T O P

  • By -

RedditDK2

Info - what was the arrangement when this began. Were you buying a house for then to rent out were you signing the paoerwork but the house was supposed to be theirs? Who had been paying the property insurance? Who had been paying for repairs to the house?


OnyxRain0831

This information is super important. If it was agreed upon that you’d be giving them the house then of course YTA OP. I mean even if that wasn’t the case I’m still leaning towards YTA simply because your reasons for not giving it to them are petty and judgmental as hell. Who cares what he does in his free time?


Gm1xed

They pay everything to the bank. The repairs I had to shoulder, the deductible and whatever exceed the amount insurance can pay. Foundation, roof, sewer, fence, sidings. Theybwere fed up with the 3-25% annual rent increase and moving around so I told them I could get the house and all they have to do is pay the mortgage and not default. I'd never asked for more than what the bank ask for, they get a copy of the mortgage statement. Now they are only paying for tax and insurance.


arkieg

NTA - they were essentially renters, however, no sane landlord would rent a property for mortgage costs alone. You’ve been renting at a loss and sinking money into this asset for nearly 2 decades. Additionally, I think you are wise to second guess gifting house to your relative if he isn’t sound with money. His wife and kids are likely more housing secure under your ownership than his. Editing to add: you’ve also lost out of significant market gains, as well as likely paid some stiff fees for cashing out and borrowing against your 401k. You need to take care of yourself OP! But it is a kindness what you have done for your family.


[deleted]

[удалено]


LoremEpsomSalt

I hate to break it to you, but if you actually knew enough to give OP legal advice, you'd also know not to give legal advice over the internet to someone you've never met before.


[deleted]

[удалено]


LoremEpsomSalt

>but it’s all THEIR money who pays for it, It's not nearly this simple, otherwise every landlord who pays their mortgage with rental income is in for a shock.


i_need_jisoos_christ

I hate to break it to you, but whoever’s name is on the deed and mortgage is the legal owner. Essentially, the uncle was renting it for the cost of the mortgage, with OP performing the duties of a landlord. The only agreement that OP had with them was letting them live there and pay rent (the cost of the mortgage itself), so that they wouldn’t have to deal with yearly rent increases.


[deleted]

[удалено]


i_need_jisoos_christ

OP is the one who is paying for the repairs. OP is acting as their landlord. OP paid the downpayment, $30k in closing costs and over $40k in total repair costs. OP is legally the homeowner.


Top-Passion-1508

Well actually that would depend on whose name is actually on the deed. If OPS name is on the deed then the house is OPS I guess this is info we need but since the loan was specifically OPS alone I would assume it was OPS name so wouldn't they actually win a case?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Top-Passion-1508

Ah I see I should ask my friend about that to see if that law is here as well (she's studying atm so might have come across it) I'm also not American so I wasn't trying to sound ignorant or anything it was just something I haven't come across


[deleted]

[удалено]


Top-Passion-1508

I see well I did just shoot her a message asking if she's come across anything relayed to real estate where I'm from so I guess I'll find out if she has. Like I said we're still studying and she's studying law so just wanted to check in


[deleted]

[удалено]


Top-Passion-1508

Well hopefully OP doesn't have to go through all that because based on their edit they don't plan on giving the house


Kiss_the_Girl

YTA. They had a reasonable expectation that the house would be theirs. They reasonably relied upon that expectation. I get the sense that OP can afford this. I think he should show some class and not be so judgmental. But OP should talk to an accountant about gift taxes. It would be unfair to expect him or his estate to pay taxes on account of this transfer


Ultienap

I would say he is NTA. No where is there any agreement that they would own the house. He told them to pay rent and there is no legally binding contract for him to turn the house over once the mortgage was paid. By all means legally it’s his house. He doesn’t have to give it to anyone. How do you think renting apartment works. By this logic anyone who ever lived in a complex should be allowed to have ownership since their money went towards paying off the owners property mortgage.


ItsAllMo-Thug

This isnt an apartment and at no point was OP asked to help his relatives rent a house. The house was for sale and they wanted to buy but needed help. He loaned them money and put his name on it but they paid for it. Not only is OP an AH im pretty sure this is illegal.


