House transfer / buying from ex with ongoing loan / costs

Just to focus on solutions: Who would actually be the expert to ask about something like this? Tax advisor? Or a notary?

The question is: Should this be considered a purchase and if so, what costs are involved or can some of them be reduced? And if not, what is it then?

It’s too complicated for a layman’s forum ;) Better don’t trust us!

That’s right! Too much half-knowledge ;)

And my layman’s understanding is that in many cases a notarized transfer means a gift (or occurs in the context of another contract aka divorce or purchase).

From the consequence of my first post one could read: Notarial matters can be discussed with them beforehand. After all, he is also an advisor. I could have written that too :rolleyes: Maybe this thread would have gone in the right direction if here the hobby notaries hadn’t repeatedly misunderstood something from the answers. There was a time when I felt like I was constantly at the notary. House purchase, sale, bought a notional half of a house, sold it again. Heritable building rights, etc. Having contracts approved, inheritance here and inheritance there… I actually have no idea about the subject, but trust in the notary, who every time made the best, at least something very good out of it. The only important thing is that both parties agree – then it usually also works without an expensive lawyer.

I never wrote anywhere that he received money for the transfer!

He is out and internally received from me the equity he had invested in the house.

hm. You did ;)

Those are your recipient antennas!

No, whoever writes that something is handled "internally" writes that it is not official. Period.

Because you accused me in dribs and drabs of being wrong?!

No, because with every crumb you give us, the case changes completely. That's just how it is in law.

Why?

Because the dispute in the divorce is again a case to be considered separately. And we could have told you that on page 2 if we had known. It is also explicitly stated in the Real Estate Transfer Tax Act.

Why are you so pissed off right now? I don't want to harm you, but the OP is asking about costs in the transfer in his specific case. And your own experience has nothing to do with that. From my professional experience, I know these topics well enough – so many customers work with us on a "tax avoidance strategy" involving share deals, etc.

Peace

Again: he did not receive any money for the transfer. It is nowhere written, even if you would like it to be so.
There was even more than a year in between. He got the money because he left… internally that means nothing was dependent on that.
Do you want the exact timeline to try to still find out that something with the tax office isn’t kosher?

Next time, you better ignore statements like mine if you only care about the original poster.
… Pretending to be clueless emphatically and putting on the white vest, that fits.
First a hyena sniffing out the prey, wanting to hunt it, then playing the lamb.
Yes, I am pissed off… yes! But that does not make me weaker or dumber! But it nicely shows your hunting instinct to want to corner others.

That’s really it now: I’m out! You can have the last word.

Hello everyone,

I notice that this is becoming a very emotional discussion :-) Thank you for that. A few basics of my problem again:

1. There was no marriage/civil partnership.
2. The bank agrees to transfer the loan to me.
3. No money will be exchanged. Only 1/3 of the house from B to A and A’s assumption of the loan. Basically as consideration, B will then be out (of the house and the loan).

I have to contact a notary anyway and hope that they have an adequate solution. Ultimately, it is of course about me having to pay as little money as possible.

I have to contact a notary anyway and hope that they have an adequate solution. In the end, of course, it’s about me having to pay as little money as possible.

I wouldn’t necessarily call that "of course." I could rather imagine a solution where both sides feel afterwards that they have not been taken advantage of by the other; numbers are then more secondary and a notary then legally secures the whole thing in a contract. "As little as possible" implies that the other side pays as much as possible and that applies to both sides. I once did—or had to do—this with a friend. Nobody wanted to pay too much but everyone also understood that the other felt the same way. On a long evening, we managed it and our friendship, which was at risk at the time, still lasts to this day.