Selling a house and letting my son collect the money on his behalf, can he not repay the debt?

Thinking about it too much, the court ruling supports the debtor's children to repay the debt

　　In order to avoid paying the debt, Xu, who was in debt, asked his son and daughter-in-law to collect the house payment on his behalf when he sold the house. As a result, he was discovered by the creditor and sued to the court.

In the end, the court ruled in favor of the creditor's claim, Xu's son and daughter-in-law repaid the house, and the related debts were finally settled.

　　From 2013 to 2016, Xu from Jiangyin borrowed more than 780,000 yuan from Miao, but he never repaid the money.

Later, Miao sued the local court for repayment, and the court ruled in favor of him.

However, after applying to the court for execution, Miao has not received the money because Xu has no assets in his name.

Afterwards, Miao discovered that Xu had sold the house under his name in June 2018, and his son Xiao Xu and his daughter-in-law Zhu paid the house price of more than 1.2 million yuan. The house payment was not delivered to Xu.

　　Miao believed that Xu had transferred property to his son and daughter-in-law for free, which had damaged his interests as a creditor and made the aforesaid civil judgment impossible to actually perform, so he sued the court to revoke the gift.

The judge who handled the case in the Jiangyin Court stated that the law stipulates that the debtor's gratuitous disposal or transaction at an unreasonable consideration results in the reduction of its property rights and interests, which affects the creditor and the realization of the creditor's rights.

After the creditor revokes the act, he may exercise the debtor's right to request the third party to return the property in his own name, and the third party should return the property he acquired to the creditor.

　　In this case, Xu asked his son Xiaoxu and his daughter-in-law Zhu to collect the money that should be collected by him when he had a large amount of debts that were not paid back. The act of Zhu Mou donating more than 1.2 million yuan for the house.

Xiao Xu and Zhu filed an appeal, and the Wuxi Intermediate Court upheld the original judgment after the trial.

After that, Miao exercised the right of subrogation in accordance with the law, and the Xiaoxu couple and Miao reached a mediation agreement and directly delivered the money to Miao to repay Xu's debt.

At present, the case has been closed.

　　The Jiangyin Court case handling judge reminded the debtors that malicious transfer of property may not only be revoked by the court, but may also be subject to increased responsibilities such as attorney fees. Relatives and friends who assist in escaping debt may also become defendants and assume repayment obligations.

The debtor should perform in good faith, and the behavior of evading debts through illegal means will be evaluated fairly by the law.

　　Yangzi Evening News/Ziniu News reporter Zhang Jianbo