Hello, Two brothers from the same parents, but with a big age difference. The eldest separated 18 years ago with the words; I don't want to hear or see you. After a certain period of about 5 years he came back asking for money, and again scandals and left! The last time he went to share property with living parents, from which he wanted to be paid now from today to tomorrow! Again scandals threatened threats and left. The parents want to leave everything to their other son who actually looks after them, but legally there is no way, the donation is spoiled and they do not want to sell the property. Share advice and opinions.
Answers 17
They can sell it to one of their sons, provided they look after them and reserve the right to use the property. The payment may not be in money, but in this way to ensure a peaceful life for your parents. If he does not take care of his parents, they can change the contract, but it becomes very difficult. Then the other son may not have any claims, but he will certainly harass his brother!
And who lied to you that a donation is spoiling? Go to a notary, both (donor and donations) express their wishes in writing and that is, one donates, the other accepts with gratitude. Nothing can spoil the will of the donor, which is notarized
But the other person, if he files a claim in court, is respected and spoils the donation
3, complete nonsense. On what basis to have claims? People can give it to me if they choose. It's theirs, they can do whatever they want. Not on the topic - no plural ends in J.
3, is the "claim" a Roman emperor ?? Then it must be capitalized !!
№3 is right, a donation is not made only to one child, the other also has a share and can spoil the donation if he has not received anything from his parents. In order for the parents not to have a problem, it is best to make a purchase with an extension for viewing and lifelong use of the property, then there are no claims.
№6 you are not accurate, you may not be aware that a donation may be ruined due to a reserved portion. Even if the parents donate their home to №4, after their death the donation can be disputed and ruined, to the extent that the children of the deceased receive an equal part of the property. That is, in case of death of the two donors for №4 there will be only 1/3 share of the donation in the presence of two children, if there are more children it is divided by more, in three children it is divided by 4, etc. equal to the child of the deceased. A purchase and sale can also be challenged in court by his brother or the creditors of the parents-sellers, if it is proved that there is no amount transferred to the account of the old owner, this is called a fictitious donation and is spoiled. They can attack this sale on various grounds: fictitious payment, lack of funds with proven origin, with which a real payment of the price has been made, etc. In case the court establishes the semblance of the sale, the rules for the covert transaction, ie the rules of the donation, will be applied. Even if the author has already sold the apartment to a certain Peter, for example, when his brother or the creditors of the parents-sellers prove that the author has not paid his parents by bank transfer the amount for the apartment entered in the sale, the transaction is declared invalid. and they will not take Peter out of the apartment, but will oblige the author to pay the reserved part to his brother. Is there a decision for the author, to have, if there is personal money with proven origin, to make a sale and bring them the amount by bank transfer, maybe only for a day or two,
In principle, I do not think it is right to "deserve" the inheritance, especially in exchange for old age or to be forced to live with them. One can respect, love and help one's parents, as well as ensure that someone takes care of them when they are ill, but it is not necessary for them to do so personally. Many parents use inheritance as a trump card to manipulate and keep their children alive, not letting them have their own family, to go their own way. Not to mention that when they start joking that it is their son who has to change their diapers, no stranger can. I don't understand how they want to do this to their own children when someone else can. I don't know how it is with you in this case. I hope they don't tie you like that. Your brother is clearly not a commodity, and they are not obliged to attribute anything to him, so they can easily deprive him of an inheritance. Donation is disputed in court. Purchase and sale - no. If they want, they can sell you the property without any problems, but I don't think they want to and that's why they are looking for excuses. Apparently they don't believe you enough that you won't drive them out of there or they just want this to be the "joke" for you to sit with. I really like when they start saying "this is your house, you repair, you change the roof, you fix the yard, the windows, the furniture, the bathrooms", but they don't attribute anything to you and you actually invest in someone else's house, from which they can always to expel you on the pretext that "you don't respect them enough." that you will not drive them out of there or they just want this to be the "joke" for which to sit with them. I really like when they start saying "this is your house, you repair, you change the roof, you fix the yard, the windows, the furniture, the bathrooms", but they don't attribute anything to you and you actually invest in someone else's house, from which they can always to expel you on the pretext that "you don't respect them enough." that you will not drive them out of there or they just want this to be the "joke" for which to sit with them. I really like when they start saying "this is your house, you repair, you change the roof, you fix the yard, the windows, the furniture, the bathrooms", but they don't attribute anything to you and you actually invest in someone else's house, from which they can always to expel you on the pretext that "you don't respect them enough."
