# Rights over who lives in house if moved out?



## magnum (5 Jan 2014)

If one of a married party moves out of a home in both their names,
and is not contributing towards the mortgage or upkeep in any way,
what rights to they have on who lives in the home with the other person?


----------



## mf1 (6 Jan 2014)

There's more to this, isn't there?

Would it be safe to assume that the person who has left objects strongly to whoever the person who has been left behind has moved in to the house? 

This is not really a legal question because, presumably, it comes down to a shouting match rather than any threat of legal proceedings!  

In the unlikely event that the objector did decide to do something about it, what are they going to do? Move back in to the house? Not co-operate with a lending institution? Get a solicitor to send a letter? They're not really on any strong ground if they are not paying their share of the mortgage. Mind you, if there is a vague threat of sending a "couple of big lads" around, that's a different matter and not one on which I am qualified to advise.

Ultimately, it depends on the circumstances. If there is equity and the property can be sold, that is probably the best way to deal with it and end the aggravation that will always be there where there is a financial tie. 

mf


----------



## magnum (7 Jan 2014)

Hi mf1,
Thanks for your comments and yes of course there is always more to these things!
I dont really follow though as to what you mean by 'This is not really a legal question because, presumably, it comes down to a shouting match rather than any threat of legal proceedings! 
That's my question... is it a legal thing?
Does the person not living in the home and not contributing (but still owns half) 
have a say as to who lives in the home?
At present the house cannot be sold and they will not be moving back into the house.


----------



## mf1 (7 Jan 2014)

Whats the actual problem? Is there an objection to a third party being in the house? On what grounds? And, if there is an objection, what is the objector actually going to do? Issue proceedings to try and evict the third party? On what grounds? 

If there are two owners, and only one is living there, what does it matter who else lives in the house? And doesn't the person still living there have a right to invite people to stay? 

I can just visualise this: the objector issuing Court proceedings to evict the third party and a Judge looking at this and thinking : Dear God in Heaven, what is the point here!

mf


----------



## Bronte (7 Jan 2014)

magnum said:


> At present the house cannot be sold and they will not be moving back into the house.


 
Why can't it be sold?


----------



## magnum (8 Jan 2014)

Thanks for feedback guys.
I am simply trying to establish does a co owner of a house have a right to say if somebody can live there or not with the other party, if they themselves do not live there and do not contribute.
It involves a separation and the new partner living in the house
I just thought it may not be allowed if the third party complained
The house will be sold eventually of course, but in the meantime how much say do they have?


----------



## stephnyc (8 Jan 2014)

I am not a lawyer - but my interpretation is that the owner who not contributing has *no *say in practice.

Even if they had some legal right as a co-owner, in practice it would be difficult/costly to enforce. I mean what are you going to do, send the gardaí around to evict someone who has one of the owners permission to be there?


----------



## newirishman (8 Jan 2014)

stephnyc said:


> I am not a lawyer - but my interpretation is that the owner who not contributing has *no *say in practice.
> 
> Even if they had some legal right as a co-owner, in practice it would be difficult/costly to enforce. I mean what are you going to do, send the gardaí around to evict someone who has one of the owners permission to be there?



I'd say you need to be careful not confusing ownership and mortgage responsibilities.
From an ownership perspective, it makes no difference if someone contributes to repaying any loans or mortgages secured against the property. 
For example, if I ask my parents/siblings/friends to act as a guarantor so I can get a mortgage doesn't mean that the parent/sibling/friend has any ownership of the property. (nor has the bank for that matter - they might have secured the borrowings on the property but that does not make them owner).
So regardless of who has signed the dotted line on the mortgage contract, if a person owns or co-owns the house, s/he has certain rights.


----------



## stephnyc (9 Jan 2014)

hi newirishman 

no, i am not confusing the two (I simply used the term "owner who not contributing" to distinguish the 2 owners). I am actually really interested, as is the OP - what are the legal rights of the owners? and how are these enforced?

IMHO, both owners should have the legal right to determine who lives in their house. However, in practice, if only one of the owners lives in the house & they allow someone to move in, what can the other owner do about it?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (9 Jan 2014)

forget the mortgage for the moment.
 Mr and Mrs A own a house together without a mortgage.
as part of their separation agreement, Mr A moves out and Mrs A stays in the house.
It may stick in Mr A's craw that Mrs A's new partner has moved into "his" house, but I can't see scope for action here. 

He could argue that Mrs A now has additional rental income from a tenant, and so the separation agreement would need to be revised. 

They own the house jointly, so Mr A could move back in I suppose. 

Are there children involved? Is Mr A paying maintenance? what are their respective incomes?


As MF says, this is not really a legal problem. It is a practical problem but the whole separation needs to be sorted out. Financially, it may suit Mr A that there is a tenant in the house. But the emotional issues outweigh the financial. 

*now add in the complications of the mortgage *
Is the house in negative equity? 

If it is in negative equity and Mr A is paying nothing, then he has no moral or legal right to object, I would imagine.

*Finally, what does Mr A's solicitor advise?*
Mr A's solicitor would know the full history. 

I suspect that they have given the same advice as MF1 and Mr A doesn't want to hear it.


----------



## magnum (15 Jan 2014)

Hi all, thanks for feedback, apologies have not been on here.
The situation is a separated couple. House nearly fully payed off.
Wife moved out, left kids with father. Pays nothing towards the house or otherwise.
Does she have any legal rights to say who lives with father in house before they have sold house?


----------



## mf1 (15 Jan 2014)

"Does she have any legal rights to say who lives with father in house before they have sold house?"

Yes. It's still her house. 

How would she enforce that legal right? 

She can't but she sure as heck can make life real awkward! 

This is a relationship issue. Arguing the legal rights and wrongs will not change that. 

mf


----------



## magnum (28 Jan 2014)

Hi, back here after a bit,
thanks for comments.
So... she does not have any legal rights then? 
And what do you mean mf1 about making life awkward? 
I am just trying to clarify her legal rights. Does she have a right to say who lives in the house or not? Also, does she have a right to move back in if she so wills after not having lived there for a long time?
Thanks in advance


----------

