and useful:

tdlawyer :

Sorry - that's the right one.

tdlawyer :

Do you want to ask me anything more about this?

JACUSTOMER-ai5d0pmz- : No thanks
tdlawyer :

Okay, thank you for your question today.

tdlawyer :

Please do remember to rate the answer for me at the end of the chat session.

tdlawyer :

Are you satisfied with the answer given?