With tenants, a member of a couple can pass on their share of the house on death, they tell their children, while the other member of the couple can continue to live there, giving their half to the cohabitation of death (living together) agreement establishes housing arrangements, such as liability for bills. The ICT agreement provides tenants with a legal framework for structuring the operation of the lease, from the decision to distribute the purchase price by the co-owners to the choice of co-owners who make important decisions regarding the property. Thus, while each tenant owns part of the property and may have rental rights to reside in the property and use it, tenants pay their share of mortgage, tax, insurance and maintenance costs based on the tenant`s share of ownership. References to the common lease and ICT can be confusing, as the terminology used is used to describe a multitude of common ownership agreements with very different characteristics and purposes that, in a context of critical issues, are often completely irrelevant in another context. To overcome confusion, it is useful to create categories and subcategory for different types of ICTs. First, distinguish those that are created primarily for homeowners who intend to occupy the co-owner property from those created primarily to generate rental income and/or return on investment or to defer income tax through similar real estate exchanges (also known as 1031 exchanges). Acceptance of the tenant`s individual offers in common shares is virtually impossible without a co-ownership agreement. As the property has not been subdivided, the owner cannot legally accept any offer for certain units or homes. Each sales contract must describe what is purchased as a percentage of the total property. The structure created by the ICT agreement is necessary to avoid the uncertainty and risk that would otherwise be linked to a series of sales contracts for the percentages of the building. The need for an ICT agreement prior to marketing is the same whether the owner intends to close ICT sales separately or insist that the entire property be sold at once. In addition, members of the agreement can sell independently or borrow against their share of ownership. Many people mistakenly believe that SACO leases, as common ownership percentages, control the resale prices of owners and/or distribute revenue when the entire property is resold or refinanced.
Indeed, a well-developed SACO-ICT agreement never allows the percentage of property to control the return or refinancing of revenues, because such an agreement would be unfair to owners who invest intelligently in improving their place. The individual resale price of an owner must always be left to the individual owner and his buyer and never be determined or influenced by his percentage of ownership or by an appreciation of the whole property. In the event of the re-verification or refinancing of the entire property, the allocation of interest should be determined by an assessment of the fair value of each owner`s interests on the basis of the qualities and amenities of the land allocated by the owner. A well-developed ICT group credit contract allows any homeowner to impose a refinancing, but offsets costs and risks by limiting (i) the amount of refinancing revenue, so that one owner cannot use another`s equity; (ii) to impose on the owner or owners who receive cash receipts all the costs associated with the granting of credits; and (iii) the prudent allocation of the financial burden resulting from the granting of the new loan at a higher interest rate than the old one.