Help: Shared ownership and access rights

[Edie]

I'd appreciate it if anyone knows the law on this one...

If two people jointly own a house, but one moves out so that they're no longer living there at all, do they still have as much right to enter and leave the house as they wish cos they still half own it?

Ta.

 

[el-ahrairah]

Not necessarily. Esp. if they are a couple that have split up - coming and going without consent can be seen as a form of harrassment i know but am not sure what the actual law is though.

 

[Edie]

Not necessarily. Esp. if they are a couple that have split up - coming and going without consent can be seen as a form of harrassment i know but am not sure what the actual law is though.

Well I've heard that the actual law says the opposite, that is a property is in your name and it's not let or anything then you have a legal right to enter it. This was off a mate of a mate who IS actually a lawyer but the info was second hand iyswim.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

I can't immediately think of any legal reason why someone who's part owner of a place shouldn't have access to it.

Unless it gets in to the realms / potential of either harrassment, criminal damage or theft of the other person's property.

Are the people in question working on something to try and resolve the ownership (e.g. sell the place, one buy the other one out) or what?

I think proper legal advice may be needed here...

 

[Edie]

It's not harassment, criminal damage or theft. It's just a feeling of 'you don't live here no more so you shouldn't just be able to walk in'. It's hard to explain. It's territorial.

 

[purenarcotic]

They have a legal right to access it if they joint own it. You can prevent this by seeking an Occupation Order though I've only used them in the context of DV so don't know if this can be applied for in other circumstances.

 

[Edie]

They have a legal right to access it if they joint own it. You can prevent this by seeking an Occupation Order though I've only used them in the context of DV so don't know if this can be applied for in other circumstances.

Ta. That's pretty clear then

 

[trashpony]

They have a legal right to access it if they joint own it. You can prevent this by seeking an Occupation Order though I've only used them in the context of DV so don't know if this can be applied for in other circumstances.

Yes, I'm fairly sure this is the case. If they are getting divorced, who gets the house should be sorted out in division of assets.

You're not legally allowed to change the locks unless you want to pursue a DV/harrassment claim against them

 

[5t3IIa]

Yes, I'm fairly sure this is the case. If they are getting divorced, who gets the house should be sorted out in division of assets.

You're not legally allowed to change the locks unless you want to pursue a DV/harrassment claim against them

But it's not illegal in the sense that the police will be the ones to tell you to change them back, it's a civil matter, I believe.

 

[Wilson]

If you lost your keys then it would be entirely reasonable to change the locks, you wouldn't then go giving a key to someone who doesn't live there as they don't need one.

 

[geminisnake]

What Wilson said but as he jointedly owns the house there's naff all to stop him breaking the kitchen window to get in if you had to change the locks

 

[stuff_it]

Well I've heard that the actual law says the opposite, that is a property is in your name and it's not let or anything then you have a legal right to enter it. This was off a mate of a mate who IS actually a lawyer but the info was second hand iyswim.

Well obvs not if you have a tennant.
I think the person who has moved out should perhaps give 24 hrs notice if they're going round, the same time as if they were landlord and tenant. Probably visiting all the time won't be particularly welcome either.

Depending on how much the people have fallen out anything less may well be inviting a harassment claim no matter how spurious.

 

[Edie]

Yes, I'm fairly sure this is the case. If they are getting divorced, who gets the house should be sorted out in division of assets.

You're not legally allowed to change the locks unless you want to pursue a DV/harrassment claim against them

Thing is the whole business takes months and months and months.

Changing the locks would be a bit confrontational given this is disagreed over.

What she wants to be able to say is look, this is me and the kids home now, you've got your own place that I can't walk into. You can't just let yourself in, I might not want to see you, or I might be in my pyjamas, or I might have another bloke over, or it might just make me jump cos I'm not expecting anyone to be there.