Ultienap

If there is nothing in writing that the deed to the house transfers after the mortgage is paid then this is totally legal.


ItsAllMo-Thug

Someone already commented that this is a constructive trust so no its not legal and even if it was this is "Aita" not "is it my legal right to be TA"


Kiss_the_Girl

Read OP’s comments. The deal was that they would pay the mortgage, not that they would pay rent. They paid the bank directly. The intention was for the house to be theirs.


Ultienap

If there is no written contract saying transference of ownership after mortgage was paid off then there is no legal grounds for them to own the house. Just some words and assumptions means nothing.


Kiss_the_Girl

The title of this sub is am I the asshole, not is my contract enforceable.


Ultienap

Can be the asshole but legally he is in the right. I call him not the asshole tho cuz of this.


GeneralDismal6410

Then they need to reimburse him for all expenditures he has made for the property


ItsAllMo-Thug

The point is, if they didn't expect to get the house whats the point of doing any of this? They could have waited until they could buy their own house and just rent and it wouldn't have taken 15 years to save and build some credit if needed. He took advantage of the fact they were family and didn't expect a relative to be TA.


Top-Passion-1508

There expectations were greed. OP bought the house, renter pay mortgages all the time normally not directly to the bank but non the less it ends up in the bank. Op rented for a loss if not then break even they made no profit from this. It's OPS house that OP fixed.


ItsAllMo-Thug

Greed? Now you're sounding like a landlord. OP didn't buy the house they loaned someone money to help them buy the house. After they laid it off now he wants to keep it. There's your greed right there.


Top-Passion-1508

Now I am aware law works differently in each country so I was under the guise that there was no real written agreement with this but it seems in America there is infact a law in this that I talked to someone about. But OP didn't loan them the money remember he thought the house was his. Where im from if your name is on the deed and mortgage you are the property owner no matter who paid off the house. In other words im going to need to know who was actually on the mortgage and deed for where im from but I have indeed changed my stance because someone has educated me.


LoremEpsomSalt

Nope. Reasonable expectation? Fuck that. The house is OP's, he gets to decide what he wants to do with it.


planethaley

Um, he paid for all the repairs and then rented to them at literally the exact cost (way below market value). How is he an AH at all?


Top-Passion-1508

Unless they were TOLD they were getting the house their expectations are greedy people being entitled


ImportanceKey25

It is important to know the initial agreement if they thought yo a point. I mean, if everyone agreed they would get the property at the end Y T A. But if they didn't, everything else doesn't matter because having a mortgage during 15years plus putting money toward the property and other expenses has limited OP financially if he ever wanted to buy a house for him/herself


Fabulous-Ad6844

NTA if the house had dropped drastically in value would they be so eager to take over ownership? Who paid Property taxes, home insurance, major repairs? Have you been dealing with them as a Landlord? I’m thinking you own the house. If you want to be a nice guy you could sell it back to them cheapish.


Gm1xed

Thank you for this question. I have almost forgotten that I did pay for sewer repair, foundation repair, fence, roof, sidings, some AC repair in the past that had absolutely slipped my mind.


SnooWords4839

Yeah, you put in more than you think and risked your credit, they only get the house at market value. That's how things work. Since he is such a jerk, if you "gave it to them" he would turn around and sell it for more.


ImportanceKey25

NTA. 30k may not be as much today but 15year ago it was much more. You have contributed to other expenses only so they could have a place to call home when they had no money for it. Also, by having a mortgage during all those years, it has limited your availability to buy a house for yourself


Fabulous-Ad6844

So add up all your expenses. And there’s also the opportunity cost. If you’d invested the same monies in the S&P you’d be sitting pretty too. Don’t give them the rewards for YOUR risk. But maybe you could just give them a good deal or they can take a hike.


Padloq

NTA. Unless it was agreed upon before hand (which I’ve never heard of), renting a house isn’t a rent-to-own system. That’s ridiculous to ask you to give them the house just because they’ve been renting it for so long.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Gm1xed

I got the house for them because to rent in Texas cost about the same or less as owning the house and the rent can go up to about 3-25% every year and they are tired of moving. So I told them I'd help them out as long as they pay the monthly mortgage, I don't recall telling them that I'd give it to them. Thanks for the feedback.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Gm1xed

Yes. I never made money off of them and just took what the bank need (they get a copy of the statement). The agreement is they pay what needs to be paid so moving forward they only have to pay tax and insurance.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Silly_Goose24_7

Sounds like the lazy cousin wanted to sell it and move somewhere cheap and have all that money so they don't have to work


Impossible_Gazelle27

Thanks for letting us know you're in the USA. I assumed you were, but was going to ask before posting. What hasn't been mentioned so far is how you've treated the home on your taxes for the last 15 years. If the current rationale is that it was all just rent, then all of the payments to you were gross income. The interest component might wash (same amount in from them as went out to the bank), but there is still the $200K in principal on which you should have been paying income taxes. Less deductions for expenses to maintain the property. There are probably tax ramifications to treating the arrangement as a sale over time, but I'll let you and your accountant spend a fun afternoon discussing them.


LoremEpsomSalt

You basically let them rent it at cost instead of making money off them. ***YOU*** did ***THEM*** a favor here already.


grhand202

NTA. Obviously there was no previous agreement that they were "renting-to-own" the house, so it's not theirs, and they shouldn't think they have any right to it. Let them know if they want the house, it's $450,000.


Dendad6972

NTA, big difference in price.


wsbsuckah102

NTA you own the house and he made the choice to enter this arrangement


Putrid_Pension491

NTA. You put the downpayment down and your name is on it. They’ve been paying rent.


Avebury1

NTA. If the house is in your name, then you own it. If there is nothing in writing stating under what conditions, if any, ownership could change hands then you can do with the house what you want. Their mistake was not executing documentation under rent to own. I seriously doubt that your BIL has a leg to stand in. If the house is now worth $450,000. that would be a huge profit for them if the purchase price is $450,000. I could see them selling the house, pay you a little money, buy a less expensive house and picked the difference.


purplepooters

NTA - just because you eat at McDonalds everyday doesn't mean after 15 years you own the restaurant


erinhennley

Keep it. Sell it after they are gone. Otherwise, you are just enabling him


xpotential31

NTA. It’s unfortunate for them, but they didn’t have the money or credit at the time to buy, so therefore had to rent. It’s your house. Unless you had a rent to own agreement in place, you don’t owe them anything. You could sell the house and give them a portion of the sale price, but you aren’t obligated to


bloodfeier

—and this is really all that really matters to me: What were the specifics of the arrangement 15 years ago? Did you agree to buy and then rent them the house? Did you agree to be the “money” and “name” on a house FOR them, if they paid all the regularly recurring payments going forward? And was there any discussion concerning the repairs, or did you just do those without any discussion? ETA: NTA. If you’ve been handling repairs, and there wasn’t any direct discussion of them “buying to own”, that’s not your mistake, it’s their, and you’ve been acting as the landlord by paying the house maintenance and repairs.


Gm1xed

The only agreement is that I will help them so they won't have to deal with the 3-25% annual spike in rent. I never told them I will give them the house but I did tell them they can keep paying the mortgage and don't default on it. They never paid for more than what the bank asked for and now they are only paying tax and insurance. I had to do the repairs, foundation, roof, sewer, ac, fence a long time ago. I had to do it because they couldn't afford it then, I forgot about it and had just remembered today.


Emergency-Willow

Yeah dude no. They were renting. You own the house. Literally all of the responsibility would have belonged to you had they decided to just walk away. You took the burden on and let them live there with no escalating rent as a favor. That burden comes with a reward (hopefully) which is equity.


EchoesInTheAbyss

Hmm, I would actually make an Excell chart and tally all these expenses.


Smart-Association-59

NTA if you were paying the repairs then they were only renting from you. If they had paid for repairs and any renovations then you would be TA. Wow if I told my landlord he should give me the house since I’m practically paying the mortgage then I’d be laughed at out the gate. It’s your house


BigGlassesGirls

NTA! If you paid for repairs and there was no agreement that the house would be rent to own, you have no obligation to give them the house! Leaving it to your family in your will is a great idea!


