What is the name of your state?california
my mother entered a verbal agreement to purchase a piece of property that the property taxes were delinquint around 12,300 dollars and was close to being put up for auction and after paying the back taxes the seller told my mom that he was backing out of their agreement and selling to someone else and if she didnt give him another 5,000 dollars that she wouldnt get any of her money back unfortunately they didnt have any of this in writing is there anything that can be done about this
Please ignore the naysayer and have your mother confer with a knowledgeable attorney that can assess the particulars. She just may be able to avoid the impact of the
statute of frauds * requiring that the agreement to be in writing and signed by the owner. The $12.3K could readily be argued as the agreed down payment and sufficient corroborating evidence to avoid the application of the statute. .
But she needs to act promptly to prevent a third party from purchasing the property and securing a superior title. Meaning, like filing an action for a declaratory judgment asking that the oral agreement be enforced and recording a Lis Pendens.
[*] Here please note that the laws mandating that agreements for the sale of land must be in writing in order to be enforceable are designed to protect owners from unsupported falsified and fraudulent verbal claims. (Thus the name:
Statute of Frauds).
However, in instances where there is substantial independent evidence tending to corroborate an oral agreement, some courts have enforced it reasoning that the protection afforded by the statute doesn't apply. That is, that the corroborating evidence precludes any finding of fraud or any injustice intended or perpetrated by the purported buyer.
There is of course always difficulty in proving the contents of oral communications. Particularly where there is a dispute as to the contents. And in this instance there would need to be detailed findings of the essential term and conditions of the sale, as the court cannot infer or create them.
If it weren't for her payment of the delinquent taxes and never having taken possession of the property she wouldn't have a ghost of a chance. But she's entitled to be compensated for the $12.3K, whether it is applied as a down payment or reimbursed in cash.
It's no slam-dunk, but it does have psychological appeal. And a demand on the jerk that he either honor their deal an close on it or cough up the $12.3K - which he likely doesn't have - might bring him around.
Keep us posted please.