 

[purenarcotic]

It's not harassment, criminal damage or theft. It's just a feeling of 'you don't live here no more so you shouldn't just be able to walk in'. It's hard to explain. It's territorial.

If it was me and I had split up with someone and they had moved out but we jointly owned a house and they just kept walking in when they wanted, I would say it is quite harassing behaviour myself.

 

[purenarcotic]

Thing is the whole business takes months and months and months.

What she wants to be able to say is look, this is me and the kids home now, you've got your own place that I can't walk into. You can't just let yourself in, I might not want to see you, or I might be in my pyjamas, or I might have another bloke over, or it might just make me jump cos I'm not expecting anyone to be there.

An Occupation Order can be sought within 24 hours and upheld within a couple of weeks. I personally would seek some legal advice regarding Occupation Orders and whether this behaviour would qualify for one. There is a number I can pass on if you want where they should be able to clearly outline all the reasons where an Occupation Order could be sought.

 

[5t3IIa]

Thing is the whole business takes months and months and months.

Changing the locks would be a bit confrontational given this is disagreed over.

What she wants to be able to say is look, this is me and the kids home now, you've got your own place that I can't walk into. You can't just let yourself in, I might not want to see you, or I might be in my pyjamas, or I might have another bloke over, or it might just make me jump cos I'm not expecting anyone to be there.

I suppose she can say that, and be ignored or agreed with or disagreed with or whatever but essentially it doesn't matter what she says if the other person isn't reasonable.

Has she spoken to a solicitor about steps to geta divorce moving?

 

[Edie]

I suppose she can say that, and be ignored or agreed with or disagreed with or whatever but essentially it doesn't matter what she says if the other person isn't reasonable.

Has she spoken to a solicitor about steps to geta divorce moving?

Well yes exactly! The divorce has passed the decree nisi stage, it's entering the sorting out the finances stage (ie the tricky bit).

purenarcotic I think she feels an Occupation Order would inflame an already very delicate situation that's currently working okay apart from this one issue.

 

[purenarcotic]

Well yes exactly! The divorce has passed the decree nisi stage, it's entering the sorting out the finances stage (ie the tricky bit).

purenarcotic I think she feels an Occupation Order would inflame an already very delicate situation that's currently working okay apart from this one issue.

Aye, I understand but it may be something to keep in mind if it continues or gets worse etc. It's really not on behaviour.

 

[Edie]

Well thanks for clarifying. I can't believe that law actually but there you go!

 

[equationgirl]

Well thanks for clarifying. I can't believe that law actually but there you go!

Sometimes the law defies reason, logic or common-sense.

 

[free spirit]

depending how the arrangement works, I'd think it could easily class as a verbal tenancy situation, whereby they have now become the equivalent of a landlord to you for their share of the house.

The rent effectively forming a part of their contribution to child support until the situation is permanently resolved in the divorce settlement.

So I'd think you would have pretty good case to insist on basic landlord / tenant style arrangements for access to the house.

I'd get the agreement written out as you see it, and clearly outline the access arrangements that you expect him to stick with.

eg

Following advice, I feel I need to clarify the situation regarding access arrangements to the house at xxx address.

Since xxx date you agreed to move out of the property following the breakdown of our relationship, and for myself and our children to continue living in the property until a final divorce settlement is agreed.

This agreement infers that while you still own part of the property, you no longer have residency rights in the property and have agreed to act in the role of a landlord for your share of the property as a part of your child maintenance responsibilities.

Your rights to access to the property have therefore now changed to those governed by The Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, and I would appreciate it if you would abide by the following basic rules for accessing the property.

1. You are entitled to access to the property for the purpose of viewing its condition and state of repair or similar.
2. You must give at least 24 hours notice if you need access to the house.
3. Access to the house must be at a reasonable time of day.

This doesn't mean that you can't also arrange access to collect our children for visits, or come into the house if I invite you in, I'm simply clarifying that you no longer have the right to come and go as you please.

I'd ask that you respect this.

Regards