Text messages - legally binding?
Discussion
The other half and I have split.
House in joint names - a large renovation project. Deed of trust to protect each deposit then it covers my renovation expenses with receipts.
I paid for nearly all the renovations until we split (me £110K him £15K)
I transferred his £15K back into his bank when we split.
via Text: I then said I wasn't spending any more money on the house it could be valued as it was.
via Text: He insisted I used his £15K for a better valuation and 'was prepared to lose money I have accepted I will lose money'
He transfers the £15K back to me the next day. I use it to pay for committed building works and give him the receipts.
House is valued at £100K less than my ex thought it would be so his £15K is lost and I will lose about £80K if the house is sold.
I then get a solicitors letter saying the £15K was an emergency loan for me and he wants it back.
Ex also texted it was only fair we should lose the same amounts as a percentage. As he is forcing the sale of the house (Ive offered him his deposit back to buy him off) can I counter by saying I will sue for an equal share of the losses based on the text messages?
By the way they were sent around lunchtime during the week when he was at work so not 3am pissed or anything like that?
House in joint names - a large renovation project. Deed of trust to protect each deposit then it covers my renovation expenses with receipts.
I paid for nearly all the renovations until we split (me £110K him £15K)
I transferred his £15K back into his bank when we split.
via Text: I then said I wasn't spending any more money on the house it could be valued as it was.
via Text: He insisted I used his £15K for a better valuation and 'was prepared to lose money I have accepted I will lose money'
He transfers the £15K back to me the next day. I use it to pay for committed building works and give him the receipts.
House is valued at £100K less than my ex thought it would be so his £15K is lost and I will lose about £80K if the house is sold.
I then get a solicitors letter saying the £15K was an emergency loan for me and he wants it back.
Ex also texted it was only fair we should lose the same amounts as a percentage. As he is forcing the sale of the house (Ive offered him his deposit back to buy him off) can I counter by saying I will sue for an equal share of the losses based on the text messages?
By the way they were sent around lunchtime during the week when he was at work so not 3am pissed or anything like that?
There's one of two things he means:
1) Communications transmitted by text message are not binding at all.
2) The message that happened to be sent by text message was not binding in the context of your overall agreement. As such it doesn't matter whether those messages were scribed and signed in your own blood, it wouldn't be binding due to the original trust agreement.
If it's the former he's implying, I'm not sure I agree at all.
For example, hypothetically of course (unless you are the passive aggressive wolf roar internet meme), you may respond by saying it is your position that the £15k was a gift to be consumed in fine wines and caviar, or a gift to cover the guilt caused by numerous infidelities.
At that point, I am entirely sure that the text message you have outlined will be brought up by his solicitor as both pivotal and binding!
You have to consider what the endgame of this is. To get £15k from you will need a court order. To get that needs a court claim. For £15k that's not a 'small claim', the court costs will be something like £600 including the hearing fee, and both sides solicitor's costs will be born by the loser.
A particulars of claim for a £15k emergency loan with absolutely no paperwork to support it will not be a pretty sight. Especially when you have written evidence otherwise. As such, I would suggest that a sensible person would not bring such a claim.
1) Communications transmitted by text message are not binding at all.
2) The message that happened to be sent by text message was not binding in the context of your overall agreement. As such it doesn't matter whether those messages were scribed and signed in your own blood, it wouldn't be binding due to the original trust agreement.
If it's the former he's implying, I'm not sure I agree at all.
For example, hypothetically of course (unless you are the passive aggressive wolf roar internet meme), you may respond by saying it is your position that the £15k was a gift to be consumed in fine wines and caviar, or a gift to cover the guilt caused by numerous infidelities.
At that point, I am entirely sure that the text message you have outlined will be brought up by his solicitor as both pivotal and binding!
You have to consider what the endgame of this is. To get £15k from you will need a court order. To get that needs a court claim. For £15k that's not a 'small claim', the court costs will be something like £600 including the hearing fee, and both sides solicitor's costs will be born by the loser.
A particulars of claim for a £15k emergency loan with absolutely no paperwork to support it will not be a pretty sight. Especially when you have written evidence otherwise. As such, I would suggest that a sensible person would not bring such a claim.
Mill Wheel said:
Has he disputed what was in the texts yet?
No he hasn't disputed the texts. He knows I don't want to sell. The trust deed states either party can sell giving two months notice. His view is if I give him his deposit back then he realises an immediate loss (£15K) whereas I wont even though the house is valued nearly £100K less than the purchase price plus my £110K expenditure from October last year. My point is I have the cost of giving him his deposit back plus taking on all the mortgage plus another estimated £40K to get the house finished.
His trump card is to force the sale to either force us both into our relevant losses (which he states is fair) or to try to blackmail me into giving him his £15K back.
He knows the relative losses (my greater) as the house has been valued.
JustinP1 said:
There's one of two things he means:
1) Communications transmitted by text message are not binding at all.
2) The message that happened to be sent by text message was not binding in the context of your overall agreement. As such it doesn't matter whether those messages were scribed and signed in your own blood, it wouldn't be binding due to the original trust agreement.
