Scenario:
2 Friends(Joe and Bob) bought a house 20 years ago.
Joe is moving out and Bob would like to pay Joe out vs selling the house.
Bob believes that ((Appraisal - (Fees)) - mortgage) / 2 is what he should pay Joe.
Where Fees includes an agreed upon % Real Estate Average Costs. Lets say 5.13%(googled average).
Bob believes if he is forced to sell the house 2 months from now, he gets stuck with all these fees, the real estate being the brunt of it.
Assuming there was no mortgage and the house appraised at 500,000.
Bob is thinking, if he gave Joe 250,000, he has his 250,000 in the house, but if he had to sell the house this summer, he would have to pay $25-30K in fees and he ends up with $220,000(when you subtract the 250K he paid Joe). So Bob is thinking he should pay Joe closer to 235-240K.
In other words, Bob feels he will end up paying for Joe's share of "fees" eventually.
Also, if they actually sold the house vs Bob buying Joe out, each would receive 235-240K.
Joe is thinking, What the hell, who is to say that you sell the house, maybe you never do, why should i have to pay for your future fees.
Bob thinks, it shouldn't matter when he sells the house, those fees that are associated with the money that Joe received which will one day have to be paid(by Bob or family member) and a agreed upon sum needs to be considered.
Thoughts?
Bob and Joe are good friends, and they have no problem going either way or any part in the middle. They have spoken to a few folks and it seems to be a matter of opinion as to what is right (or who conveyed his their position best)?
We talked to a lawyer since we need to do paperwork and he pretty much said, you guys need to come to an agreement on the price. Not sure if he just didn't want to be bothered or if he had never encountered this scenario.