Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
breach contract, tort or something else?
my uncle gave me a small home he owned and I agreed to accept it and so took possession. I lived there 15 years paying the mortage payments taxes ins. etc. I always believed I was doing these things because it was mine, my investment. My uncle had never told me that the loan I was paying off was a loan he took against the property just prior to his offering the property to me as a gift. I was aware of the fact that there was a substantial debt due, that it wasnt an old mortage I was going to have to finish paying. It was just about the full mkt value of the house. Needless to say I was never givin a deed or anything else in writing from him. All I have are reciepts ect. showing I payed taxes and mortage etc., fifteen years worth. I figure I payed a little over $100,000 all toll. One day my uncle says he is going to sell the place the reasons he gives are just lies and I told him no it was not his to sell. He sold it anyway , it being worth $300,000 after fifteen yrs- when i took poss. it was worth only 45k or 50k. He sold it for 180k and the buyer filed to have me removed. I want to get my lifes investment back I deserve the fruits of my labor I am not exactly sur what to sue under can you suggest the best path to take?
2 Answers from Attorneys
Re: breach contract, tort or something else?
Wow! This is the kind of thing that creates new California Supreme Court decisions!
I can spot a fair number of theories upon which you might be able to prevail, either against your uncle under contract, implied contract or tort theories, or against the buyer (and your uncle) on real estate title theories.
The contract and tort theories are fairly obvious (breach of contract, promissory fraud, promissory estoppel, and quasi contract), and there are some possibly less obvious theories relating to your actually having acquired good title by adverse possession or equitable estoppel.
A key factor may be whether the buyer had actual or constructive notice of your rights, or whether he/she was a bona fide purchaser (BFP) for value, without actual or constructive notice of your claim. If you were in possession (and it seems you were), and the buyer never bothered to investigate whether you were a tenant, trespasser, owner or whatever, the buyer may not be a BFP, and may not have acquired good title against your claim to own the property on the basis of adverse possession or by equitable estoppel.
The question now is whether you have been removed, or whether the eviction process is still under way, and what you have done to stop it, if anything.
I am not far away (West Marin) and I kind of specialize in these disputed title cases. I believe I can get you a cash settlement or maybe keep the property for you, but there are a lot more questions I would have to ask to see if your uncle has any defenses, such as written proof that you moved in as a tenant rather than as owner under a gift.
Re: breach contract, tort or something else?
I do not disagree with the theories you could advance as suggested by attorney Whipple, but you will have to explain how/why you believed it was "yours", when you admit getting no deed, the taxes and insurance must have been in someone else's name, etc. Wouldn't a reasonable man have been put on notice that he did not have an ownership interest of record? Also, if you only paid $100,000.00, total, for 15 years, it sounds like you got under market rent, so your uncle could argue you got a benefit. You may have a steep uphill battle.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
