Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    1

    Default Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    My question involves real estate located in the State of: North Carolina

    P - Plaintiff
    D- Deceased
    DF- Defendant

    Hello everyone, here are the facts:
    - DF and D were in a romantic relationship. D asked DF to move in order for DF to provide companionship to D. DF does so.
    - DF wants to buy a home, DF obtains bank loan to do to. D tells DF not to do that. That D will provide money in cash to pay for DFs new home. In order to do that D puts himself and DF on the deed as tenants in common. D tells DF that the home is DF's. D never lives in the home. D states that once D is dead, home will solely be DF's.
    - P is D's child. P comes to D's home, does not like that DF is living with D. DF becomes uncomfortable, tells D that DF is going to live in home D purchased for DF until D can resolve problems with P.
    - D dies.
    - DF resides in home for 11 years.
    - P now wants to petition to partition the property or have it sold.
    - D contends that P does not own property because D intended for it to only be DF's.
    - D contends that P has no ownership interest in property.
    - P contends that they own a half interested, inherited through D's death.

    What do you all think?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    455

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    I think you need to go the state statute for answers: https://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegisla...Chapter_41.pdf

    Looks like with a "tenancy in common" that upon death of one of the owners the property transfers to the deceased owner's heirs. Assuming you're the Plaintiff, it looks like you should be prepared to buy out the heir to the property.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,749

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    I'm confused. Is it possible that these lines:
    - D contends that P does not own property because D intended for it to only be DF's.
    - D contends that P has no ownership interest in property.
    should say that DF contends something. Dead people don't file lawsuits.

    But I agree with Bunny. Whatever the alleged "intent" was is by and large meaningless. In order for survivorship rights to exist they must be explicitly stated. P has half (or whatever other interest) as the deed says.
    Unless P and DF work things out, the court will order the property sold and proceeds split and that will probably mean less for both of them.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    18,007

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    DF is wrong. D's "intent" died with him because D did not properly memorialize his intent in a will, trust, or on the deed. "I was told" = the most dangerous words in the English language.

    DF's choices:

    Sell out to P.
    Buy out P.
    Agree to sell and split the proceeds.
    Fight the partition action, spend tens of thousands on the litigation, only to have the house sold anyway at a much lower price through a court ordered auction.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,256

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting Shadowbunny
    View Post
    I think you need to go the state statute for answers: https://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegisla...Chapter_41.pdf

    Looks like with a "tenancy in common" that upon death of one of the owners the property transfers to the deceased owner's heirs. Assuming you're the Plaintiff, it looks like you should be prepared to buy out the heir to the property.
    Buying out P is probably the best idea overall. If you were able to get a bank loan to purchase the property in the first place, then you should be able to get a bank loan to buy out P's interest. You could try a somewhat low ball offer. P might be willing to consider cash at hand rather than go through the entire expense of a lawsuit.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,429

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting laurap182
    View Post
    What do you all think?
    You're going to need to answer several questions for anyone to be able to give you any intelligent feedback:

    1. Are you P or DF or someone else (and, if you're someone else, what is your relationship to the persons involved)?
    2. Please confirm that, at the time of D's death 11 years ago, title to the home stood in D's and DF's names, as tenants in common.
    3. How is the title to the home currently held?
    4. Did D have a will? If so, what did his will provide with respect to his property in general and the home in particular?
    5. Was D's estate probated after his death? If so, what happened to the home in the probate case?
    6. What evidence does DF have that "D intended for [the home] to only be DF's"?
    7. Is there a actually a partition lawsuit pending? If so, do P and DF have lawyers representing them? When was the lawsuit filed?

    Please note that whether P does or does not own an interest in the property has nothing at all to do with D's intentions (except to the extent that those intentions were memorialized in a will). Following D's death, his estate should have been administered in accordance with either his will or the intestate succession laws of North Carolina. If he died without a will, then his entire estate would typically go to his child(ren) (and/or possibly grandchildren if he had any predeceased children who had children of their own). The only way that DF would have received D's interest in the property after D died would be if D's will provided for that result.

    Quote Quoting adjusterjack
    View Post
    DF is wrong. D's "intent" died with him because D did not properly memorialize his intent in a will, trust, or on the deed. "I was told" = the most dangerous words in the English language.
    It's a good thing, then, that the words "I was told" don't appear anywhere in the original post. Also, nothing at all in the original post supports the conclusion that "D did not properly memorialize his intent in a will [or] trust."

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,099

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post
    Also, nothing at all in the original post supports the conclusion that "D did not properly memorialize his intent in a will [or] trust."
    I've got to believe that the OP would have mentioned a will or trust had there been one.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    18,007

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting pg1067
    View Post

    It's a good thing, then, that the words "I was told" don't appear anywhere in the original post.
    Here's the "I was told" part.

    D tells DF that the home is DF's. D never lives in the home. D states that once D is dead, home will solely be DF's.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,256

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    What if it wasn't tenants in common? What if it was deeded differently than that and the OP is mistaken about that part? If it was deeded in such a way that DF did have survivorship rights then D would have been accurate in what D said before D's death. It would not hurt to double check that part.

    However, if the OP is accurate that its tenants in common, then I am back to suggested that DF buy out P's interest in the home.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    4,099

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting llworking
    View Post
    What if it wasn't tenants in common? What if it was deeded differently than that and the OP is mistaken about that part? If it was deeded in such a way that DF did have survivorship rights then D would have been accurate in what D said before D's death. It would not hurt to double check that part.

    However, if the OP is accurate that its tenants in common, then I am back to suggested that DF buy out P's interest in the home.
    We shouldn't really assume that if an OP gives a specific piece of data that the data is untrue. We'd never be able to answer anything.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Co-Ownership: Tenants in Common vs. Joint Tenants vs. Tenants by the Entirety
    By lawfacts in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-12-2017, 11:50 AM
  2. Material Facts - Non Disclosure Issue
    By Yeags in forum Buying, Selling and Conveying Real Estate
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-09-2011, 12:49 PM
  3. Crazy Tenants
    By Kyana in forum Landlord-Tenant Law
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-24-2011, 07:56 AM
  4. Crazy Neighbor and a Common Wall
    By speedre in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 10:50 AM
  5. Co-Ownership: What are Tenants In Common
    By cwjr1835 in forum Real Estate Ownership and Title
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-10-2007, 12:07 PM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources