Rights To Half A Property Just Because Name Still On Deeds

[Karamia]

Asking for a friend and I am so hoping someone will have an idea of what to expect in this scenario so I can give her some support: couple divorced 25 years ago after an 18 mth marriage (child born but he paid no child support). Male left and female stayed put in house with kid, but they never sorted other legal bits apart from divorce. So both names were still on deeds to house, mortgage and bills etc but only female was then paying all of these and then she paid off house/mortgage completely herself around 10 yrs ago. Male never paid child support nor anything to do with house in past 25 years and never lived there. But now, after all these years, because she wants to put deeds I  her own name alone, male is coming for half of entire house. Female put all money in plus all updates to modernise etc  in those 25 years (Know this should have all been resolved at time of divorce 25 years ago, of course, but male did not turn up for anything, court cases etc). I guess question is - can he really get a judgement for half value of entire house just cos they were once married and didn't sort this years ago???

Grateful of any advise at this stage. 

[barry1010]

What does the Title Register say about ownership, it might be relevant.

Is it owned as joint tenants or tenants in common?

[barry1010]

It's an alarming scenario, especially if she dies before it is sorted out. 

[Karamia]

Hi Barry - was that even a thing back then? They were married couple and both names on deeds from back then as married couple and then have just never been altered as far as I know. 

[Canary42]

I think you definitely (and urgently) need to get legal advice, although my gut feeling is he has a weak case, and providing she has evidence of his neglect then any judgement will benefit her for well over 50% share, if not the lot....

[Karamia]

I agree she was far too trusting, believing that he would never come after the house which he had never contributed to. Surely, if he can not provide any input to this house/  'investment', he cannot be allowed to receive half its value? Does not seem right.

[barry1010]

Yes, it was a thing back then and long before then.

[Karamia]

I honestly could not tell you what my own husband and I were noted down as, when we owned our then married property. I don't remember all of the phrases you are speaking of. Have heard of them used more now. Not sure my friend would have any recall of this either - will it be stated on title deeds? 

[Karamia]

I absolutely have told her she needs a solicitor to deal with this, but don't think she understanding the seriousness  of it all. Want to support, but I am so worried yet don't want to scare her.

[barry1010]

He is an owner of the house, if they are joint tenants and she dies he will own the whole property regardless of anything in her Will

If they can't sort it out they will have to go to court. The judge will take everything into consideration but it could prove expensive.

She needs a good solicitor 

[barry1010]

If it's tenants in common, this will be on the Title Register 

"No disposition by a sole proprietor of the registered estate (except a trust corporation) under which capital money arises is to be registered unless authorised by an order of the court.”

[barry1010]

This could have been very bad for her.  If he had a lot of debt or become bankrupt a charge could have been put on the house, in the worse case scenario it could have forced a sale of the property to pay off his debts.  As they are still financially linked she could have had difficulty getting credit.

It really should have been dealt with at the time of the divorce.  

[Barmaid]

She needs to get specialist legal advice from a practitioner who deals with family law and trust law and quickly.  This is a complicated area and she needs to make sure that her contributions are reflected in any final division.