Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Naomi;

There is an equitable principle in law called "purchase-money resulting trust" which says that when X and Y buy property together, and each gets part of the legal title, but X puts up more of the down-payment money than she receives in ownership interest, then Y holds the excess ownership interest as an involuntary trustee for X, and must convey the excess to X upon X's demand.

The implication here is that if you and your ex-boyfriend are "on title" as joint tenants or as 50-50 tenants in common, but you can show that you paid 100% (or even 51%) of the down payment, and didn't intend to make him a gift, you can probably successfully assert in a quiet-title action that you are the beneficial owner of 100% (or 51%) of the house. Obligation on the mortgage, or making payments, does not affect the aforestated principle.

Further, you do not owe him any rent. Co-owners both have the right of possession of the entire property, and therefore neither owes the other rent for sole possession (unless, of course, they make a contract calling for rent).

My recommendation would be to file suit seeking to quiet title 100% in yourself, based upon a purchase-money resulting trust. The written document you describe will be helpful. Once you are adjudged the sole owner, you can deal with the property as you choose and he'll be just a bad (?) memory.

I have significant prior experience in handling resulting trust cases, including winning on appeal. If the property is in Alameda County, I might mention that I have just settled a real-estate co-ownership case involving a home in Berkeley, and could easily and economically work on this matter for you. Please contact me directly for a no-obligation analysis and proposal.