If it's the former he's implying, I'm not sure I agree at all.
For example, hypothetically of course (unless you are the passive aggressive wolf roar internet meme), you may respond by saying it is your position that the £15k was a gift to be consumed in fine wines and caviar, or a gift to cover the guilt caused by numerous infidelities.
At that point, I am entirely sure that the text message you have outlined will be brought up by his solicitor as both pivotal and binding!
You have to consider what the endgame of this is. To get £15k from you will need a court order. To get that needs a court claim. For £15k that's not a 'small claim', the court costs will be something like £600 including the hearing fee, and both sides solicitor's costs will be born by the loser.
A particulars of claim for a £15k emergency loan with absolutely no paperwork to support it will not be a pretty sight. Especially when you have written evidence otherwise. As such, I would suggest that a sensible person would not bring such a claim.
It's your point two my solicitor is stating.1) Communications transmitted by text message are not binding at all.
2) The message that happened to be sent by text message was not binding in the context of your overall agreement. As such it doesn't matter whether those messages were scribed and signed in your own blood, it wouldn't be binding due to the original trust agreement.
If it's the former he's implying, I'm not sure I agree at all.
For example, hypothetically of course (unless you are the passive aggressive wolf roar internet meme), you may respond by saying it is your position that the £15k was a gift to be consumed in fine wines and caviar, or a gift to cover the guilt caused by numerous infidelities.
At that point, I am entirely sure that the text message you have outlined will be brought up by his solicitor as both pivotal and binding!
You have to consider what the endgame of this is. To get £15k from you will need a court order. To get that needs a court claim. For £15k that's not a 'small claim', the court costs will be something like £600 including the hearing fee, and both sides solicitor's costs will be born by the loser.
A particulars of claim for a £15k emergency loan with absolutely no paperwork to support it will not be a pretty sight. Especially when you have written evidence otherwise. As such, I would suggest that a sensible person would not bring such a claim.
In which case then the thread is not about the validity of text messages in law, but your wider position.
What does the deed of trust state is the methodology of sale? Auction, Estate Agent, and at what price? Can you play hardball and market it high?
What does the deed state if there are any losses?
The long and short is though, even if he says he wants to, actually going through with marketing, getting a sale and enforcing it is another thing. What kind of buyer wants to buy a house with the knowledge there is a possibly never-ending ownership struggle which means their purchase may never go ahead, and they'd never know when it could be finalised?
What does the deed of trust state is the methodology of sale? Auction, Estate Agent, and at what price? Can you play hardball and market it high?
What does the deed state if there are any losses?
The long and short is though, even if he says he wants to, actually going through with marketing, getting a sale and enforcing it is another thing. What kind of buyer wants to buy a house with the knowledge there is a possibly never-ending ownership struggle which means their purchase may never go ahead, and they'd never know when it could be finalised?
Vron said:
I wont even though the house is valued nearly £100K less than the purchase price plus my £110K expenditure from October last year.
Of you don't mind me asking, does that mean that the £110k expenditure has meant that there was almost no change to the value of it? The deed says if we cant agree on a price an Estate Agent decides a fair price. The deed says we split proceeds 50:50. My solicitor who wrote it says he didn't anticipate a loss otherwise he would have put a clause for that in.
The loss is so great as there has been a large overspend (mainly because it was a home not a project) in a nutshell.
The problem for selling is the building inspector hasn't signed it off and the rewire isn't complete yet so no electrical certificates.
Purchased for £450. Spent £110 + £15. Valued at £499999 for stamp duty. Of course that probably wont be the realised price. If I was buying it I would be erring on the side of caution and offering £450. It is still like a building site in most rooms.
The loss is so great as there has been a large overspend (mainly because it was a home not a project) in a nutshell.
The problem for selling is the building inspector hasn't signed it off and the rewire isn't complete yet so no electrical certificates.
Purchased for £450. Spent £110 + £15. Valued at £499999 for stamp duty. Of course that probably wont be the realised price. If I was buying it I would be erring on the side of caution and offering £450. It is still like a building site in most rooms.
Edited by Vron on Wednesday 14th May 17:48
I'm a bit confused, is he just asking for £15k back and he will sod off?
If so and if you want to keep the house, which to sell would mean a loss to you of in excess of £15k and you lose the house is it not a no brainer to give him £15k with a contract to sod off for good and move on?
If so and if you want to keep the house, which to sell would mean a loss to you of in excess of £15k and you lose the house is it not a no brainer to give him £15k with a contract to sod off for good and move on?
wildoliver said:
I'm a bit confused, is he just asking for £15k back and he will sod off?
If so and if you want to keep the house, which to sell would mean a loss to you of in excess of £15k and you lose the house is it not a no brainer to give him £15k with a contract to sod off for good and move on?
Yes and his deposit of £150K so £165K.If so and if you want to keep the house, which to sell would mean a loss to you of in excess of £15k and you lose the house is it not a no brainer to give him £15k with a contract to sod off for good and move on?
