Plaintiff paid off Defendant's 2nd mortgage in amount of $70,000 in 2007. D gives P a check for 8,000 in 2008, with no memo. P claims it was a loan and that the check was the first payment with terms of repayment never being fully discussed. In 2013, D claims no such discussion took place, that P paid off mortgage alone without D's knowledge, and that, as a result, the payoff was considered an investment into the property. Property was short sold in 2009. D claims loss was shared and does not owe money.
Addt'l facts - P lived with D from 2007 to 2008. P owned different property with mortgage at the time.
Addt'l claims - P had no access to mortgage info without D's knowledge. P was asked to move out. P was not consulted during short sale.
Can P win? Does P have preponderance of evidence?What other obstacles or problems does P have, aside from proving the existence of the oral contract? Barring that, would it be enough to simply disprove the notion that the mortgage payoff was a gift or investment?