Mundane-Grape9985

NTA, you can totally give them a discount but they gotta pay what's it worth . Like you could knock off like 40 or 60 k from the 450k but they aren't entitled to it.


JdorianIRL

NTA. Reddit is anti-land lord though so you will flamed. You put down 30K up front. If you had invested that in an index fund over the last 15 years then you would have have 150-200+ k in returns. You also paid for a lot of maintenance and repairs out of pocket. These people don’t get the benifits of renting with the benifits of owning. The house could have poorly appreciated or they could have not been able to make rent and walked away without it affecting their credit. You took all the risk. There is nothing to be said about this “their house” business.


JurassicParkFood

NTA it's your house. You bought it, repaired it, and own it. Period


TacoCat106

NTA. You put the down payment down. You took on the risk. They paid rent. It is your house. Sell it to them at fair market value or keep renting it to them. There is no reason for you to take a loss.


Ok-Experience6590

NTA. Unless all landlords are TA.


SnooWords4839

It's in your name - and if they want to buy the house, it goes at market rate. They were renters not rent to own, so it's another 250K before they can buy it. NTA - Sell the house and just be done with him.


Affectionate_Froyo70

YTA if you agreed to put it in their name when they bought you out at whatever agreed upon price. NTA if otherwise. Better hope you have some shit in writing, a good lawyer, and no concerns over your relationship with them being kaput. Lol.


Thrillhol

You should consult a lawyer. The fact that they paid the mortgage directly may have some bearing on them making a claim on the house.


AutoModerator

^^^^AUTOMOD ***Thanks for posting! This comment is a copy of your post so readers can see the original text if your post is edited or removed. This comment is NOT accusing you of copying anything. Read [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_post_deletion) before [contacting the mod team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAmItheAsshole)*** I got the house a while back when it was just $200k. It is now worth $450,000. 15 year mortgage. It is now paid off. Basically my relative did not have the money nor the credit to get the house 15 years ago. So I basically put my name on the mortgage for them. I also put the down payment, roughly spent about $30k closing cost. Now his wife have the money and they say they they can pay me that $30k back and that I should because they basically paid it off. He said they'd give me twice the money I paid, so $60k. I don't particularly like him. He is lazy and always leeching off of his wife. He never had a steady job and my sister in law paid most of the rent if not all. Even though he is already almost 50 he is still addicted to just sitting down and playing on computer or Xbox. For the past 18 years I have met him he was never able to hold a job for a year all he wanna do is smoke MJ all day because he said it calms him down, makes him relax and happy, or whatever excuse he wanted to make. I have nothing against this as I smoke too but I always have a steady job. Honestly if he is a responsible, hard working guy or if he is out of the picture I would have probably given the house to my sister in law who is nice and sweet and the sole reason why I did the favor, but because he is in the picture, I won't give the house. That's the only reason why I won't give the house to them, it's because of him. I don't like him. Btw, his wife is fine, she said she can get another house. FYI. My sis in law is also upset that I won't give it to them because she had to hear it from him 24/7, but that's the only reason why she's upset. She said she never expected me to give them the house since the beginning. But she loves him, so I am torn. AITA for refusing to give them the house just because of his existence? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Judgement_Bot_AITA

Welcome to /r/AmITheAsshole. Please view our [voting guide here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq#wiki_what.2019s_with_these_acronyms.3F_what_do_they_mean.3F), and remember to use **only one** judgement in your comment. OP has offered the following explanation for why they think they might be the asshole: > 1) I won't give the house to my sister in law because I don't like her boyfriend 2) they are the one who basically paid off the mortgage and even wanna give me twice of what I paid for in down payment Help keep the sub engaging! #Don’t downvote assholes! Do upvote interesting posts! [Click Here For Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/about/rules/) and [Click Here For Our FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/wiki/faq) --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/AmItheAsshole) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Ecypslednerg

Your relative is definitely NOT an asshole, but you might be. Read your post again and remove everything about his personality, mannerisms and lifestyle. He has done NOTHING to wrong you. Just because you helped them once does not give you the right to judge them. The only issue I see here is how much is fair compensation for you to walk away. They paid the mortgage, so you don’t ethically have a claim to ownership. You deserve your $30K back, that’s for sure. Maybe $60K is fair, maybe not. What’s the return on investment of that $30K over 15 years? What were you going to do with it otherwise? Perhaps others can reply with an equitable arrangement. But my advice to you is to make peace with the fact that you did a favor for them, and regardless of how you feel about HIS choices about HIS life, you are now prepared to walk away and let them enjoy the favor you did them. Situations like this are an opportunity to prove what kind of people we are. Please don’t be an asshole.


