Absolutely yes, you have the right to sell your piece of the property to anyone you wish who accepts the terms of being a co-owner with your sister.

She can borrow the funds to buy you out (ideally, charge her a premium for being a witch in this regard).

Look, your little sis isn’t going to save you when the chips are down - not gonna happen. You have to look after your own life, and selling property YOU OWN is perfectly appropriate. Whether she ‘has,’ to sell hers is irrelevant - she can live with the arrangements you make, or suck eggs!

This is America. Blood is no longer thicker than water; family is just another tool to be used for your good. In this case I think you are being very generous in even considering her well being, but you owe her nothing.

Tell her to quit whining and live with YOUR decision.

THe correct answer is to borrow off of your half of the equity. If your sister won’t agree to that, there’s no need to offer her any incentive; force the sale in court and be done with it

When I read or hear about this sort of conflict-in-the-making, I count my lucky stars.

My Sister and I lost our Father (who was divorced from our Mother) in 1988. He left a small ranch and a couple pieces of commercial property, naming my Sister as executrix — she and her husband live on the ranch, while I live in Thailand — but with our interests 50-50 and “co-mingled.” That meant at first every time something legal needed to be done, my Sister would have to send documents to get me to countersign, and it was becoming rather problematic. (We were doing a lot the first few years, mainly aimed at staying out of trouble with the IRS!)

Anyway, our lawyer suggested we modify the ownership slightly, giving her slightly more than me, thereby enabling her to sign without having to get my signature.

*Could* she sell out lock, stock, and barrell and leave me twisting? Yes. Be she *always* consults me on all decisions of any consequence. Always.

Further, at my insistence she draws a small salary from the income generated from our commercial properties, which puts things at least partly on a businesslike level.

After 19 years without a single spat, let alone fight, I reckon yes, I’m one lucky guy.

I hope the brother and sister get their conflict sorted out amicably and to everyone’s satisfaction.

One thing that wasn’t made clear is what happens if the sister buys the brother’s share (and all associated responsibilities) in the vacation home. At some point in the future, are he and his wife going to expect ‘free’ use of the vacation home? My suggestion is to get this clarified in writing if the sister finds a way to retain at least a share in the home.

I actually saw a situation very similar to this one where the two brothers owned a house together, and one of them refused to sell the house. They also refused to negotiate and ended up going to court. Through the process the mom sided with one of the brothers and cut-off the other brother. The entire family ended up on non speaking terms. The funniest part is that there was no equity in the house, in a market that was declining and they had the ability to sell and walk away clean from the property. Because it took so long they eventually had to pay money to sell the house and took a loss. This goes to show that you should pick your investing partners wisely, and might want to look outside of family!

The “Do The Right Thing” answer assumes that the parties purchased the property. Suppose the parties inherited the property? That would make a difference and completely undermine the DTRT answer.

The parties asking the question should visit a qualified real estate lawyer to help them evaluate all of their options, including those suggested by DTRT and by the other Comments. The parties also need to know that they in fact have a legal option to compel the sale of the property — it is called PARTITION — but part of the price paid for invoking partition is relationship damage, transitory or permanent.

Lesson learned: Think twice before you participate in a business dealing with a family member or friend. Don’t get me wrong, there are many successfull family/friend co-owned businesses and properties out there. But your relationships will go a lot smoother without finances being involved.

To SoCal Tommy’s comment: I agree with the author’s comment too, but I disagree with yours. For example, I love both my brother and my wife. But when push comes to shove, I will always choose what’s in the best interest of me and my wife over my brother. That’s not to say I don’t care about my brother. It’s just than I vowed to spend my life with my wife, not with him. It may not be the perfect decision, but it’s hard decisions like that that will keep me happily married rather than divorced.

I disagree with WylieMoney. Why should the Sister be put out because the brother wants to help his wife start her own business? Granted, it should have been established up front on how they’d get out of part of the ownership, but everyone has 20/20 hindsight. If the only source of funds the husband and wife have to start a business is the equity in a shared property, maybe they are jumping the gun on starting a business? In addition, the sister should not be the one to “have to” find a buyer, other partner, etc. as one person wrote. It is not her problem.

I find your arguments intriguing to say the least. This “vacation home”, in all probability, was probably purchased with the following intent in mind by both parties:
- A luxury that both families can use
- Was done in a way to make the endeavor affordable for both parties

This vacation home is not a cash cow, as some of you see. I am not sure what the siblings thought processes were, but having a vacation home was probably in the forefront of their buying decision, not looking at the house as a piggy bank for emergency ventures for the future. Sure, the wife wants a business now, but they also wanted a vacation home before. Writing off the “family factor”, ultimately there are 2 things at play that need to be addressed: differentiating the necessities of your financial life from simple insatiable wants.

I disagree.

He is under no obligation to subsidize his sister’s housing, especially if it is a vacation home. That his reason is to further his family’s livelihood is all the more reason to follow through, but I do not think the reason matters.

If one person wants out of a dual owned property, the remaining owner should make all the effort to either buy out the other half or find a replacement owner that she feels good about (and certainly clarify the contract next time around). If the remaining owner can’t find a way to cover the other half, either by buying it or finding a new buyer, it is probably in her best interest to sell as well.

The only thing she is ‘giving up’ is a vacation property that she can’t afford!

WylieMoney

I agree with Tim wholeheartedly, and sad to add one other component, but: You could end up getting a divorce (what’s the % now, over 50%?), but your sister will always be your sister.

This is a tough one. I agree you should decide what will happen if one wants to sell and the other doesn’t before such a purchase takes place.

From an investment point of view, your sister should not stand in the way if you want to sell your investment. You could force a sale legally, but you can kiss your sister and her family good bye if you go that route.

If you need that money to survive, then do what you must. But, if your wife’s business idea isn’t worth terminating your relationship with your sister, then find the money elsewhere.

Don’t most new businesses fail within the first year? One year from now you could have lost all the money and lost your sister. That would be a sad outcome, indeed.