Which is the right judgment?

Question

Suppose I agreed to sell a property to person A. Person A agreed to pay full amount within 3 months and if not the person A looses any amount paid.Let us say person A paid 50percentof the total and did not pay the rest. 2 or 3 years passed and no payments were made. Later the value of the property goes up and now comes person A to pay the rest. The owner refuses to take any and decided not to sell the property to person A.

Now as a judge I would like to solve the issue.

Let us say I have 2 ways to dismiss the case

1. The person who is selling the property, must pay all the amount he received from person A with current interest rate so that the owner can sell it to someone else for the current price.

2. Since person A paid 50 percent of the money, the owner must give 50 percent of his property since he got paid for 50 percent of the property at an old rate and then the owner must take and own only 50 percent of the property. In other words person A now owns 50 percent of the property.

Which is the right judgment?

Answer 1

First of all, the seller owes A nothing in any event.  The original agreement states that A loses all money paid if the balance is not paid in 3 months.

On the other hand, the seller has allowed A to remain on the property for years without (so far as we know) making any attempt to collect the balance.  This essentially amounts to an admission that A is in fact the owner.

Neither of the offered options is acceptable.  The first requires repayment of an amount which is not due, per the original contract.  The 50 percent paid is lost, as agreed.  The second essentially allows A to get half of the property after breaching the original contract.

My ruling:

* A is now the constructive owner of the property.

* A owes the seller the entire amount of the original contract - the initial payment was lost, and the balance (plus interest) is still due.

* The original seller has a lien against anything A makes by selling the property, unless or until the above payment is made.

Then again, I'm not a lawyer.

Answer 2

neither. the "right" judgment would be this:

person A did not fullfill his obligations of the contract and pay all monies owed within the specified and agreed time.  this cause the person A to lose all interest in the property along with the monies paid.

Answer 3

neither.  If the deal called for forfeiture if the deal is not done, then A gets nothing.  No money, no property.  The only escape is if the deal had a clause requring the seller to give notice of exercising the option to keep the money and the property.  

Answer 4

If the agreement in writing, spells out that person "A" had signed and agreed to pay within the 3 months, agreed to forfiet any amount already paid, whether it is 50% or 99% the person A is not entitled to any money or property under the agreed signed contract.  There is nothing states in the contract of exclusions or exceptions under the terms.  Therefore, it is what it is...period.

Answer 5

3. The contract stated that if person A failed to pay the amount owed by a certain date then the property was forfeit and Person B keeps the money that was paid.

Judgment for Person B

Answer 6

Neither.  Person A breached the contract and forfeited any right to the property.  Since this is a sales of land, the Statute of Frauds applies, and all of this must be in writing.  

Answer 7

i have to agree with jwc, if in the contract person a was supposed to pay in full by a certain date or forfeit any and all monies paid then by rights person b has full and clear ownership of the property and the 50% that person a had given him 3 years ago.  person b, in this case, gets to have his cake and eat it too, person a should be a more savvy investor in the future