Family confusion over financial assistance to support their mother came to a head when Robin van der Byl needed a High Court order to force sale of her Palmerston North home in order to buy a home for himself. Justice Simon France dismissed family suggestions that Robin had muddied the waters in gaining part share of their mother’s home.
The High Court was told of van der Byl family discussions in 2006 about support for their parents. Son Robin suggested construction of a granny flat alongside the family home with their parents shifting into the granny flat and Robin with his then wife shifting into the main house. Neither his parents nor his siblings were in a position to provide financial support for the build. Robin put up $100,000. He told the court his parents offered to transfer a one-third share of the property to him ‘to protect’ his contribution. The High Court was told this amount roughly equated to one-third of the then market value of the property. Each had separate lawyers finalise the transaction. His father died whilst granny flat construction was underway. Three years later, in 2009, Robin moved out of the main house. Other members of the wider family subsequently shifted in; some paying rent, some not.
Some twelve years later, Robin was living in Australia in straightened circumstances. His only income was a national pension. His accommodation was a bedroom rented from a relative. Attempts to realise his share of the Palmerston North family home was met with more than dismay; some relatives were outraged that his 88 year old mother should be required to sell up and buy elsewhere in order to pay out his share. Robin should wait until his mother died, they said. Questions were raised about how Robin came to be part-owner.
Justice Simon France ruled there was nothing sinister in Robin becoming part-owner. The transaction was clearly documented. He was entitled to cash-out his part share. While his mother had lived at the property for nearly thirty years and any question of a move was stressful, Robin faced financial hardship in looking to buy a home for himself, Justice France said. Robin’s mother was offered the opportunity to buy out her son’s share of the Palmerston North property at a court-ordered valuation, failing that it is to be sold.
An online valuation values the property at $850,000. Evidence was given that Robin had accidentally wound up as half owner of the Palmerston North property after his father’s death because of a lawyer’s mistake in naming Robin as a joint owner rather than owner as tenant-in-common with a one-third share. In the High Court, Robin asked to be cashed-out at a one third share, being the intent of the 2006 financial arrangement.
van der Byl v. van der Byl – High Court (28.04.22)
22.077