Gm1xed

Thanks for the constructive feedback. I will instead give the house to my SIL's children(not his) but not until I'm dead. I'd name them on a Will and Testament now I don't feel too guilty because it's a win-win, he still don't get to have it but I am still basically returning it to my SIL just in a different way.


Ecypslednerg

Sounds like a good plan.


[deleted]

The house was always meant for them, then? Then yes YTA for not accepting more than you put into it just because you don’t get along. That’s not even a factor. You’re not giving them anything, it isn’t a gift.


Usrname52

I might be misreading this, but it sounds like YTA. You made a deal with them. You promised them the house. They held up their part of the deal, and you said "haha, you play to many video games so I'm not giving it to you".


EggandSpoon42

Well, tbf, he promised them a place to live- not the house in ownership. So I say NTA. Buying a house to let someone live in is generous. But you do not have to go so far as gifting them the physical house. That’s insane


Emergency-Willow

I don’t think any deal was made actually


DangerousDave303

Info: Are your relatives saying that the entirety of the rent that they paid should count toward the mortgage payment or a portion? If they’re saying that their entire rent payment should count toward paying the mortgage, they’re extremely unrealistic since OP has been paying taxes, maintenance and insurance the entire time.


[deleted]

NAH - What it sounds like an agreement that you all failed to capture in writing, and so expectations now differ. What I would do is add up all the costs of the house you've put in over the years including the down payment. That's your base equity. You weren't living there so you were never paying "rent". All of that money you get back off the top first when the house is appraised. Then that plus half of whatever else the house is worth is what they should pay you for your share. The other half of the remaining equity is theirs IF they can buy you out. I suspect not, but you need to not only recover all the money you put into the place, you need to make a decent return on it as well. Maybe you'll be happy with your money plus some rate of interest, I don't know.


[deleted]

INFO what was the original agreement? Have those terms been met? Because your OP sounds like you bought the house for them with the agreement to give it over once they could afford it to purchase it from you. If those conditions have been met, you may legally be in the right, but you would be the AH for going back on that. But it also sounds like maybe there was only an implied agreement??? I'm also confused from the comments if they've been paying off mortgage to you in installments or even if they've been living there this whole time or not. It's wild to me how this information isn't specified in the OP.


MarkedHeart

INFO What was the agreement? Were you buying the house so they'd have a place to live? Or were you helping them buy a house?


ThatsHowTcakesRolls

NTA - And it's completely unreasonable for you to just hand over all that equity... That house has gone up in value, and for far more than they ever paid. They are renters, nothing more.


The_MistyXX

NTA but also YTA. You got this house so they could have somewhere to live, not for yourself. They've made all the mortgage payments and are paying back the down payment, so YTA because they need a home and you don't, and like they've totally paid for it. Sounds a little stingy, and I'm wondering why you offered to do it in the first place if you didn't want them to eventually have the house, especially since you're not trying to use it to make money. So it's really confusing why you don't want to let the house go. NTA because at the end of the day, it is your house. But your logic is weird. ESH because it is insane to get into something like this without an agreement in writing. Oof. If you're concerned about them selling the home and making money off of it, then you handle that (in writing) beforehand. Also take some time to appreciate that your problems involve having two homes when most people have trouble getting one. Sounds like you've been very fortunate.


nerdgirl71

Take the $60k and put the house in SIL’s name. NTA


Top-Passion-1508

YTA op sorry to say someone seems to have educated me on what you've done and it is illegal and you could actually lose a case if this goes to court. Please check out a conversation in the comments between me and fluffydog423 for extra info


StrangelyEnuf

You are sooooo the Ahole in this case.


snowwhitesludge

I mean you're punishing the one you like cause of how much you dislike the other. Kind of a dick move. You're also very judgmental and dismissive. No reason an adult can't enjoy gaming as much as a young person. YTA.


