Blogger
Share this content
0
4
6133

the division of property

    I have a client who along with his wife owns jointly and equally a  number of properties with another party that are mortgaged in 4 names and are let  out .                  There is an acrimonious split going on .     

HMRC a long time ago agreed that there is not a partnership in place and this is still the view as per PIM 1030 there is no other link between these parties .             Their arrangement was a bit unusual in that one party found and puchased the properties the other arranged the funding and refinancing ,the person who found the property was obviously "on the ground ", the person doing the funding was 600 miles away and never saw the properties.                

The properties were good ,the work done to them was good ,the renting occupancy and attention to tenants was good and all the funding was and continues to be good, the problem is they now have fallen out over relatively simple but numerous issues.                                                            

My client has agreed in a series of emails to the division of the properties, the properties were put into small groups and  my client allowed, rashly , his former investment colleague to make the allocations over a period of a year ,upon reflection and viewing the properties (he is the funding person ) my client finds that "the fair division " of the properties is not so both in terms of value and the types of properties.                                   

He wishes to renegotiate the division of properties ,the other party advises he is content with the division as is ....the question now is?

Is my client free to renegotiate the property division or is he bound by the email agreements? 

                                                                                                    ,

He had pointed out throughout  the divisions that all divisions were part of the overall division process which would involve the division of properties ,the division of bank overdrafts and the division of remaining cash..and subject to review but he has also agreed in emails that he agreed with the divisions as they were happening. 

Thirty properties have without any acrimony been divided over the previous 2 years and the bank overdraft has been split recently with my client reluctantly agreeing to the division of a number of properties to save planning permissions running out for his former investment colleague .

The question is again how bound is my client by his email commitment ?.                          thank you   

Replies

Please login or register to join the discussion.

avatar
29th Dec 2012 21:34

Speak to a lawyer nm

nm

Thanks (0)
avatar
By elyob
30th Dec 2012 18:23

  thanks,        the problem

  thanks,        the problem here is that there is disagreement between lawyers  as to what the position is some quote that a contract is in place whether  it is verbal or in writing and an email suffices others refer to the 1925 property act saying that  a contract must be in writing and signed  i was hoping for a view from an accountants perspective that may have come accross this situation before

Thanks (0)
30th Dec 2012 20:00

IMHO if your client agreed to something as a result of material misrepresentations or non-disclosure of important relevant facts on the part of his former associates, then he should have the right to have any agreement revised.

However the only ones likely to win infightings are lawyers, and if your client could be happy with a lesser share of his blessings, it might be to his advantage in more than one way.  But maybe he is in desperate need of venting his aggression…

Not a lawyer so please don't take much notice!

Thanks (0)
avatar
By elyob
30th Dec 2012 22:01

 

 

 

thank you for your reasoned comments , he is not  desperate need to vent his aggression, rather it is the feeling of being  taken for a ride whilst trying to be fair in the dealings but maybe his fair isnt the other partys fair.                                                                                       

 

you are right in respect of costs and then there is the time that it will take up with propbably a no win settlement.  thanks i do take notice

Thanks (0)