Can I force my ex to sell the house we bought together?

I purchased a house jointly with my then partner in 1992. We each sold our existing properties and were able to purchase the property outright with no mortgage. A solicitor drew up a deed making us tenants in common.

We separated in 1995, and the same solicitor drew up a second deed varying the terms of the original one. He recommended that we used separate solicitors, but I did not take his advice.

At the time I was under considerable pressure. My ex-partner was an intimidating, controlling character and I was keen to get out of the relationship with the least possible fuss. He was also litigious. 

The new deed allowed him to live in the property for as long as he wished, let rooms and keep the proceeds. He was to be responsible for maintaining the interior and we agreed to share the maintenance of the fabric of the building jointly. I have kept up my end of the bargain, but he seems to have done little.

Before 2015 there were no laws against controlling or coercive behaviour in a relationship. It is clear to me with hindsight that he realised he was getting a good deal and that is why he agreed to it without fuss. 

He is responsible for insuring the property, and is required to indemnify me against any costs, claims and demands arising from his use of it.

The agreement can only be terminated if he wanted to vacate or sell, or on death, in which case the property would be sold with the surviving partner having first option on the other’s half share. 

I thought he would eventually sell, but 30 years on he is still living there. I have now reached pension age and was relying on my 50 per cent share of the sale to fund my retirement. 

When I attempt to instruct surveyors to value the property, my ex-partner refuses access and I have had to instruct solicitors on several occasions.  He picks quarrels over almost everything almost as if he gains satisfaction from running up my professional fees by arguing the smallest details.

This situation has gone on for over 30 years and is becoming increasingly intolerable. I feel as though I have effectively financed my ex-partner’s pension by enabling him to live off the proceeds of letting rooms. 

Is there anything I can do now to force a sale? Via email  

Ed Magnus of This is Money replies: This is without doubt an unfortunate situation.

You expected your ex-partner to sell your joint property relatively soon after your separation in 1995, allowing both of you to move on with your lives. 

The situation you describe sounds as if it could be an example of economic abuse. This is a common form of domestic abuse, which involves the abuser restricting their victim’s ability to acquire, use, or maintain money or other economic resources.

Preventing you from selling or accessing a home that you own 50 per cent of is essentially restricting your access to an economic resource that is rightfully yours.

It could be deemed a form of control that has reduced your ability to make your own choices and live an autonomous life.

As many as one in six women in the UK have experienced economic abuse by a current or former partner, according to the Charity Refuge. 

The reader feels as though they have effectively financed their ex-partner’s pension by enabling them to live off the proceeds of letting rooms.

You mention that at the time you signed the new deed of variation you were under considerable pressure and that your ex-partner was an intimidating, controlling character who scared you.  

The Serious Crime Act 2015, currently addresses the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour where the victim and perpetrator are personally connected.

Under the current legislation personally connected means intimate partners, or former intimate partners or family members who live together. 

However, there is currently an amendment proposed that would remove the co-habitation requirement.

It would mean that a situation like this, where the abuse continues long after a break-up, may well be covered in the future.

There could also perhaps be an argument here for duress – albeit it may be your word against his.

Duress is defined as unlawful pressure, force, or threats used to coerce someone into doing something against their will or better judgement.

If one is the victim of duress, then any contract or agreement entered into as a result of the duress is void. 

To get advice for our reader, we spoke to Christina Govier, head of support to financial services at the charity Surviving Economic Abuse, Chun Wong, a partner at Hodge Jones & Allen solicitors and Stephen Nettle, senior solicitor at Co-op Legal Services.

Most solicitors we approached said they would need to see the deeds before they could advise

Is this economic abuse? 

Christina Govier replies: We’re so sorry to hear of your situation. The intimidating and controlling behaviour from your ex-partner could be considered abuse.

We also hear from people whose ex-partners have forced them to incur legal fees as a form of control.

Domestic abuse takes many forms and does not always involve the use of physical violence.

Some abusers control their partner’s everyday actions and choices, becoming or threatening to become violent if their demands are refused.

An abuser may control your economic resources – including housing. This is known as economic abuse.

Unfortunately, there are many ways that an abuser can use jointly-owned property as a tool of control.