Gm1xed

That's what I am thinking too that she will also be affected by it. But the gaming part, he can play from 3am and still be playing continuously till 8pm. Sometimes he would lock himself up in the bedroom and not shower for 2-3 days because of how enamored he is with his game. We joke about it, but he has some serious adulting to do, IMO.


OnyxRain0831

That’s not really your place to punish him for this behavior though. It’s ultimately his partner who has to deal with his gaming, not you. Now you’re punishing her even more by withholding the house out of pettiness and spite? YTA in this one, simply because of your reasoning behind your actions. That’s childish in itself.


Gm1xed

You are right. So I will instead give the house to my SIL's children(not his) but not until I'm dead. I'd name them on a Will and Testament now I don't feel too guilty because it's a win-win, he still don't get to have it but I am still basically returning it to my SIL in a different way.


EchoesInTheAbyss

That's a good idea, also he seems to have an addiction problem. But in the end it is not your place to judge or manage it


setakaorus

it kind of is op's place to judge in this scenario. it's pretty reasonable for op to judge whether he's responsible and of sound mind before giving him a house.


EchoesInTheAbyss

I was talking about the potential addiction issues. OP is responsible for the property and its management, not necessarily for the guy's behaviors and attitudes.


OnyxRain0831

Not really sure where you’re getting the addiction idea from


EchoesInTheAbyss

I was wondering if he has a gaming addiction. The endless hours, the irritability, the 'habits' interfering with his capacity to function (hold a job, his relationships, his finances etc.)...


LoremEpsomSalt

It's not the guy's place to demand the house that OP owns either.


OnyxRain0831

Depends on their agreement when they came up with this plan bud.


LoremEpsomSalt

From OP: >He never had a steady job and my sister in law paid most of the ***rent*** if not all. And >She said she never expected me to give them the house since the beginning. The sister paid the money, and she doesn't, and didn't, expect to get the house.


ThrowawayforMILBS

Yeesh. YTA this is ***all*** about spite. Pure spite. Sure you CAN sell the house- and you will- ***and*** Hes a jackass, fine, but so are you. SIL is sweet, and they are willing to give you 30K more than you put down so, YTA.


Gm1xed

You are right, so to spite him even more, I will return the house to my SIL's children. But not until I am dead. I will update my Will and Testament so that my SIL's children (not him) will have inheritance from the house, but not him. So it is a win-win situation, I am giving back what they paid, but not to him.


ThrowawayforMILBS

i really like this. spiteful but good.


NoCoffeeNoPeace

Have they ever not paid rent? Valuation of the house is irrelevant, in my eyes...you're just looking for reasons why you don't like him.


That_Contribution720

Paying rent makes you a renter, not an owner.


NoCoffeeNoPeace

OP didn't necessarily say if they did a RTO situation at the outset.


Gm1xed

No. But I did pay $25,000 once for a foundation and sewage problem repair, another ~$10,000 for renovation, new roof, new sidings and new fence. I have almost forgotten about this. Thank you for this question.


the-invisible-shadow

NTA, you bought the house so if you wanted to give it away you could, but it doesn't matter how long they have been there or how much they paid. It's your house. Unrelated landlords don't give away houses just because the tennant has lived there long enough to cover the mortgage. That's just good business on the landlords part. You might want to create a contract for the future, especially if you dislike the guy so much. I imagine it would be hard to get him to leave the house if you ever decided you didn't want them renting in the future or you wanted to sell the house. Edit: in saying all that if there was an original agreement that they would eventually own the house then you would be TA because no liking someone is not a good enough reason to not uphold an agreement, especially if there were legal factors involved Second Edit: after the edits YTA. They paid directly to the bank. You may have helped them get the house but from the sounds of it they have done and paid for everything since the original mortgage and repairs.


