The author posted a question in Legal Advice
Then a question? and got a better answer
Response from
hmm.and is it documented - a gift, and there are no supporting documents about the provision of, so to speak, revenge towards your father's sister from the person who now rubs you the wrong way? You can file a lawsuit for violation of your constitutional rights, that you are prevented from living. Prepare the evidence - statements to the plumbing, to the local police department, testimony, maybe even install a hidden camera - will not hurt. Also your main proof will be that when the gift, since the property is joint - your consent is not asked Good luck?
Response from 0[+++++]
hmm.is it documented as a gift, and is there no supporting documentation of any so called gratuitous treatment of your father's sister by the person who now rubs you the wrong way? You can file a lawsuit for violation of your constitutional rights that you are prevented from living. Prepare the evidence - applications to the Plovdiv to the local police department of the testimony of witnesses, maybe even install a hidden camera - will not hurt. Also your main evidence will be that the gift since the property is joint - your consent is not asked Good luck
hmm.is it documented as a gift, and is there no supporting documentation of any so called gratuitous treatment of your father's sister by the person who now rubs you the wrong way? You can file a lawsuit for violation of your constitutional rights that you are prevented from living. Prepare the evidence - applications to the Plovdiv to the local police department of the testimony of witnesses, maybe even install a hidden camera - will not hurt. Also your main evidence will be that the gift since the property is joint - your consent is not asked Good luck
Response from 0[+++++]
What kind of contract is he on? On the sale, right? What does it mean that she donated it? The transaction should be registered where you can see what the deal was. Did daddy's sister offer to buy daddy's share first? If not, cancel their contract Worst-case scenario, you can sell your share to gangsters and use the money to move to a quieter place.
What kind of contract is he on? On the sale, right? What does it mean that she donated it? The transaction should be registered where you can see what the deal was. Did daddy's sister offer to buy daddy's share first? If not, cancel their contract Worst-case scenario, you can sell your share to gangsters and use the money to move to a quieter place.
Response from 0[+++++]
I see my sister donated her share of the apartment. My suggestion is to challenge the transaction as a sham. And try to prove in court that your father's sister did not donate part of the apartment, i.e. gave it without compensation, i.e. for free, and received money for it. Thus she cheated the law.
I see my sister donated her share of the apartment. My suggestion is to challenge the transaction as a sham. And try to prove in court that your father's sister did not donate part of the apartment, i.e. gave it without compensation, i.e. for free, and received money for it. Thus she cheated the law.
Response from 0[+++++]
You just buy out his share and that's it.
You just buy out his share and that's it.
Response from 0[+++++]
This is most likely a sham transaction. The consent of the second owner of the father bypassed the contract of donation. that's all. But here you can in court to refer to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation p. Article 3, clause 4.
This is most likely a sham transaction. The consent of the second owner of the father bypassed the contract of donation. that's all. But here you can in court to refer to the Housing Code of the Russian Federation p. Article 3, clause 4.
Response from 0[+++++]
It's simple - in court, the transaction is being challenged because the pre-emptive right to buy the share was violated. Sister should have offered in writing to buy the share first her father. Since such an offer was not - the transaction is terminated. Sister gives the money to the buyer. Buyer kicks new locks and a second door If it was really a gift but received money - then on the advice of TEDI.
It's simple - in court, the transaction is being challenged because the pre-emptive right to buy the share was violated. Sister should have offered in writing to buy the share first her father. Since such an offer was not - the transaction is terminated. Sister gives the money to the buyer. Buyer kicks new locks and a second door If it was really a gift but received money - then on the advice of TEDI.
Response from 0[+++++]
can be challenged easily. The law is broken here. First of all, she should have first offered to buy her share to her father as a co-partner. If she did not do this, the transaction can easily be considered invalid. She could not give this procedure is very long first she had to give her 1 meter, then register and donate then all. And where does your sister live now? You could have made a contract of real division of the apartment. But you can't do it now. It is necessary to recognize the transaction void sister just have to talk to the man and make a contract dissolving the transaction. How could she give a gift?
can be challenged easily. The law is broken here. First of all, she should have first offered to buy her share to her father as a co-partner. If she did not do this, the transaction can easily be considered invalid. She could not give this procedure is very long first she had to give her 1 meter, then register and donate then all. And where does your sister live now? You could have made a contract of real division of the apartment. But you can't do it now. It is necessary to recognize the transaction void sister just have to talk to the man and make a contract dissolving the transaction. How could she give a gift?