When siblings get greedy

Discussion in 'Legal Issues' started by bdizzle, 9th Feb, 2020.

Join Australia's most dynamic and respected property investment community
Tags:
  1. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    Greetings Brains Trust,

    I'd like to share a current situation my family experiencing with a property dispute. Hoping this doesn't happen to anyone else.

    Scenario:
    Mum (M) has 1 property (PPOR).
    Mum (M) has 3 x Children. A,B,C.
    At one point all family members were living in the house.
    A&B moved out of the house and C continued to live there.
    C decides to convince M to be on the mortgage approx 200k.
    C draws equity to purchase investment properties totalling 400k.
    C moves out of the house.
    C is now claiming 100% ownership of the property when M passess as A&B moved out and C continued with mortgage repayments.
    A&B are requesting C to take the loan portion drawn down to finance IP purchases; C is not obliging.
    No other option than to go legal.

    If anyone has any suggestions or experiences they would like to share, it would be more than welcome.

    Regards,
     
  2. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    5,990
    Location:
    Australia
    dont understand this part. M is sole owner. Did she take out a mortgage and onlent to C? Cross col? Guarantee?

    is M dead? Is there a will?
     
    Beano likes this.
  3. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    5,990
    Location:
    Australia
    assuming M is still alive this doesnt mean much unless C is also on the title.

    not sure what this means. What is take the loan portion?
     
  4. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    @Trainee
    C Put him self on the mortgage.
    M is still alive.
    C is not on the title.
    Orginal mortgage from M is 200k. C Drew down equity of 200k. Mortgage is now 400k.
     
  5. Terry_w

    Terry_w Lawyer, Tax Adviser and Mortgage broker in Sydney Business Plus Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2006
    Posts:
    30,812
    Location:
    Australia wide
    doesn't make sense. How can a non-legal owner mortgage a property that they don't own?
     
    Beano, Bunbury and wylie like this.
  6. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    5,990
    Location:
    Australia
    Which means C is now liable for at least half the mortgage and has no legal title to the property? Dont even know how thats possible.

    Check the names on the mortgage documents. And the will.
     
    Beano likes this.
  7. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    10,087
    Location:
    Brisbane
    M would have had to sign something to allow C to use her property as security?

    I agree with other posters that this doesn't make much sense. I'm wondering if the way you've described things is correct? Wording etc?

    What does M say about all this?
     
  8. Terry_w

    Terry_w Lawyer, Tax Adviser and Mortgage broker in Sydney Business Plus Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2006
    Posts:
    30,812
    Location:
    Australia wide
    Are you saying C borrowed against M's property?
    You seem to be confusing mortgages and loans.

    Generally a non-owner cannot borrow against a property they don't own as they cannot mortgage it. So perhaps M was a joint borrower with C and M gave the mortgage.
     
    Stoffo likes this.
  9. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    10,087
    Location:
    Brisbane
    Could M have used her property to give a partial guarantee? I think the wording is confusing things.

    And depending on who is on the title, and how it is held, someone cannot just claim 100% ownership unless it is "joint tenants". Sounds messy regardless.
     
    willair and Terry_w like this.
  10. Terry_w

    Terry_w Lawyer, Tax Adviser and Mortgage broker in Sydney Business Plus Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2006
    Posts:
    30,812
    Location:
    Australia wide
    It could be a parental guarantee.

    Anyone can claim anything. I once claimed to be owner of Wylie's property. It didn't get any where .
    But where family are involved and finances are mixed and living in others properties it can be a real threat to claim some sort of interest in a property even though not on title. Those making the claim have the burden of proving it too.
     
    willair likes this.
  11. Trainee

    Trainee Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    24th May, 2017
    Posts:
    5,990
    Location:
    Australia
    Unfortunately a lot depends on the sophistication of the owner. Most people dont even understand the importance of a proper will.
     
  12. Stoffo

    Stoffo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    14th Jul, 2016
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    Sydney
    Am assuming you are B (stuck in the middle) ?

    Sounds like M borrowed and loaned C the funds, or went guarantor ?

    What you really need to know is if C has been servicing all the $400k loan, or just the $200k portion they are using (with M still servicing the original $200k).

    If C has been servicing the entire loan they may have some form of claim, but unless there is an existing signed loan/agreement between M & C then it could be claimed that any repayments made by C were a gift to help M out (being the loving caring son he is !)

    Further to complicate the mess, M could also claim to be partners with C in the investment properties an counter claim for her share of Capital Gains or profit made !

    Best you can do is gather as much paperwork as possible, if M is not coping you may need to consider a power of attorney.
     
  13. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    @Trainee , Mortgage documents have both M & C on it. C is not on the title.
     
  14. Terry_w

    Terry_w Lawyer, Tax Adviser and Mortgage broker in Sydney Business Plus Member

    Joined:
    9th Jun, 2006
    Posts:
    30,812
    Location:
    Australia wide
    mortgage docs? How can he mortgage an asset he does't own?
    Surely you mean the loan contract?
     
    Beano likes this.
  15. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    @Terry_w , our thoughts exactly.
     
  16. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC

    Assumption correct, I am B.
    C had been servicing both loans whilst living there. i.e. 400k.
    M is now retired.
    As a parent, M believes we are working it out.
     
  17. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    Point taken.
     
  18. bdizzle

    bdizzle Member

    Joined:
    17th Aug, 2015
    Posts:
    12
    Location:
    VIC
    Will find more info next week.
    Thanks all, for contributing.
    Regards.
     
  19. Stoffo

    Stoffo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    14th Jul, 2016
    Posts:
    2,677
    Location:
    Sydney
    Good luck "B" ;)
    I hope all is easily resolved

    Family and finances rarely work out :( (unless it's all in writting prior)
    Sounds like M has tried to help C out, and C is taking advantage :mad:
    C may have some entitlement, only to the amount he has repaid off the original $200k
    But to lay claim to 100% of the family home is just nasty :eek:
     
    wylie and Archaon like this.
  20. wylie

    wylie Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18th Jun, 2015
    Posts:
    10,087
    Location:
    Brisbane
    I empathise. We had an estranged brother "try one on" and he found a lawyer/barrister willing to take his case on a "no win, no fee" basis. It's a long story, but ultimately whilst we had a really strong legal case, he was asking that we pay his lawyer/barrister plus our own, whilst his barrister threatened if we didn't settle, he would apply to unwind the wills, the trust.

    So, we settled. He got a lot of money. We got the settlement rubber stamped by a judge so (hopefully) he cannot come back and say we didn't look after him as the will directed. There is a risk that he will mismanage his windfall, so we did what we could to minimise the risk of him coming back for more.

    I've typed a lot more, but removed much of it because it is probably too much information.

    The takeaways though are -

    . Try to find a no win/no fee lawyer. My brother managed to find one. But he had a lot to gain, so that might not work depending on the size of the estate.

    . We had letters from a dementia specialist and longstanding GP that my father was of sound mind and knew what he was signing (the wills). His barrister threatened to challenge all of this, so it wasn't really worth the paper it was written on.

    . My brother clearly had been planning this all along, and by the time we got the first letter, his fees were 23k. We couldn't risk him rambling on and on and on for months on end whilst we fought it, and then be hit with a huge legal bill that he expected us to pay.

    . Whilst it was painful to go through, it's only money. That sounds flippant, but ultimately, it's the truth. I was trying hard not to let this send my crazy, railing at the injustice of it.

    . Downside is our children got absolutely nothing (financially) from their grandparents because he got their portion. His son will inherit the total that was to be split between nine grandchildren (not easy to explain, and not really helpful for you).

    . Upside is my nice brother and I never have to lay eyes on him again. That's priceless.