Unjust enrichment

But your relationship had other benefits?

Perhaps you should consider the $18 per hour rate most of my sub's employees were making as a rule of thumb. If you documented your hours on a regular basis, you could take it to civil court, but if you think about it, the lawyer would probably get as much of that as YOU would. You could always ask him to take a 40% cut of the results for a small retainer. Thus I still think small claims would work in a state that had higher limits... and your state might be changing the limits... most states are. So double check your state limits on small claims court.

If you did not document your hours until later and made an estimate even then, I doubt you have much to gain in any court. Sometimes just threatening a civil suit will get a return of YOUR investment (time) in dollars. But if you were living there, you SHOULD have been paying half the expenses anyway.

For anyone else reading these posts, if a similar situation happens to you where you are putting cash into improvements to a house and doing the work yourself, if things go south in the relationship area, you should file a lien on the property at least for the money you have in the property. That didn't happen in time in this case. Learn from his mistakes.

Not sure of the advisability of putting a lien on your OWN property (he states "We built a house", even if it is jointly owned. If your name is on the deed, it doesn't make sense to encumber your own property. And, in order to put a lien on someone ELSE'S property, you need to have a prior arrangement that you will do so if the agreement isn't followed. He cannot just say, retroactively, "Hey, I think I am entitled to "X" amount of dollars, therefore I can slap this lien on your property".

You cannot just arbitrarily slap a mechanics lien on property with an understanding prior to the agreement that you will do so if the terms of the agreement and payment aren't followed. So, while a lien is a good way to help protect your investment, if prior agreement isn't made BEFORE hand, you cannot make one retroactive.

Hi All,

Thanks for the input.

I am the original poster.

The facts are that as a result of my 1000 to 1200 hours of work, she gained 40-45 thousand in equity - that is the difference between the cost of building the house (+ lot), and what it was appraised at for the mortgage.
She did not have the down payment of that magnitude.
I can document my time and effort by way of sub-contractors, family and friends that can provide testimony to my effort. This coorabation can also come from the American Home Partners company who provided the house packageand acted as the construction loan administrator. BTW, they told me that in the entire 8 months of the construction they taloked to her only about 3 to 5 times while I was the one with whom they dealt constantly and regularly.

There is also an appearance of intent that after about 1 1/2 years in the house and my having done much in the way of improvements she went and sought a "new" man in her life with the intent of "discarding" me upon finding "greener pastures". I do also have evidence now (wish I had it before) that she most likely has done this in the past - Hang onto one man until she finds a replacement.

It will no doubt be a complex case. AND, I have yet to find a lawyer who will take it on a contingency or percentage basis. I may have to try and do it myself and I am willing to make a strong and coherent effort.

I understand your predicament, but what concerns me is that you cannot come back "after the fact" so to speak and implement an agreement that wasn't there from the onset. Obviously, it makes sense that you intended to be together or you wouldn't have done all that work making HER a nice place to live. However, short of having something in writing, it is going to be difficult to win and attorney's don't take cases like this on contingency--because if you lose, they don't get paid.

Also, I'm afraid that ( speaking objectively) your comments about her past relationships, using them, discarding them so to speak isn't a sabre I'd rattle if I were you--because that reflects poorly on YOU. In other words, if that was the case, why would you have a relationship with someone like that? And, in doing so, you apparently found the risk of that happening to you not appreciable enough to keep you from investing time, money and effort into the venture. So, to even mention it ---especially since what you are speaking of isn't illegal is a moot point. I don't mean to sound unkind--I am trying to speak objectively and tell you how a judge or jury will hear what you are saying.

As a woman, and a human being I understand your frustration and hurt. But, unfortunately, that isn't something a jury can address.

Bottom line--short of something in writing outlining the particulars BEFOREHAND, I am not sure what legal leg you have to stand on.

Everyone that has a relationship that ends feels like they lost something they want back. Unfortunately, for you, that was more than emotion and feelings--it was money. And, in all honesty, I cannot see a court being able to find legal grounds for making an agreement (especially one she never agreed to specifically in writing) retroactive.

I wish you well.

Thanks for your input and your honest words.

I understand what you are saying. Please let me add that I doscovered much about the past in the discovery about her recent affair(s).

What I am thinking is to prove a pattern and intent to mislead. To gain at the expense of using me and my services.

Under the term unjust enrichment this seems actionable as per my discussions with a few attorneys.

If it had ended honorably, rather than her lying and cheating, we could I believe worked out an arrangement.

She did not have the down payment for a house and by building it oneslef there is "sweat equity" which facillitates an implied down payment.

I don't know why you folks have such a hard time understanding that most people who work the trades do NOT have a contract in writing to do work on a house that is inhabited. That specifically does not make it difficult to file a lien... and I doubt she could have sold a house that had his name on it without giving him a share, Grace, so your comment is out of context and not informed.

The fact that he can document the time spent should allow him to file small claims court documents to regain a small portion of the actual cost it would have been to her. Since she SOLD the house already, he has lost the ability to put a lien on the property which is the best form of protection against what she apparently did, but that doesn't stop him from suing her. And all this bruhaha about who was living with whom is irrelevant. One does not have to build onto the house in order to live there. Paying half the heat and mortgage should be sufficient as his share and is therefore irrelevant to the question of whether she should pay him for his time and for the money he put into the house for materials. Certainly nobody would allow an unqualified person to build or modify their house... just like nobody would do such a job without either the inference of future benefit of ownership or at the request of the owner and based on her actions, she was leading him to believe they were a couple. Unjust enrichment? Maybe, but it is simply fraud.

Five elements must be established to prove unjust enrichment:

1. An enrichment;
2. An impoverishment;
3. A connection between the enrichment and the impoverishment;
4. Absence of a justification for the enrichment and impoverishment; and
5. An absence of a remedy provided by law

I am not sure all those elements exist, but of course, if you have had legal counsel tell you it is possible, then by all means, proceed.

Good luck.

I doubt I could have invented a more incorrect definition or example of unjust enrichment.

The problem with trying to use the cohabitation as part of this case is that it is the equivalent of breach of promise or promissory fraud... which in federal courts and in some states has no remedy in the courts. Things change. You are and were entitled to the local rate for your work and any money you paid for materials. Your use of the relationship in a court case is a waste of time trying to show the equivalent of a fraud that cannot and will not be given a remedy by most court systems. Drop that part of your ruminations and sue for your lost wages... unjust enrichment is appropriate.