2021–2026 · TRANSACTIONS RECONCILED AND SEPARATED

Where the money went.
What the payments meant.

The closing cash, the roommates' rent, the acquisition reimbursements, the pooled mortgage funding, and the later conditional $1,000 payments are different streams. The actual transactions—and Jun's description of the changed 50/50 arrangement—belong at the center of the Silver Creek account.

The financial reconstruction documents payments and competing interpretations. It is not a judicial determination of ownership, rent or default.

1. The acquisition was funded before the reimbursement debate

The estimated March 2021 borrower’s statement separately accounts for the $2,000 deposit and lists $38,696.74 additional cash to close. The first two are not redundant. The financing also included the Capinpins' substantial FHA mortgage; the gross cash total is not the acquisition price, final equitable entitlement or a finding the borrowers contributed nothing.

Bank-to-escrow wire

Earnest-money check

2. Jun and Aileen's post-closing payments were not the closing cash

Critical precision: account ending 1626 is the recipient personal Bank of America account in the source statement; the statement is issued under Romeo's name, while the account's joint legal titling should be verified separately. These personal credits should not be mistaken for ABC Elder Care account *9766 transfers or added again to the $40,696.74 in cash supplied at closing.

3. Before Silver Creek, they were also tenants in a different house

Jun and Aileen occupied a rented room at Romeo and Annie's Crystal Ridge residence, reportedly until May 2021. March 5, 2021: $1,000 Jun → Romeo, Venmo memo “March Rent.” April 4: $1,000 Aileen → Romeo, Venmo memo “rent payment.” These are actual rent-labeled personal transactions for the earlier living arrangement. The contemporaneous final May installment and complete room lease remain to be matched; the description “through May” currently reflects the owners' timeline rather than a verified final payment receipt.

It would be false to use the April 4 rent memo as proof of down-payment equalization. Equally, the later April 18 $2,139 bundle cannot responsibly be labeled exclusively room rent given Aileen's explicit itemization.

4. They then pooled $1,750 each for the Silver Creek mortgage

In an April 23, 2021 group exchange, Romeo instructed everyone to send $1,750 “for the half sa mortgage plus the utilities” to the new ABC business account. In a separate contemporary exchange, Jun asked whether to Zelle ABC for the mortgage and said he could send $1,750. ABC records show $3,500 transfers to Jun in May, June and July 2021. The early bank ledger includes some deposits by Jun/Aileen and Romeo/Annie; the pooled $3,500 transfer is not an additional contribution by the sender after the original deposits are counted.

Read the April account, shared-cost and lease discussion — 2 pages

The five selected messages retain Annie’s statement that a lease/rental agreement was needed, alongside the proposed account access and reimbursement arrangement. They show the contemplated operating structure; they do not independently verify every payment or establish a fixed ownership share.

Mortgage/household cost sharing while the two couples co-occupied the property is analytically different from cash-at-closing capital. The precise share of later $12,000 asserted by Jun attributable to occupancy, acquisition reimbursement, paint or equipment must be classified without duplicates. We do not assert Jun and Aileen contributed nothing.

5. Jun explained why the original 50/50 plan changed

Preserved iMessage-style screenshot — the disputed 50/50 arrangement

This preserved message is significant because its attributed language addresses a contemplated sale and the substitute $1,000 payment discussion. The visible phone interface says “New iMessage”; neither the date nor sender-level native records have been independently authenticated. It is not, by itself, definitive proof of every legal term or of a 60-month obligation; the precise conditions must be read with 2021 discussions, the December 2022 census-trigger exchange, January 2023 payment pause and signed lease documents.

June 13, 2021 — “IOU” / “down payment”

July 18, 2025 — Jun's informal 50/50 proposal, before the later counsel-led negotiations

6. The later $1,000 was a different, contested stream

The parties' accounts describe a separate $1,000 monthly amount, contemplated for up to 60 months in exchange for continuing arrangements and avoiding sale, with actual payments tied to the AFH reaching three residents. In December 2022, Aileen asked to start the extra $1,000 after the census trigger. The compiled bank ledger shows Jan. 6, 2023 $4,600, then Feb.–Mar. $3,600 when the three-resident trigger reportedly ceased, returning to $4,600 in April 2023. The selected January pause notice and February payment proposal can be examined below alongside the signed lease terms.

Open the census and payment exchanges — 4 pages · Read the signed lease and amendment

The selection retains the December rent wording and the later pause acknowledgments. It does not establish a permanent amendment or resolve every disputed credit; the signed terms and September 2024 backdating context remain material.

The payment trail changed with the amount being paid. ABC Elder Care’s supplied statements list $3,600 Zelle debits described as transfers to Jun on February 13 and March 14, 2023, followed by $4,600 on April 10. These rows corroborate particular payments; they do not settle every disputed balance or establish a permanent waiver. The February and March dates were after the tenth.

Open February 2023 payment row — 2 pages · Open March 2023 payment row — 2 pages · Open April 2023 payment row — 2 pages

Read the rows beside the census/payment exchange and the fixed written rent terms. The census explanation is our account, not a bank finding. The statements list debits; they do not independently confirm recipient-side receipt, lender credit or every covered month. The April reader also explains an excluded party annotation with an incorrect year.

The selected bank rows show $4,600 payments labelled as rent on January 11 and August 13, 2024, and a $3,600 bill-pay to Jun on March 11, 2025. The posting dates remain visible. These rows document particular payments and labels, not every disputed credit or a legal determination of default.

Open the payment dates and rent labels — 4 pages

That is stronger support for a conditional extra component over the mortgage-related base than a blanket assertion that a signed lease is legally irrelevant. The 2021 lease describing a higher rent existed before the AFH produced the later $1,000 stream; the amendment bearing January 31, 2023 date was reportedly executed September 26, 2024, after that practice started. The user characterizes the paper as matching the actual arrangement; that interpretation must be argued using messages, dates and conduct, not assumed as an adjudicated legal conclusion.

7. After the failed title route, the base followed mortgage statements

In the 2025 QCD–refinance–release process, title transfer did not complete in February. According to Romeo and Annie, the parties then moved toward a purchase-and-sale agreement in March while Romeo/Annie ceased the separate $1,000 amount yet maintained mortgage-sized transfers. Evidence directly establishes a transition to $3,600 in March 2025 and $3,798.68 in July. Original correspondence verifies that counsel for the Capinpins sent a statement due March 2026 on February 18, and the May, June, July and August statements on April 23, May 21, June 19 and July 21, 2026. Five dates are source-verified; the record still does not establish a complete monthly forwarding series from March 2025 onward.

The documentary point is the course of actual payment behavior: amounts moved with mortgage-and-escrow demands, even while the parties disputed whether additional sums could be characterized as unpaid rent. This supports a course-of-conduct argument; it does not by itself void all written rent terms.

8. Necessary distinctions that protect the argument

The financial record supports identified payments and a disputed course of performance. It does not establish a complete contribution total, an ownership percentage, or a judicial resolution of the rent dispute. Selected sources are public; private banking originals remain withheld.