TN 11 (10-19)

PS 01820.012 Georgia

A. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) Recipient’s Equitable Ownership in a Mobile Home and Real Property for Determining Recipient’s Resources and Eligibility for SSI – Georgia

September 13, 2019

1. Syllabus

In this opinion, the Regional Chief Counsel (RCC) examines an SSI recipient's ownership interest in a mobile home and the real property on which the mobile home is located following a verbal purchase agreement. The RCC concludes that based on Georgia law, the recipient does not have an equitable ownership interest in the subject property for determining his resources and eligibility for SSI.

2. Opinion

QUESTION

For determining the resources of E~ (Recipient) and his eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI), you asked what ownership interest Recipient has in a mobile home and the real property on which the mobile home is located.

OPINION

Recipient does not have an equitable ownership interest in the mobile home and the real property on which the mobile home is located.

BACKGROUND

The information provided consists of statements from Recipient and his mother provided to the agency in September 2018. Recipient stated that he and his wife entered into a verbal agreement with his parents to purchase a mobile home and three acres of land (the subject property), located in Georgia and legally owned by his parents. Recipient reported that the monthly payment that he allegedly made to his parents, which he refers to as a mortgage payment, was $232.00 and the total purchase price was $15,000. Recipient stated that he and his wife paid off the purported mortgage three months before he provided his statement. Recipient claims that the subject property will be put into his name and his wife’s name when his parents are legally able to do so. He states that his parents cannot change the title to the subject property until they have paid off their mortgage.

The statement by Recipient’s mother provides essentially the same information provided by Recipient. Recipient’s mother states that she and her husband entered into a verbal agreement with Recipient and his wife to sell them the subject property land for $15,000. Recipient’s mother states that Recipient and his wife allegedly paid a monthly mortgage payment of $232.00 a month, and they paid off the purported mortgage three months earlier. Recipient’s mother states that she and her husband are still paying off their mortgage, which includes the subject property. Recipient’s mother states that she and her husband cannot transfer the subject property to Recipient and his wife until they pay off their mortgage, which had a balance of $12,000 when Recipient’s mother provided her statement. Recipient’s mother states that when she and her husband pay off their mortgage, they will have the title to the subject property transferred to Recipient and his wife.

The agency requested documentation from Recipient to substantiate the verbal agreement (e.g., bank records), but Recipient was unable to provide any documentation.

DISCUSSION

A. Federal Law

SSI is a general public assistance program for aged, blind, or disabled individuals who meet certain income and resource restrictions and other eligibility requirements. See Social Security Act (Act) §§ 1602, 1611(a); 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.110, 416.202 (2019).[1] Resources are “cash or other liquid assets or any real or personal property that an individual . . . owns and could convert to cash to be used for his or her support and maintenance.” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1201(a); see Program Operations Manual System (POMS) SI 01110.100B.1; POMS SI 01120.010B. “If the individual has the right, authority or power to liquidate the property or his or her share of the property, it is considered a resource. If a property right cannot be liquidated, the property will not be considered a resource of the individual . . . .” 20 C.F.R. § 416.1201(a)(1); see POMS SI 01110.100B.1, B.3; POMS SI 01110.115A; POMS SI 01120.010B.

The Act excludes from resources an individual’s home and its land if the individual has an ownership interest in the property and uses it as his or her principal place of residence.[2] See Act § 1613(a)(1); 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1210(a), 416.1212(a), (b); POMS SI 01110.210B; POMS SI 01130.100A.1, B.1-3. “Ownership interests in property, whether real or personal, can occur in various types and forms. Since the type and form of ownership may affect the value of property and even its status as a resource, they are significant in determining resources eligibility.” POMS SI 01110.500A. The agency generally will accept an individual’s allegation of home ownership unless the file raises a question about the individual’s allegation. See POMS SI 01130.100C.1. If questions arise, the agency will request evidence of real property ownership, such as a deed or current mortgage statement, or evidence of personal property ownership (e.g., a mobile home), such as title or current registration. See POMS SI 01130.100C.2.a, C.2.b.

