Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Unable to obtain grant deed from original owner after payment

This could potentially be a very tough case; I have to assume your friend is going to argue that you were simply renting the house. I have fought these battles before but whether or not you win will depend upon the documentation you do have. You need to file a partition or quiet title lawsuit. Gather up all the paperwork and find an attorney experienced in the area as soon as possible.

Re: Unable to obtain grant deed from original owner after payment

It depends on a lot of particulars left out of your story. One needs to review all written correspondence and receipts, one needs to know the fair rental value of the property during the time you were "paying off" the purchase, one needs to know who else knew of the verbal arrangement and how they came to know it.

If there is no written memorandum of an agreement of sale sufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds (which requires real estate transactions to be memorialized in a writing) then you will not get the house. But, you still may be entitled to a judgement against the "friend" for unjust enrichment.

You need an initial and thorough consultation with an experienced attorney to consider all of the possibilities. You should be prepared to pay a modest fee for such a consultation.

Good luck.

Re: Unable to obtain grant deed from original owner after payment

Unimproved land, I assume, no house.

First, oral agreements are insufficient to convey real property and a court will not enforce as oral land-sale agreement as such. However, this doesn't mean you have no case.

My additional concerns about this deal are whether you in fact paid the full price agreed upon in the oral agreement. You paid all the loan payments and taxes, but normally this is an owner's burden in addition to paying the purchase price.

Next comes the question of adverse possession. If you paid all the property taxes, you have satisfied one of the more difficult preconditions to ownership by adverse possession. It is possible that additional facts would show that you've satisfied the other conditions as well. Start by asking whether you (rather than the "friend") were in actual or constructive possession of the parcel during the prior five years. If, for example, YOU had erected a fence around it and kept the gate locked without his consent, that might establish the exclusive and "hostile" possession requirement.

Another aspect involves the purpose of the arrangement in the first place. Your facts hint that there was a tax-avoidance angle to doing this deal without documentation. If so, the court will inquire whether either or both of you were conspiring to violate tax laws. While a prosecution is unlikely, there is a chance the court would be unwilling to assist you and would not hear your suit.

The more likely scenario, however, is that you can probably obtain restitution (repayment) of the money you've shelled out, with interest, on the basis of fraud, unjust enrichment, or some related principle. You might be awarded a constructive trust on the land to secure payment of your judgment.

There are also a few cases (see California Supreme Court decision in Monarco v. LoGreco) holding that oral promises to convey land can be enforced when an owner has made promises over a period of time and the promisee has relied on those promises to his detriment - hence the legal theory is called "detrimental reliance" (and also "promissory estoppel").

So, there are a few theories; have a GOOD local real estate lawyer go over the facts and legal theories with you. You need a lawyer with imagination and a good knowledge of the case law and theory surrounding oral conveyances of real property.