Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,265

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    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.
    It is worth the OP double checking that. Since D clearly believed that the house would be DF's once he/she passed away, the possibility exists, so it should be checked out.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    19,760

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    The only way there are survivorship rights in NC is if the deed specifically says they are there. Just joint isn't sufficient. Tenancy by the entirety would be sufficient, but since D and P aren't married, that's not an option.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    16,265

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting flyingron
    View Post
    The only way there are survivorship rights in NC is if the deed specifically says they are there. Just joint isn't sufficient. Tenancy by the entirety would be sufficient, but since D and P aren't married, that's not an option.
    It still wouldn't hurt to double check.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    2,441

    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?
    Who cares? If someone wants to create another thread with different facts, we can discuss it. However, I see no value in discussing "what if" the facts are different when we don't even have complete clarity about the facts that have been provided.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    127

    Default Re: Crazy Facts - Tenants in Common Issue

    Quote Quoting laurap182
    View Post
    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?
    You ask what I think? With all due respect my thinking is that if it is customary of you to write in this awkward, cumbersome style that you ought to kick the habit.

    Secondly, I think an explanation is owed as to why this glaring, but wholly irrelevant contradiction in your clumsy narrative:
    (1) D never lives in the home, yet (2) D's child P does not like DF is living with D [sic].
    Lastly, unless D and DF took title to the home not as tenants in common, but as joint tenants with rights of survivorship (j/t/r/s) then DF better come up with something more substantial than
    D states that once D is dead, home will solely be DF's.
    Otherwise DF could very well be facing an indefensible Petition to Partition the property. Which if pursued to fruition could result in the property being sold at a public auction with the only bidders being vultures looking to steal it.

    I don't know where you fit in here, but if your loyalties are with DF, you would do well to have her consult with her lawyer.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

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