Number one gave the right advice. Donation is easier to dispute, sale you can practically not dispute. So they sell you everything with a lifetime clause and the other son stays dry. Don't mess with the deal, many people wait and then a lifetime of inheritance cases.
№7, I don't know if you are a lawyer, you try to pretend to be one, but obviously you don't read as a lawyer should read. Read again what I wrote in post №1, the payment for the purchase is not in cash, but in the care of the parents, and they in turn continue to live in the "sold" property, which can not be sold to someone Peter, as the contract does not allow it. With such a purchase and sale I became the owner of a floor of a house and I know very well how things are. If you are not aware, do not confuse the author.
Only one thing I can't understand. Why ask here where sulo and pullo correspond, in most cases incorrectly? There are lawyers, one consultation is BGN 30-40. Even if he is a top lawyer, an oral consultation would cost no more than BGN 100, and it will be many times more useful than writing on such a site.
№8, that's where it sucked him in - "Not to mention when they start shaking that it's their son who has to change their diapers, no stranger can. I don't understand how they want to cause this to their own children when another can to do so. "Absolute nonsense, nowhere in the contract does it mention that it is the son or daughter who must take care of his parents personally. Children can live where they want, but in order to fulfill the contract, they must provide care for their parents, no matter who takes care of them. If the parents are healthy and can take care of themselves, it is enough to help them with money, because with these small pensions, they cannot support themselves. But once they sign a contract, the property becomes the property of the child and he can secure it as he sees fit, but no one obliges him to live with his parents.
№11, are you a bully or a bullet because you are also on this site? And I can't understand, since you are not interested in the site, what are you looking for here? Why throw money at something that can be learned from people who have experienced it and share it for free. People have said it, don't ask an old man, but a patillo. Will the lawyer invent new rules and new laws that we must trust only such? And do you know how many cases there are of lawyers misleading their clients by playing with the other party (of course against a bribe)? You are probably a lawyer and you are looking for victims on this site !?
10 You are not at all aware of the rights and laws, but you claim that once something has happened to you, it applies to everyone and is universal. First of all, what happened to you is not a sale, but a transfer against watching. Secondly, any accidental Peter can acquire a home with encumbrances, encumbrances are the features of the property registered in the registry agency, such are contracts for use, mortgages and others. That is, as long as you do not find a "Peter" who wants to buy the apartment with deferred use / after the death of your parents /, you can sell it now, and the buyer will wait several years to take possession. Third MOST IMPORTANT! The contract is null and void, ie it does not have legal consequences, as if it was never concluded, if: it conceals a donation: for example, a family with two sons has a bad relationship with one. And that their habitation may be for the other only, enter into a maintenance and care contract with him; if it is clear in advance how long the old man will live - for example, he is terminally ill at an advanced stage. Your brother №10 with a good lawyer could prove concealment of a donation and the court could declare your contract with your parents null and void. Just because your brother didn't do it doesn't mean that all brothers played with a transfer contract against watching don't do it.
№14, I don't want to argue, but you are stubborn (obviously you are a woman, only they are so stubborn and argue, even when they are not right) and this gives me the urge to become stubborn. In my notarial deed, it does not say donation, transfer, fictitious donation or whatever you invent there, but it says - purchase and sale and all the conditions and clauses for performance are listed. She explained to us how a "good" lawyer would prove that the contract was fake, since the parents were actually supported and lived in peace? If you read and understand what you read, in post №1 I wrote that the contract can be broken, but more difficult than the donation, and not by the other son or daughter, but by the parents with whom it is concluded, if they are dissatisfied with the care get Let's not philosophize, the author does not benefit from this, but from feasible advice. If his brother is as the author describes him, his neighbors probably know him as well, and if they witness his behavior toward his parents, a lawyer can hardly do anything. Well, with such a corrupt legal system, anything is possible, very often white is called black, we see its constant blunders, there are a lot of them!
15 these services to tell you by which article and law your brother can bite you, are already paid. But I stand firmly behind my words that it is possible to be attacked by other children, any contract in case parents transfer / sell / donate / bequeath their property to only one child and such cases are won.
№16, it is written sell, if your supremacy is like that, if I know who you are, I would never trust such a lawyer. That's why you write here, you do self-promotion, but you pretend to be a weak lawyer and you actually do anti-advertising, it's a pity. And your member, I don't care, keep it for you!