Dispute of sale. Strange but true

[maril]

Mother obtained home from previous owner in exchange for debt. She later sold home for $1.00 to her son in 1989. Mother died in 2000. Her son is selling the house. Previous owner has now come forward with a scribbled piece of signed by mother(notary signature but no seal) stating that mother agrees to pay previous owner any profits over $30,000.00. Does the sons legal and documented purchase of the home in 1989 overide the mothers agreement with the previous owner since it is a purchase is less than 30,000.00? Would statute of limitations come into play? Is such a scribbled document good in court? This dispute is in Texas.

 

[HomeGuru]

Consult an attorney in Texas as he/she would need to see the document.

 

[JETX]

I agree with HG.

There could be some provisions (covenants) that would stay with the property even after property transfer, and some contingencies that would no longer apply on down-line sales. An attorney needs to read the ENTIRE documents and determine their validity on any existing conditions.

 

[maril]

Home Guru and Halket, Thanks for your replies. The son will be consulting an attorney. I did find out that the agreement between the previous owner and the mother was made prior to 1974. The home had been sold and reposessed by the mother about 15 years ago and the previous owner did nothing at that time. Also, only the signature of his ex wife is on the piece of paper along with the mothers signature. The agreement is hand written and the notary signature has no stamp, number or date. This is not a legal document. It just simply states that if the mother sells the property anything above 30,00.00 will go to the previous owner. Does this sound nuts?

 

[HomeGuru]

Even a squirrel thinks that's nuts.

 

[maril]

Haha ha! Very funny.

 

[maril]

To all, Just spoke to attorney about this case and he called it attempted extortion. Says there are no grounds to apply the agreement due to statute of limitations and the fact that the son had purchased the property so many years ago. He told the son just to tell them he did not recognize the material as a document and that he would prosecute if they contacted him about the matter again.

 

[JETX]

Sounds like some good advice.

Glad this (probably) worked out.

 

[maril]

This part has been taken care of. See my other post.