Dec232025
Partition Action Q&A Series

Can I be reimbursed for money I already spent maintaining a vacant property, and what proof should I provide? – North Carolina

Short Answer

Yes—North Carolina law can allow a co-owner to be reimbursed in a partition case for certain money already spent to preserve or improve a jointly owned property, especially where the property is vacant and the spending prevented loss of value. Reimbursement usually depends on (1) the type of expense (taxes/insurance/repairs vs. upgrades), (2) whether the spending was necessary or actually increased value, and (3) whether the co-owner paying had exclusive possession. The best proof is a clean paper trail that ties each payment to the property and explains why it was needed.

Understanding the Problem

In North Carolina, when two or more cotenants co-own a house that has been vacant and one cotenant pays for cleanup, repairs, insurance, taxes, or loan payments to keep the property in good condition for a future sale, can that cotenant be paid back out of the proceeds in a partition action? What documentation and records should support a request that the court credit those expenditures before the remaining net sale proceeds are divided by ownership percentages?

Apply the Law

North Carolina partition cases allow the court to address “contribution” and “credits” between cotenants for certain property expenses. In general, a cotenant may seek contribution for carrying costs (such as taxes, insurance, repairs, and certain loan payments) and may also seek an allowance for improvements, but improvements are treated differently than necessary repairs. In a partition sale, a request for contribution is typically raised by application during the partition proceeding in the clerk of superior court (the usual forum for partition matters), so the issue can be handled as part of distributing sale proceeds.

Key Requirements

  • The spending fits a reimbursable category: Courts generally treat property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, necessary repairs, and certain loan payments as “carrying costs” that can be shared among cotenants.
  • Repairs vs. improvements are separated: Necessary repairs aimed at preserving the property are treated more favorably than improvements or upgrades; improvements are commonly limited to the lesser of (a) cost or (b) value added as of the start of the partition case.
  • No disqualifying “exclusive possession” period applies: Some reimbursement rights can be limited if the paying cotenant had exclusive possession during the period the costs were incurred (the idea is that the possessor may already be benefiting from use of the property).

What the Statutes Say

Analysis

Apply the Rule to the Facts: The property is vacant and one co-owner has been paying for cleanup and repairs to maximize value for a planned sale. Under North Carolina’s partition framework, many “keep the house from deteriorating” costs (like trash-out, safety-related repairs, insurance, and taxes) can qualify as carrying costs or necessary repairs that support a credit or contribution claim. If the spending includes upgrades (for example, remodeling choices aimed at boosting market appeal), the claim often turns on proving how much value those upgrades actually added, not just what they cost. Because the property is vacant, an “exclusive possession” argument may be less likely than in an occupied-house scenario, but it can still matter if one cotenant effectively controlled the property and excluded the other.

Process & Timing

  1. Who files: The cotenant seeking reimbursement/credit. Where: Typically the clerk of superior court in the county where the real property sits (North Carolina partition proceeding). What: An application or motion within the partition case asking the court to determine contribution/credits for carrying costs, repairs, and improvements, with supporting exhibits (receipts, invoices, proof of payment). When: In a partition sale case, the request is commonly raised during the partition proceeding so it can be addressed before final distribution of sale proceeds.
  2. Document and exchange proof: Provide a clear spreadsheet and attach backup documentation showing (a) date, (b) vendor, (c) description, (d) why it was necessary or value-adding, (e) amount, and (f) proof it was actually paid by the requesting cotenant.
  3. Allocation at distribution: If the court allows credits/contribution, those amounts are typically handled in the accounting that occurs before the net proceeds are divided according to each cotenant’s ownership share.

Exceptions & Pitfalls

  • Mixing “repairs” and “improvements” together: Courts often treat these differently. A roof patch to stop leaks is usually easier to justify than a discretionary kitchen upgrade; improvements may require evidence of value added and may be capped.
  • Weak proof of payment: Estimates, verbal agreements, or handwritten notes usually carry less weight than paid invoices, canceled checks, credit card statements, and bank records that match the invoice amounts.
  • Cash payments without receipts: Cash spending creates proof problems. If cash was used, supporting documentation should include detailed receipts and a credible record tying the payment to the property expense.
  • Not tying the expense to preserving value: “Carrying costs” generally focus on preserving value and protecting the cotenants’ interests. Documentation should explain necessity (for example, insurance required by lender; repairs needed to prevent further damage; debris removal required for safety/code compliance).
  • Exclusive possession disputes: If one cotenant had sole use and control, the other may argue certain expenses should not be shared for that time period. Records showing vacancy, access, communications, and shared decision-making can reduce this risk.

Conclusion

In North Carolina, a cotenant in a partition case can often be reimbursed (credited) for money already spent on carrying costs like taxes, insurance, repairs, and certain loan-related payments, and may also recover for improvements—but improvements are commonly limited to the lesser of cost or value added. Strong proof includes paid invoices, receipts, and bank or card records tied to each expense, plus a summary showing why each item preserved value. The most important next step is to file a written request for contribution/credits within the partition proceeding before the court distributes sale proceeds.

Talk to a Partition Action Attorney

If a co-owner has been paying to maintain a vacant jointly owned property and reimbursement from sale proceeds is at issue, an attorney can help organize the proof and present the right request in the partition case. Call today at (919) 341-7055.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information about North Carolina law based on the single question stated above. It is not legal advice for your specific situation and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws, procedures, and local practice can change and may vary by county. If you have a deadline, act promptly and speak with a licensed North Carolina attorney.

Category: Partition Action Q&A Series

Author: jpierce

Attorney Jared Pierce is the founder of Pierce Law Group in Raleigh, North Carolina, a firm he established with a dedicated focus on probate administration and estate planning across North Carolina. Born and raised in the Republic of South Africa, Jared moved to Durham with his family in 2001, bringing with him a rich cultural background and a distinctive accent that often serves as a conversation starter.