The point is he was clear he was putting in his £15K because he wanted 'his share' (of the profits). He texted me the house was worth £600K+ the day before he gave me the £15K back. That was his estimation. As the house isn't worth that he's crying that his £15K was an emergency loan.
So I would have to pay him £165K in cash, take over the whole mortgage and spend another c£40K to finish the property.
I'm considering just cutting my losses - he loses his £15K I will lose about £80K but I won't have to stump up £165K, spend another c£40K and I will be mortgage free to toddle off and find somewhere else?
He is still liable (and is paying) half the mortgage until it's settled even though he has moved out. I did offer to pay all the mortgage but he wanted 'his share' so insisted he kept paying.
Vron said:
The deed says if we cant agree on a price an Estate Agent decides a fair price. The deed says we split proceeds 50:50. My solicitor who wrote it says he didn't anticipate a loss otherwise he would have put a clause for that in.
The loss is so great as there has been a large overspend (mainly because it was a home not a project) in a nutshell.
The problem for selling is the building inspector hasn't signed it off and the rewire isn't complete yet so no electrical certificates.
Purchased for £450. Spent £110 + £15. Valued at £499999 for stamp duty. Of course that probably wont be the realised price. If I was buying it I would be erring on the side of caution and offering £450. It is still like a building site in most rooms.
Oh dear.The loss is so great as there has been a large overspend (mainly because it was a home not a project) in a nutshell.
The problem for selling is the building inspector hasn't signed it off and the rewire isn't complete yet so no electrical certificates.
Purchased for £450. Spent £110 + £15. Valued at £499999 for stamp duty. Of course that probably wont be the realised price. If I was buying it I would be erring on the side of caution and offering £450. It is still like a building site in most rooms.
Edited by Vron on Wednesday 14th May 17:48
With respect to him/her, your solicitor is a numpty. If you are currently being advised by the same person that drew that up, you really, really need to find someone more commercially aware. I mean, one that realises that house values can go down as well as up...
These types of agreements, however nicely they start must have the endgames plotted out to the nth degree. There should always be clauses, especially between family so there's no need to fall out. Additionally there should be a watertight 'buy out' clause, where if the relationship irreparably breaks down, both parties supply sealed bids to the solicitor and the higher value buys the other out. Then you end up with a true value to the asset.
My advice would be to (as well as getting a noes solicitor) to hang tough.
Always remember, as nasty as it sounds, "What are they going to do about it?". So, they give you two months notice of their request for sale. My guess is that your solicitor has not specified which estate agent to use, or their instruction.
So, you can frustrate things. Push for the estate agent to market the property at the price it would achieve if finished in order to get offers for people effectively buying 'off plan' so you or they can put their own finishing touches to it.
If he doesn't agree, stuff him. He's still paying half the mortgage, you are finishing off the property.
At the end of they day to force you to sell will be time consuming and expensive - by that time you'll have probably finished it off.
Yes I feel let down by my solicitor.
I know he feels bad about the Deed of Trust from what he's said but at the end of the day I signed it - it seems so obvious now to have put a clause in for losses. I half hoped the interpretation of 'proceeds' could be seen as either positive or neagative proceeds but my solicitor doesn't agree - a separate clause should have been put in.
Problem is I don't want to pour more money into a potential black hole. I asked the builders etc to stop work which they have. Nothing is happening at the house at present.
I know he feels bad about the Deed of Trust from what he's said but at the end of the day I signed it - it seems so obvious now to have put a clause in for losses. I half hoped the interpretation of 'proceeds' could be seen as either positive or neagative proceeds but my solicitor doesn't agree - a separate clause should have been put in.
Problem is I don't want to pour more money into a potential black hole. I asked the builders etc to stop work which they have. Nothing is happening at the house at present.
Edited by Vron on Wednesday 14th May 18:39
Vron said:
Yes I feel let down by my solicitor.
I know he feels bad about the Deed of Trust from what he's said but at the end of the day I signed it - it seems so obvious now to have put a clause in for losses.
You pay a solicitor to get things right to the point where he can advise you that signing is in your best interests.I know he feels bad about the Deed of Trust from what he's said but at the end of the day I signed it - it seems so obvious now to have put a clause in for losses.
Effectively you've signed an agreement where you put in nigh on 100% of the monies after purchase, £100,000 no less and you are left to ally exposed to that loss should the very real possibility that the house has to be sold for less than the money you've put in.
You have a deed of trust where he effectively holds all the cards and can make demands to force you into losses which is exactly the type of thing a deed of trust is designed to prevent.
It is obvious, but you pay a solicitor to tell you what the obvious things are from their experience.
If he/she has missed as something as obvious as this, then what bleedingly obvious things are going to be misses when he/she tried to minimise your losses?
You are talking about the loss of a significant sum, I'd lawyer up with a practice with a specialist in deeds/trusts and another in conveyancing to see if they can come up with a strategy to stop your losses.
Logic would dictate that a finished property is worth more than a half finished one, simply because unfinished it can only be sold as a project to someone, or a developer. Finished, you open up 100 times more buyers. So, I would suggest even a reasonable finish would end up minimising your losses. While that's going on, your new, good solicitor can defend your legal interests.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff