Brett and Shannon Alderson ordered to pay Bonnie Cook $420K for share in Ormeau house

A Gold Coast couple has been ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to compensate the woman’s mother after they broke an agreement she could live with them rent-free in perpetuity.

The Ormeau acreage that was subject to a dispute between Bonnie June Cook and her daughter Shannon Alderson, and daughter's husband Brett Alderson. Picture: REA Group

A Gold Coast couple has been ordered to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to compensate the woman’s mother after they broke an agreement she could live with them rent-free in perpetuity because the relationship had soured.

Plaintiff Bonnie June Cook, 76, who formerly lived near the Gosford area in New South Wales, took her daughter, Shannon Alderson, and daughter’s husband, Brett Alderson, who is a significant figure in the Gold Coast automotive industry, to the Supreme Court of Queensland over the dispute.

The dispute centred upon what would be fair payment for Ms Cook to leave the Ormeau acreage they shared.

Shannon and Brett Alderson. Picture: File

Justice Rebecca Treston said the Aldersons and Ms Cook entered into “what seemed like a harmless family arrangement” in mid 2015 after Mrs Alderson suggested to Ms Cook they all live together at a property purchased in the Aldersons’ name.

Of the $825,000 purchase price, Ms Cook contributed $110,116.41, and spent an additional $160,804.42 upgrading a detached garage into a granny flat for her to live.

Under the terms of the agreement, which was not committed to paper, Ms Cook would be entitled to live at the Ormeau property rent-free for the remainder of her life; she would not share in the capital gains as she was not the legal owner of any part of the property; and if the Aldersons moved, Ms Cook would come with them on the same terms.

Plaintiff Bonnie June Cook, 76. Picture: Facebook

But harmony at the property was “short lived,” Justice Treston said, with animosity building when Ms Cook was visited by her son, Jamieson Cook.

Mr Cook was not liked by his sister Mrs Alderson, who voiced fears for her personal safety in having her brother visit, Justice Treston said.

In April 2023, Mrs Alderson texted Ms Cook asking to buy her out, citing factors including marital disharmony and a lack of privacy.

The Aldersons offered $250,000 but this was refused, on the basis Ms Cook had sold her Central Coast property for $425,000 in 2015, when the arrangement was struck, but to re-enter the market would now set her back $800,000–$900,000.

In court, the Aldersons argued they were only required to return Ms Cook’s capital contributions – that is, the approximately $271,000 Ms Cook spent on the purchase price and granny flat upgrades – but Justice Treston said this would not be fair.

“By the combination of the agreement and the termination of it, the first and second defendants [the Aldersons] will still receive the capital contribution, with whatever increases attach to it, but the plaintiff [Ms Cook] will no longer receive the value of the relief from weekly outgoings,” Justice Treston said.

“That was a real financial benefit to her, and the loss of it ought to be compensated.”

Justice Treston ordered the Aldersons to pay Ms Cook an additional $120,000 plus interest, taking the total amount owed to buy out the plaintiff’s share to $420,630.83, secured via an equitable charge on the property.

The value of the Ormeau acreage had now risen to $1.75m, Justice Treston noted.

In a statement, Mr Alderson said the dispute and subsequent court proceedings had been scarifying for the family.

“Unfortunately, things didn’t work out as we all hoped and despite our best efforts, we weren’t able to agree about how much we should pay Bonnie after she decided to leave the property,” he said.

“We are grateful for the assistance of the court in bringing this matter to an end, so we can now all move forward and put this behind us.”