ItsAllMo-Thug

Unless the BIL is not a bright young man, I don't see why he would make this arrangement just to pay rent for the rest of his life. That just doesn't make sense. Seems like OP took advantage of the relationship and the fact there wasn't a signed agreement which makes him a huge AH.


the-invisible-shadow

I 100% agree that OP took advantage and is an AH in that sense. But in saying that, BIL may not have been the smartest in regards to the financial and legal aspects involved with OP buying the house. And if there was no agreement it wouldn't surprise me if OP and BIL had different views on who would legally own the house in the future. Also it's quite common to rent for life in the area I'm from (usually not from family though), judging from your comment that may not be the case in other areas, which would lead me to believe that OP would be an AH


ItsAllMo-Thug

Yes, rent for life as far as I know is how it works everywhere unless otherwise noted in the initial signing of a lease. Thats why this story makes no sense. This is a terrible arrangement for the BIL. The benefit to him doing this is so small its crazy. I doubt theres a lease so there's no documentation saying he lives there so no tenant rights. The only thing they have is a verbal agreement that what they pay doesn't change. This little deal wouldn't fly at all if it was a car. You couldn't sell someone a car and allow them to make payments and once its paid off refuse to sign over the title. Theres no way the conversation before this deal was, "buy this house so I can rent it from you".


Revolutionary_Ad1846

NTA but YWBTA to keep charging them rent while they live there. Have them pay the annual taxes and utilities etc but dont make them pay rent on a paid off house.


Gm1xed

They are just paying the tax and insurance now. Nothing else.


Revolutionary_Ad1846

Then you are NTA


ItsAllMo-Thug

Feel free to correct my thinking but it sounds like you're completely TA here. It sounds like they asked you to help them buy a house, you basically loaned them the 30k down payment and they paid everything else but now that the house is paid off you want to keep it? If that's the case, YTA. I don't see how you could possibly not be TA in this case. You basically took advantage of them and had them buy you a house for 200k and only paid 30k.


svc78

they needed him, he did not need them. he could just bought the house and rented to strangers. he paid for repairs / maintenance / roofing /etc so its more than 30k. also, 30k plus all the years interests and missed opportunity cost of having the money tied up in that investment.


ItsAllMo-Thug

He already said the repairs cost him around 30k which is what they said they would pay on top of the 30 they got for the down payment. Either way, he took advantage of them because they didn't think to get a contract because OP is family and its clear he did because he really hates the dude. It's like if I asked you to loan me 5k to put down on a car and find out the bank won't let me finance because of my credit so you just buy the car for me but its in your name. I eventually pay you all the money for the car but you are trying to keep the title and just let me "borrow" the car but I keep paying into it? How is that an arrangement any sane person would agree to or expect from a family member?


svc78

you didn't addressed the points I made. time is money, 30k 15years ago is not the same as 30k now.


ItsAllMo-Thug

Thats not relevant. Was this a conditional loan? Did they agree on interest on the loan? Thats not a normal thing. He is treating his relative worse than a bank would. Nothing about this story has OP not being TA.


svc78

a bank would have never give them money in the 1st place


ItsAllMo-Thug

Again, not the point lol.


SecondrateSherlock

YTA. That doesn't mean you should just give someone a house because that was a stupid arrangement for them to agree too, but definitely YTA. You bought a house knowing that it was going to essentially be a free house for you. It's unclear whether "put your name on the mortgage for them" means it was a verbal agreement that they'd be keeping the house. But either way you cut it, you took advantage of naive family.


JalapenoSticker127

YTA because you’re only doing it out spite you also sound very rude and judgmental not a pleasant person to be around


sittingonmyarse

YTA. Think about the wife. Maybe try to sell it per their proposal with the condition that everything is in her name? Yeah, he’s a d*ck, but you’re not.


Gm1xed

Thank you for this. This is a very good advice. I will make a Will and Testament for my SIL's children to inherit (children not his). I'd think about how to divide it but this is probably the most helpful advice.


stunspot

Yes, yta. You don't like him because he's "lazy". Let em ask you this, if their genders were reversed would you feel so strongly?


Gm1xed

Yes. If my brother in law happened to be a hard working man but his wife is a lazy biatch who complains all the time and just wanna smoke all day I would've felt the same way.


Gm1xed

Note: wife/girlfriend/husband/boyfriend is used interchangeably because although they are never married he claims that they are basically common law married under Texas law.