FINANCIAL BARGAINING – WHEN THE RELATIONSHIP ENDS

FINANCIAL BARGAINING – WHEN THE RELATIONSHIP ENDS
by Roger V. McCaffrey-Boss
Copyright by Gay Chicago Magazine and Roger McCaffrey-Boss
July 30-August 5, 2009

Q: Several years ago, my lover and I decided to move in together. We never put in writing our financial and property agreements because we felt our relationship would last forever.
We purchased a run down three-flat on Foster and instead of working at a regular job, I spent my time working on the building and going to school to get a college degree. My lover just told me that he wants to split up and that I must move. To pressure me while I was in school, he moved all my furniture out of the house and threatened not to return any unless I moved out next week.

I discovered that the building is in my lover’s name and I don’t own any part of it. I fixed up the building to make it worth what it is today. Where do I stand legally?

A: It is really annoying when lawyers say, “The first rule of disputes is that the time to write a agreement is never when you need it. Once a person wants to move out or end the relationship, it is too late.” Unfortunately, it is so true.

The law in Illinois does not recognize the validity of LGBT relationships and affords no protections as are provided to heterosexual married couples. Unlike the heterosexual married couple, one member of a LGBT couple can’t go to court and ask a judge for a fair distribution of the “marital property.” Nor can a LGBT couple ask a judge to fairly split the property to equalize their economic position after the breakup.

If one member of the couple should try and pull a power play and take property belonging to the other person, the law provides a fast remedy to recover possession of property wrongfully taken. The remedy is called an action for replevin which is a special kind of lawsuit to determine who is entitled to possession of personal property – furniture, stereo household items etc.

Second, self-help evictions are against the law. Courts have ruled the following actions to be illegal ousters by landlords: changing apartment locks, removal of doors or windows, stopping utility services to the apartment, and acts of violence against a tenant or his property. A building owner cannot oust a tenant without due process of law.

With respect to the building, one way to achieve a fair split of assets in a breakup is to look at the methods developed to resolve property disputes in heterosexual breakups. Those methods are based on the premise that the marriage relationship or partnership has become an economic partnership and that property acquired during the relationship should be divided in a way that recognizes the contribution of both parties to the relationship.

This method can result in an unjust situation, however, when the relationship ends and the nonworking (or homemaker) partner is left with nothing, as in the question. The nonworking partner in this case might have to go to court and claim that there was either an oral partnership to share in the increase of value of the building or a constructive trust because of the work and money contributed to the improvement of the building. Either legal remedy would prove to be expensive because of the need for lawyers to fight out the dispute in the courts.

The best method for resolving property disputes, however, is for the couple to have a written agreement to cover disposition of all property and to provide in their agreement that disputes must be resolved by mediation or arbitration.

Roger McCaffrey-Boss is a graduate of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, and is a member of the Chicago Bar Association. You can e-mail him at RVMLAWYER@aol.com . He suggests that you consult your own lawyer for any specific questions regarding the issues raised in this column.
advertisement