Verbal Agreement Trumps Cash Offer in US Property Dispute

A Kansas Court of Appeals has sided with a woman who claimed she had agreed to purchase her cousin's house and five acres of land based on a verbal arrangement made in 2020, even as he sought to accept a higher offer from another buyer.

Tiffany Miller had been managing the mortgage payments on the property and undertaken substantial repair work over the intervening years, according to court documents. Despite this, her cousin later disputed the existence of any binding agreement to sell, prompted by the arrival of an external buyer offering $150,000.

The appellate court determined that the verbal agreement between the two relatives constituted a valid and enforceable contract. The ruling underscores how courts in certain US jurisdictions may recognize oral agreements for property transactions under specific circumstances, particularly when one party has invested significant time and resources in reliance on the arrangement.

The case serves as a cautionary note for property sellers considering informal agreements, especially within families. While verbal deals may be easier to arrange initially, courts may enforce them if one party can demonstrate substantial performance or reliance, as Miller did through her mortgage payments and property improvements.