fbpx
Previous
Next

Advertisement Banner

No title to property? Woman showed proof to gain 73 pct share of the property.

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on whatsapp
man and woman near table

Is your name on all the assets you paid / are paying for today?

Frankly, if you like to share with someone to buy a property, it’s best to do it properly. The Sale and Purchase Agreement should have your name too and it’s not good enough to just base on trust. It may not be due to trust sometimes because circumstances change / happen. Here’s one case where the buyer wanted to save on taxes and thus did not have her name on the property. She trusted her MBA course-mate instead.

Then, she got involved in a court case where the wife of the man she trusted with the property purchase wanted the court to declare that she had no stake in the property. Oh dear, not an easy time for her definitely.

Article in straitstimes.com A woman (Ms. Yeow) and a married man bought a $1.7 million house together as an investment, but put the property under the man’s sole name to “save costs” on stamp duties and property tax. The agreement was for the house to be sold and the profits shared once the price hits S$3.5 million. Ms Yeow was transferring $7,000 to $10,000 every month to Mr Ramasamy to pay the mortgage. her total contribution was S$833,600 and Mr Ramasamy’s as S$310,000.

The married man’s wife staked her claim on the house in Hougang. Ms. Yeow was a course-mate to the man in a Master of Business Administration programme. Ms. Yeow showed proof that she contributed 73 percent to the purchase and related expenses. The judge ruled that after having carefully analysed the evidence, Ms. Yeow has indeed proven that she and Mr Ramasamy had intended for their beneficial interest in the property to be apportioned according to each person’s financial contributions. Please do read the article in full here: Article in straitstimes.com

An oral agreement is still a valid agreement

By the way, an agreement does not need to be in written form in order to be valid. An oral agreement is also valid BUT it would be harder to prove and if there’s just an oral agreement between two persons, then it gets even harder to prove if both parties are saying different things. This is why when it comes to something which is S$1.14 million (RM3.53 million), better not rely on oral agreements and it’s not always possible to prove what was agreed or in this case, showing proof that she did pay for the property and that her stake was higher than the person whose name is on the property.

I think in this case, justice prevailed if all the facts of the case are as per reported. Happy understanding and learning from such a case yeah.

Love news like this and more? Sign up for daily investment news updates. Alternatively, Follow me on Telegram here.

Please LIKE kopiandproperty.com FB page to get daily updates about the property market beyond kopiandproperty.com articles. Else, follow me on Twitter here.

Sign up for KopiWeekly. (only once per week of property, finance, investment news and more)

Next suggested article: Renting without a tenancy agreement?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

We love to hear from you (Facebook Comment)

LIKE us for property news update, FREE.

Previous
Next

Advertisement Banner

kopiandproperty.com

kopiandproperty.com

kopiandproperty.com is everything about property related writings and news. Enjoy reading with a latte.
Previous
Next

Advertisement Banner

LIKE us for property news update, FREE.

Property investment news everyday? Subscribe for free!

An article a day, keeps updated all the way.

Join 1,544 other subscribers

Property investment news everyday?

An article a day, keeps updated all the way. Subscribe for free!

join the family

Like us for daily investment news and more

Hit the like

%d bloggers like this: