hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 6, 2018 8:07:16 GMT -5
Meh, they're divorcing...I don't think it's up to HIM to figure out what she'll qualify for to buy a house. That's on HER. It's not up to him to figure out whether she can/will live up to their divorce settlement (it might be smart of him to try to figure it out...but I don't think it's really his responsibility). I don't think he's doing anything wrong with not signing over the deed to her...maybe "wrong" in a strict sense, but I think he's being smart. If he's supposed to sign over the deed, and she's supposed to buy the house...and she HASN'T bought the house...then I wouldn't sign over the deed. She's BUYING the house...that's what signing over the deed is...you get it when she actually BUYS the house. That's the only "carrot" he has to try to make sure she does what she's supposed to. If he signs over the deed, then he basically has to go back to court to enforce her to buy the house from him (and then again, what if she can't get financed?). It seems MUCH easier to hold onto your leverage until the other person gives up their leverage...particularly when it's so clearly linked. Personally, I'd much rather be the person in contempt, knowing the other person is also in contempt...than the person who did everything by the letter of the judge's order and then chasing the other one down to make them follow the order. It just seems SUPER unlikely anything negative is going to happen to him by being in contempt if his wife is also in contempt...particularly when the 2 issues have such a direct link to them. He agreed to not selling the house and letting her stay there and refinance knowing she couldn't afford it. His attorney could have easily shown the judge that she could not afford to buy him out. There was not a lot of figuring out involved. He had to know going into this that she wasn't going to refinance any time soon. Yep, and her attorney should have easily understood he probably wasn't going to sign over the deed to the house until she actually bought it from him. That's what a deed is. Just look at all the vitriol on THIS thread about how he's "trying to sell it out from under his wife and KIDS". It's no different than if they'd sold it in the divorce...but look at all the venom directed toward him for wanting to actually sell it. It's no different of a situation than if he'd insisted on it during the divorce. He might have well known she wasn't likely to be able to do it, but if she said she could...sure, give her a little time to try and do it, don't sign over the deed until she does. He gave her a shot at making it work, it didn't, time to move onto the next step. But again, it's not up to him nor his attorney to figure out what SHE is able to do financially. That's HER job. He isn't her caretaker. If he didn't think she could refinance/buy it in her name only...that's the best reason in the world not to sign over the deed to her until she DOES.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 6, 2018 8:13:05 GMT -5
Just to be clear, I don't like the idea of trying to sell it in secret (I think trying to sell it after she's been unable or unwilling to be financially responsible for it is a good move, just not in secret). But I think he's being absolutely smart by not signing the deed over to her until she's actually bought the house.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:31:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2018 8:13:47 GMT -5
He agreed to not selling the house and letting her stay there and refinance knowing she couldn't afford it. His attorney could have easily shown the judge that she could not afford to buy him out. There was not a lot of figuring out involved. He had to know going into this that she wasn't going to refinance any time soon. Yep, and her attorney should have easily understood he probably wasn't going to sign over the deed to the house until she actually bought it from him. That's what a deed is. Just look at all the vitriol on THIS thread about how he's "trying to sell it out from under his wife and KIDS". It's no different than if they'd sold it in the divorce...but look at all the venom directed toward him for wanting to actually sell it. It's no different of a situation than if he'd insisted on it during the divorce. He might have well known she wasn't likely to be able to do it, but if she said she could...sure, give her a little time to try and do it, don't sign over the deed until she does. He gave her a shot at making it work, it didn't, time to move onto the next step. But again, it's not up to him nor his attorney to figure out what SHE is able to do financially. That's HER job. He isn't her caretaker. If he didn't think she could refinance/buy it in her name only...that's the best reason in the world not to sign over the deed to her until she DOES. He needs to take her back to court if he wants to change the divorce agreement. Not plop a for sale sign in the yard when she's out of the country. That's just a dick move.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:31:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2018 8:49:04 GMT -5
So...why couldn't that be a requirement of all divorces - pre-nup or not? Wouldn't that make a clean break for both parties divorcing? Because not everyone would want that? You can divorce however you choose. The guy in the OP didn't have to agree to letting her keep the house. My ex didn't want us to sell the farm. He knew it was my dream I'd had since I was like 8 and he wanted our son raised there as well. He was ok with being on the mortgage until I could refinance even if it was many years. Other people could be seriously underwater and would rather wait out the real estate market than take the loss. Plus there are a ton of people out there that don't have the assets to pay off debts even if they wanted to.
The courts are bogged down enough without putting all kinds of restrictions on who can or cannot get divorced.
I agree with this- the first thought I'd had was that that flexibility worked for MPL. When DH and his first wife divorced, they agreed that she had the right to stay in the house and keep paying the mortgage and other expenses till their son was out of college. That ended up being something like 12 years but sure enough, she refinanced and gave DH his share of the equity. Eventually she sold the place to a developer as a tear-down (Westfield, NJ- big commuter town) and bought a condo. It meant that DH rented for a long time but it worked for them.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 6, 2018 8:54:24 GMT -5
Yep, and her attorney should have easily understood he probably wasn't going to sign over the deed to the house until she actually bought it from him. That's what a deed is. Just look at all the vitriol on THIS thread about how he's "trying to sell it out from under his wife and KIDS". It's no different than if they'd sold it in the divorce...but look at all the venom directed toward him for wanting to actually sell it. It's no different of a situation than if he'd insisted on it during the divorce. He might have well known she wasn't likely to be able to do it, but if she said she could...sure, give her a little time to try and do it, don't sign over the deed until she does. He gave her a shot at making it work, it didn't, time to move onto the next step. But again, it's not up to him nor his attorney to figure out what SHE is able to do financially. That's HER job. He isn't her caretaker. If he didn't think she could refinance/buy it in her name only...that's the best reason in the world not to sign over the deed to her until she DOES. He needs to take her back to court if he wants to change the divorce agreement. Not plop a for sale sign in the yard when she's out of the country. That's just a dick move. IF he's changing it. We also don't really know what it says about what happens if she doesn't buy the house from him. Either way, it's not ok to try to sell the house while she's away...but he may not even need to change the agreement. I know a number of people where one person was supposed to finance the house in their name...and if not completed by X date, the house can be put up for sale.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Aug 10, 2018 11:27:58 GMT -5
The fight continues... still at work so did not check the deed website yet.
But got an alert from Redfin: the husband lowered the price form 542k to 510k.
So he is moving forward with his intentions to sell the house contempt or no contempt. I wonder if he has managed to remove the lien she had on the house....
He is not backing down, I would have thought she would have cut her vacation short and be back by now.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Aug 11, 2018 7:37:02 GMT -5
Since he lowered the price yesterday 3 different couples have been to the house to see it....
MIL said she is coming back on the 15th....
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,861
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 11, 2018 7:42:52 GMT -5
Good luck. It’s not going to happen. Buyers will back off.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,594
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Aug 11, 2018 7:47:19 GMT -5
Good luck. It’s not going to happen. Buyers will back off. I haven't read the whole thread but I was sitting here thinking I wouldn't touch that house with a ten foot pole even if he was giving it away. To much legal crap going to come up and the new owners may be sitting on the curb before it is over. JMHO
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,861
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 11, 2018 7:49:27 GMT -5
Yes it’s hard to get people out of a house.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,861
|
Post by zibazinski on Aug 11, 2018 7:49:43 GMT -5
Especially if they don’t want to go
|
|
geenamercile
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:40:28 GMT -5
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by geenamercile on Aug 11, 2018 7:50:57 GMT -5
And they have a court order/decree saying they can be there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:31:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2018 8:02:07 GMT -5
I haven't read the whole thread but I was sitting here thinking I wouldn't touch that house with a ten foot pole even if he was giving it away. Too much legal crap going to come up and the new owners may be sitting on the curb before it is over. JMHO I agree- still not sure why the realtor is going to all this effort when it's being marketed (according to the info Haitian has) in contempt of a court order. As I said earlier, maybe he's hoping to force her hand and pressure her to sell if they end up with a valid offer? My BIL and SIL, both VERY savvy business people, bought a floor-through in a prewar building in Manhattan (across from the Plaza Athenee, so nice neighborhood) at a bargain-basement price 30+ years ago because the owner was in trouble with the IRS and there were all kinds of liens on it. I'm sure it turned out to be an excellent investment, but they could afford to wait it out while the issues were resolved.
|
|
Blonde Granny
Junior Associate
Joined: Jan 15, 2013 8:27:13 GMT -5
Posts: 6,919
Today's Mood: Alone in the world
Location: Wandering Aimlessly
Mini-Profile Name Color: 28e619
Mini-Profile Text Color: 3a9900
|
Post by Blonde Granny on Aug 11, 2018 10:24:23 GMT -5
It's my experience that all liens must be paid before the new owner can get clear title to the property. Seems like this guy believes he's the one in charge here....he has a lot to learn.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Aug 11, 2018 11:55:35 GMT -5
I think :
1) either he doesn’t know about the lien.
Or
1) he does know which is why he lowered the price by 32k 2) or he lowered the price because he knows she will be back soon 3) he wants a legit offer on hand to push her to sale
My assumptions are that she had a certain amount of time to get the house under her name or she has to sale or find a way to give him his money.... been 18 months!
Now with a valid offer or offers he can go in front of a judge and say: see; been 18 months and she has yet to finance the house under her name. I have given her enough time and been more than reasonably patient.
Now we have this offer (or offers) and the house can be sold ASAP and profit divided etc.
|
|
TheHaitian
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 27, 2014 19:39:10 GMT -5
Posts: 10,144
|
Post by TheHaitian on Aug 11, 2018 11:58:20 GMT -5
It's my experience that all liens must be paid before the new owner can get clear title to the property. Seems like this guy believes he's the one in charge here....he has a lot to learn. Lien that require payment yes. Lien that state someone is in contempt? I dunno... I guess you have to show how the person is in contempt? Direct order from the judge? Because the deed is under his name and the mortgage (that will be satisfied once the home is sold) is also under his name. What can they show to the company that is actual proof she has right to the house?
|
|
geenamercile
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:40:28 GMT -5
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by geenamercile on Aug 11, 2018 12:30:48 GMT -5
My guess is the ex-husband might be able to get all the way to closing, however when the new owners want to move in she is still going to be there. They would need to go through the eviction process, at that time she would have the decree showing that he was suppose to put the deed in her name. I don't see a judge kicking her and the kids out at that point, will most likely tell the new home owners that they will need to go through the process of getting their money back from the X.
Or the judge might rule in favor of the new owners, but then she would need to be made whole which could mean the ex would be required to buy her a house in the same area.....
Or the judge could have her made whole by the sale of the house....
Who knows.
No matter how it happens I don't think it will happen how the ex thinks.
We went with a foreclosure and that took like 5 months to close on, I wouldn't want to touch this mess at all.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,594
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Aug 11, 2018 12:39:43 GMT -5
My guess is the ex-husband might be able to get all the way to closing, however when the new owners want to move in she is still going to be there. They would need to go through the eviction process, at that time she would have the decree showing that he was suppose to put the deed in her name. I don't see a judge kicking her and the kids out at that point, will most likely tell the new home owners that they will need to go through the process of getting their money back from the X. Or the judge might rule in favor of the new owners, but then she would need to be made whole which could mean the ex would be required to buy her a house in the same area..... Or the judge could have her made whole by the sale of the house.... Who knows. No matter how it happens I don't think it will happen how the ex thinks. We went with a foreclosure and that took like 5 months to close on, I wouldn't want to touch this mess at all. After reading this, my pole got a lot longer! Might consider if selling price was $1.00.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,871
Member is Online
|
Post by haapai on Aug 11, 2018 12:41:14 GMT -5
I'm wondering if this is all price-discovery. If the husband gets offers, he will be able to use those to establish the market value of the house.
If the value is high enough, this may establish the impossibility of his former spouse being able to get a mortgage. Even if his ex-wife isn't convinced, the judge may be.
He might just get an order to sell out of this d*** move. OTOH, he might really anger the judge.
|
|
kjto1
Established Member
Joined: Jan 13, 2013 13:47:03 GMT -5
Posts: 485
|
Post by kjto1 on Aug 11, 2018 12:48:07 GMT -5
Since we don't know what the decree says, maybe he is doing what his attorney advises. Maybe they do have a legal game plan.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,871
Member is Online
|
Post by haapai on Aug 11, 2018 12:55:49 GMT -5
I wonder which of them is going to sue the other for how their actions have reduced the sale price of the house. Listing in this manner is no way to maximize the price.
|
|
cktc
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 19, 2013 22:15:31 GMT -5
Posts: 3,202
|
Post by cktc on Aug 11, 2018 13:32:36 GMT -5
It seems like it's just an intimidation tactic. Maybe he thinks he can bully her out and she won't take it to court. That, or he's just really stupid.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:31:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2018 13:37:13 GMT -5
Won't the title company get involved when/if buyers attempt to close? I would think they would stop the sale if there is a lien that states she is supposed to have the deed, not him. It would cloud the title, and they don't like that.
Edited to clarify: the title company involved in the sale. I wouldn't think they'd issue a policy under these circumstances.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:31:23 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2018 15:23:54 GMT -5
The title company is protecting the buyer and the mortgage company against two things: someone showing up claiming they had an interest in the property so the sale wasn't valid, and any debts attached to the house. Strictly speaking, only the debt is called a "lien".
So- yes. You won't get a title policy unless the title company is satisfied that whoever signs the deed is/are all of the people with any right to the property. They WILL go through the details of the divorce settlement and they'll find any debts such as the original mortgage, HELOC, unpaid property taxes, mechanic's liens (someone did work to the house and was not paid), any debts the IRS has against the house, etc. (This is the type of work I did during the summers in college- searching county records.) Any debt secured by the house will have to be paid and signed off on by the creditor before the property can be conveyed to anyone else.
So yes, it will all come out before the closing, I'd think it would scare a lot of buyers away, particularly those who need to close soon.
|
|
Miss Tequila
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 10:13:45 GMT -5
Posts: 20,602
|
Post by Miss Tequila on Aug 12, 2018 13:18:06 GMT -5
This thread should be a reminder to everyone to always get a pre-nup! This guy is now tied to a mortgage on a house he no longer lives in. I would be livid. I would never be ok with having my ex make payments on debt that was in my name. I would push for either an immediate refinance by him or we would be selling. And I would fight until that happened.
The great thing about my divorce was the separate finances. It made settlement very easy. What was mine was mine. What was his was his. If I ever marry again it would only be with an iron-clad pre-nup
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 12, 2018 13:43:06 GMT -5
I wonder which of them is going to sue the other for how their actions have reduced the sale price of the house. Listing in this manner is no way to maximize the price. Well SHE certainly isn't going to sue HIM for lowering the price of the home, considering she wants to buy it...a lower price is in her best interest. The best thing that could happen for HER is that he gets offers that are low because of the way things are going...she still has an opportunity to buy the house, and now she's buying it even cheaper than she'd planned.
|
|
NoNamePerson
Distinguished Associate
Is There Anybody OUT There?
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 17:03:17 GMT -5
Posts: 25,594
Location: WITNESS PROTECTION
|
Post by NoNamePerson on Aug 12, 2018 13:45:43 GMT -5
It may be buried in some post but I'm curious how long this couple has been married. Not that it matters. Just curious.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Aug 12, 2018 13:46:15 GMT -5
It seems like it's just an intimidation tactic. Maybe he thinks he can bully her out and she won't take it to court. That, or he's just really stupid. What does he really have to lose if she won't actually buy the house and give him his equity? He can sit around do nothing and keep not getting his equity while she continues living there. Or he can get an offer on the house and use that to either convince her they should sell it by showing her how much money she can walk away with (because it's easier to motivate people when there's a real deal on the table rather than the idea that maybe a deal would happen someday) or use it as court documentation if she's supposed to have already bought the house to show that this is the amount he's out because of her failure to act. Stupid is just sitting around doing nothing and hoping that things will magically work themselves out. He's not really out much if anything here from the sounds of it.
|
|
seriousthistime
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 20:27:07 GMT -5
Posts: 4,679
|
Post by seriousthistime on Aug 12, 2018 14:33:09 GMT -5
Maybe someone's addressed this elsewhere in this thread, but it seems a better way to prove the value of a house is to hire an appraiser.
It's been a while since I looked at a realtor's listing agreement, but it seems to me you're not actually saying you WILL sell the house if the realtor finds a buyer; you are saying you will pay the realtor a commission if he or she finds a buyer. If you reject a full-price offer from a qualified buyer, you may be on the hook to pay the realtor's fee if you reject the offer and use it to try to motivate your ex to buy the place. And by reducing the price it seems this guy just made it more likely the realtor can find a buyer.
And to address something mentioned above, if someone is in contempt of court, it does not give the other party a defense to his or her own contempt. Case in point: child support and visitation. The person paying child support sometimes stops paying, and argues that he or she is being deprived of visitation. If you want to enforce the visitation provision, you go to court. You don't stop paying child support, which can lead to a quick trip to the county jail with bail set in the amount of the child support arrearage.
ETA: And now having glanced at the five pages of posts here, the notion that he should quitclaim the deed to her has another legal wrinkle. Mortgage documents generally include language that if a change in ownership is made (as it would be if he signed a quitclaim deed to her), the mortgage company can immediately call the loan.
|
|
haapai
Junior Associate
Character
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:40:06 GMT -5
Posts: 5,871
Member is Online
|
Post by haapai on Aug 12, 2018 15:19:02 GMT -5
I wonder which of them is going to sue the other for how their actions have reduced the sale price of the house. Listing in this manner is no way to maximize the price. Well SHE certainly isn't going to sue HIM for lowering the price of the home, considering she wants to buy it...a lower price is in her best interest. The best thing that could happen for HER is that he gets offers that are low because of the way things are going...she still has an opportunity to buy the house, and now she's buying it even cheaper than she'd planned. Driving the bids/valuations/sales prices of the property down only benefits her if a.) she is able to drive the valuation down to the point that she can get financed for a mortgage sufficient to buy him out and b.) taking out that mortgage is a better option than taking her share of the sale and going somewhere else.
If both conditions are not satisfied, actions that have the the result of lowering the price that the property fetches when it is sold to an arms-length buyer will hurt her.
She does not benefit from the property receiving bids that do not discount the hot mess that surrounds the property, especially if the potential buyers run like hell when they discover what they have made a bid on.
I think that they are both cutting of their noses.
|
|