An SSI applicant or recipient may allege that he or she has an equitable ownership interest in his or her home or other property. See POMS SI 01110.500B.3.b; POMS SI 01130.100C.4. “An equitable ownership interest is a form of ownership that exists without legal title to property. It can exist despite another party’s having legal title (or no one’s having it).” POMS SI 01110.515A.2.b. “Basically, existence of an equitable ownership interest is determined by a court of equity. However, under certain circumstances, an adjudicator can conclude that an equitable ownership interest exists and make a resources determination accordingly.” POMS SI 01110.515C. An individual may acquire or obtain equitable ownership interest in his or her home or other property from personal considerations or from other actions such as making mortgage payments. See POMS SI 01110.515C.3; POMS SI 01130.100A.4. If an individual alleges equitable ownership and the POMS do not include applicable regional instructions, agency personnel should obtain any pertinent documents and a statement from each of the parties involved regarding any arrangement that has been agreed to and request an opinion from the Regional Counsel. See POMS SI 01130.100C.4.

B. State Law

Recipient and Recipient’s mother provided statements in which they both allege that Recipient and his wife entered into a verbal agreement with Recipient’s parents to purchase the subject property for $15,000.00. Recipient and his wife reportedly paid a purported $232.00 monthly mortgage payment, and they paid off the purported mortgage three months before Recipient and his mother provided their statements. Recipient’s parents, however, are still paying off their mortgage on property that includes the subject property. Recipient and Recipient’s mother claim that once Recipient’s parents pay off their mortgage, they will transfer title to the subject property to Recipient and his wife.

Because the subject property is located in Georgia, the agency applies Georgia law to determine the ownership interest, if any, that Recipient has in the subject property. See POMS SI 01110.500A, C. Generally, any contract for the sale of land must be in writing. See Ga. Stat. Ann. § 13-5-30(a)(4) (West 2019)[3] (denoting Georgia’s Statute of Frauds); Bodiford v. Waltz, 830 S.E.2d 738, 740 (Ga. Ct. App. 2019). However, an oral agreement for the sale of land may still be enforceable: (1) when the contract has been fully executed; (2) where there has been performance on one side, accepted by the other in accordance with the contract; or (3) where there has been such part performance of the contract as would render it a fraud of the party refusing to comply if the court did not compel a performance. Ga. Stat. Ann. § 13-5-31. Regarding part performance, “an oral contract sought to be enforced based on part performance must be certain and definite in all essential particulars . . . and must be certain enough to enable either party to enforce it according to its terms.” Bodiford, 830 S.E.2d at 740 (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). In addition, the part performance must be consistent with the existence of a contract and inconsistent with the lack of a contract. See id. at 741.

In Recipient’s case, the alleged sale of the subject property would not fit within any of the exceptions to Georgia’s statute of frauds requiring that the sale of land be in writing. First, the alleged oral agreement for Recipient and his wife to purchase the subject property has not been fully executed because Recipient’s parents have not transferred title to the subject property to Recipient and his wife. Second, although Recipient and his mother allege that Recipient and his wife have paid off the purported mortgage to buy the subject property, Recipient provided no documentary evidence to support the allegations that he made the payments or that his parents accepted the payments, e.g., bank records showing the transfer of money, handwritten notes or a ledger acknowledging the payments, or any other evidence to substantiate the allegations of Recipient and his mother.

Third, the lack of evidence to support the allegations of Recipient and his mother indicate that part performance of the purported contract has not occurred, and no one involved in the purported sale has alleged fraud based on refusal to comply with the purported sale. The statements of Recipient and his mother, without any supporting evidence, are simply insufficient to take the purported sale of the subject property out of the statute of frauds. Also, the alleged oral agreement has no specific provisions regarding when the sale or transfer of title would take place. See id. Recipient apparently resides on the subject property, but doing so does indicate that a contract existed given his relationship to his parents – it would not be unusual for an individual to live on property owned by his or her parents without an agreement to buy the property. See id. at 741. Therefore, the evidence available does not indicate that Recipient has an equitable ownership in the subject property.

Given Recipient’s lack of an equitable ownership interest in the subject property, the agency may need to determine if Recipient’s use of the subject property represents income in the form of in-kind support. See Act § 1612(a)(2)(A); 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.1102, 416.1121(h), 416.1130 - .1148.

CONCLUSION

Recipient does not have an equitable ownership interest in the subject property for determining his resources and eligibility for SSI.


Footnotes:

[1]

All references to the Code of Federal Regulations are to the 2019 edition.

[2]

“An individual’ principal place of residence is the dwelling the individual considers his or her established or principal home and to which, if absent, he or she intends to return. It can be real or personal property, fixed or mobile, and located on land or water.” POMS SI 01130.100A.1 (emphasis added).

[3]

All references to the Georgia Statutes Annotated are to the West 2019 edition.


To Link to this section - Use this URL:
http://policy.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/1601820012
PS 01820.012 - Georgia - 10/09/2019
Batch run: 10/09/2019
Rev:10/09/2019