Melbourne Lass
Member
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2016
- Messages
- 122
- Reaction score
- 0
The victim in this case is KR. BR had transferred the family home into KR's name only after the 2000 collapse of the business, which is mortgaged to Westpac Bank. There was a caveat over the property, prohibiting it from being sold or transferred.
KR was loaning money from Westpac.
The Ristevski family was plagued with financial burdens and their Bella Bleu clothing boutique in Broadmeadows, in Melbournes north, closed down in February.
- Both KR and BR where partners in formalwear business (Bella Bleu)
- BR - Sole sharholder of Warrant Brands
- KR - Director of Warrant Brands
Can, someone please pick at this scenario.
Just say, BR wanted to sell the house in Oakley Drive or somehow regain control of the house and couldn't because it was in KR's name, and due to the caveat.
Would the debts dissapear if KR had passed away? Would the debts be handed over and leave BR with the responsibility of the mortgage? I understand that it could be different scenario's for everyone due to morgage agreements/wills.
Would the caveat still apply in this scenario (if) BR was handed over the morgage? If the property could not be transferred into BR's name, would the dissapearance of KR help to get the property transferred back into BR's name.
The caveat has been withdrawn. I posted about this in an earlier thread but I don't know how to link to it.