For example, they might stop making their share of mortgage payments, refuse to move out of the property or withhold consent for a sale.

Your ex-partner may have told you certain things about separation and home ownership that are not true in an effort to maintain control over you and the property. You can find more information here.

Economic abuse is a common form of domestic abuse, which involves the abuser restricting their victim’s ability to acquire, use, or maintain money or other economic resources

At this point, it’s important that you seek legal advice to explore your options. A service like Finding Legal Options for Women Survivors could help with that. 

You may also wish to seek advice from Rights of Women around managing this situation.

We know that obtaining legal advice can be very expensive and often unaffordable for those experiencing economic abuse.

Legal aid is available in some cases where there has been domestic abuse but was not always an option for many homeowners because of the means test.

However, the Legal Aid Agency has recently recognised that domestic abuse survivors may have money that is tied up in a property and that they can’t access, and can account for this in the means assessment. You can find out more here.

Exploiting, restricting or sabotaging economic resources after a relationship has ended is post-separation abuse.

It can create economic instability and prevent a survivor from rebuilding their life safely and independently.

This form of abuse is now criminalised in an amendment to the new 2021 Domestic Abuse Act – we expect that this will come into force in spring 2022.

If you think you might be experiencing economic abuse, phone the police in the first instance. You can also contact the National Domestic Violence Helpline for support on 0808 2000 247.

What’s the legal advice? 

Chun Wong replies: It is unusual to have disputes where a Deed of Declaration or Trust has been drawn up, as most cases consider what happens when there is no formal written agreement in place.

It is certainly good practice to have a deed drawn up to avoid any ambiguity and arguments later.

It is also prudent to ensure that the legal title is registered in joint names reflecting the beneficial shares as set out in the deed.

Assuming both parties contributed in equal terms and on the basis that they are tenants in common in equal shares, it seems unusual that one party has been allowed to stay in the property with no compensation to the non-resident party by way of occupational rent, and that any formal rent is not split equally.

The problem is that the client was advised to take independent legal advice and chose not to do so.

It may be arguable about whether the solicitor at the time could act for both clients given there appears to be a potential conflict of interest.

You may wish to obtain a copy of the file from the time to see if there is scope to explore this further.

Without seeing the deed and knowing the full facts of the case, I think the client is in a difficult position.

They could try and negotiate a further variation of the terms between the parties, perhaps giving their partner a slightly bigger share of the proceeds if he agrees to sell now or within a short period.

Failing that, if they were to make an application to force the sale of the property, the other party is likely to seek to rely on the terms of the deed.

Stephen Nettle replies: This is an extremely difficult situation. To be able to advise fully, any solicitor who you instruct will need to see the two deeds to which you refer, dating from 1992 and 1995.

Unfortunately, it does not appear that your former partner has any intention of leaving the property soon, which leaves you in a prejudiced financial position, as you describe.

What is open to you, is to make an application to the Court for an Order for Sale under the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, often referred to as Tolata.

The Court has a wide discretion under Tolata in terms of the making of an order for sale.

The Court would need to consider all the relevant circumstances. You could raise your former partner’s intimidating, oppressive behaviour.

Our reader, having now reached pensionable age, was relying on the proceeds of sale to fund her retirement

However, against this, it appears likely from what you say that any application for sale would be strongly opposed.

Your former partner would be able to argue that you entered a deed which allowed him to live in the property for so long as he wished.

I consider that he could put forward strong arguments in this respect for the court refusing to make an Order for Sale. He could also point to your delay in seeking sale.

The possibility of undue influence on the part of your ex-partner will also need to be considered, but it would be likely to prove problematic to establish this, in light of the fact that it appears that you were informed of the need to consider seeking independent advice before executing the deed.

I think it is important that you seek legal advice in relation to this matter.

You do, however, need to be aware that proceedings under Tolata can prove costly, with you running the risk of paying your former partner’s legal costs in the event that your application fails.

One alternative would be for solicitors to contact your former partner on an off the record basis, otherwise described as a without prejudice basis, proposing either the sale of the property within some specified time period or the buyout of your interest by your former partner in return for a fixed payment.

It is worth noting that the Court has no power under Tolata to order such a buyout.