Any advice on a deed matter? any lawyers with suggestions? (no advice-I understand lol)

a reply to: rockhndr

This may've already been stated but I don't have the patience to run through all of the comments to this point. Her name on the deed does entitle her to ownership rights. However, it depends on what type of deed and how the property is being held. Under the most likely circumstances, she owns half of the property, regardless of the fact that she didn't pay anything for it.

The amount he would owe her could be offset by monies that she owes to him. Further, if she took money from his account without authority, it is a crime. He could bring criminal charges against her for doing so, assuming it is still within the statute of limitations. He should be careful not to threaten criminal prosecution in retaliation for her claims, however, as that could be a separate law suit on her behalf.

You should get an appraisal of the property asap and make sure the appraiser knows that you want it to be as low as possible.

Then you should contact a lawyer in your area. You shouldn't hire the cheapest one. You should hire one with experience in property law. He's gonna need to pay her off sooner or later, as long as her name is on that deed. Better to get it done now before his property value rises.

Also, don't do any maintenance or upgrades to the property until the case is settled.

LMAO!! Right? Maybe I should have posted looking for the "MOB" mentality instead of "legalese"!! Hahahaha!! a reply to: olaru12

Thank you!!! a reply to: TobyFlenderson

a reply to: rockhndr

De nada

a reply to: TobyFlenderson

I agree with you about her being a straight up 50% owner, but unless they were married, I doubt there would be any "offset" of monies owed the gentleman if the property has to be liquidated.

More likely, he would have to sue her to recoup any money owed after the liquidation of the property.

A property title is always going to take precedence over a personal loan, and in my experience, judges are going to be hesitant to treat the two as equal.

originally posted by: rockhndr
Not sure I understand you...they WERE in a relationship...??? a reply to: TinySickTears

I am not in the US but I have read many times here in the UK that people are

mistaken if they believe that live in partners are entitled to the same rights

as married ones. They are not, perhaps that may be worth looking into?

I have learned the hard way abut US laws, legalities etc. I have over 30 years as a real estate broker and worked in several states.

Usually the law is the law as written but I have also seen judges with strong opinions and especially when it comes to men and women cheating and lying during relationships-which is what this sounds like.

Unfortunately, a judge might hear you, as the "new" live-in sounding like sour grapes - depends on the judge.

originally posted by: eletheia

originally posted by: rockhndr
Not sure I understand you...they WERE in a relationship...??? a reply to: TinySickTears

I am not in the US but I have read many times here in the UK that people are

mistaken if they believe that live in partners are entitled to the same rights

as married ones. They are not, perhaps that may be worth looking into?

That's mostly the case here as well, but varies state-by-state. Here in Washington State, this would be a very clear-cut case. The ex is entitled to 50% of the property. It wouldn't matter if they were married or not.

you guys aren't in a community property state, which is nice, but that is going to be a challenging thing to overcome. If he signed her onto the deed, you'll have to get her to sign a quit claim deed somehow, sell the house, or refi it and buy her out, assuming you have equity. I see this often with divorcing couples (I'm a mortgage banker and help people in these scenarios more often than I'd like), though not often with unmarried co-owners. I'd recommend contacting a divorce lawyer to see if they may have any advice on what to do with the ex. Where they didn't buy the house together, I'm wondering what her ownership percentage of the property is. In any event, I wonder if the ex coerced him into getting her onto the title, all while siphoning money out of his account; seems premeditated to me. Lawyer up.

If she has low ownership % and there's enough equity to buy her out according to her ownership %, you might be able to get her to agree to sign the quit claim by offering some funds and keeping it out of court- if you guys want to keep the house. Good luck!

I think if he is currently living in the property and it is his primary residence there is no way the court will force him to sell the property and move out just so she can get half of the money. more likely what the court would do is say that if the property ever is no longer his primary residence then it could be sold or after he dies the property has to be sold and she gets half the money.

lets forget that the owners are different genders and not related, lets say that 2 brothers bought a home and one of them lived in the home.then 5 years later the brother that doesn`t live there wants to sell the property to get 50% of the profits, I doubt that any court would force brother who lives in the home,and who is 50% owner, to move out and sell the home against his will.

personally, I wouldn`t get a lawyer or do anything, let her initiate the legal proceedings and then get a lawyer.

a reply to: Tardacus

She would have the same property rights as the original owner. All she would have to do is petition the court to force a sale or order a FMV cash-out.

ATTN: OP...

There's another problem here that I just thought about... If your partner were to pass away (God forbid), and he died intestate, the ex could inherit the house 100% (again, based upon your state's laws). Hopefully you both have legally-executed wills.

a reply to: SBMcG

right, and the person who is living in the home has the same property rights as the person not living there, 50/50

50/50 is a tie nobody has the upper hand and no judge is going to force the 50% owner who is using the home as their primary residence to move out and sell the property just because the other 50% stake owner ,who has a place to live,wants money.

The judge will say, that if the 50% owner who is living there ever moves,or dies THEN the home will have to be sold and half the profits given to the other 50% owner or their heirs.

a reply to: Tardacus

Not in my experience. If the property is co-owned, occupancy does not supersede the property rights of the non-occupant.

Maybe I've spent too many hundreds of hours in court listening to this stuff out of pure boredom, but I think this is pretty clear cut.

Anyway, I wish the OP the best.

a reply to: SBMcG

Agreed. Offset was the wrong choice of words. Depending on the jurisdiction, they may be able to bring a cross-complaint if a suit is filed.

a reply to: rockhndr

cant comment on the deeds and stuff because I am not from your country but i suggest that you and him started the relationship and got togher. The two of you can now undo this relationship by yourselves. You do not need 'professional' help.

Suggest you set aside all the pain you are both going through but taking on professional 'help' will only result in longer pain and less money for both sides.

a reply to: rockhndr

HE CANT SELL THE HOME LATER HIMSELF...not without her getting 1/2. You are stuck with her owning 1/2...and she knows it, and you need to realize it.

Its like a mortgage on a home...the bank owns 1/2 and you own 1/2...you cant sell it...or even on a car note...without the other 1/2 getting their share or by paying it off.

I option is he can deal with her now by seeing how much it'll take in $$$ to get her to sign off and make it free and clear.

Like in divorce-2 names-2 owners...no matter who paid what. There is a document with 2 co-owners. Home, car, business, copyright, authoring a book. Sell or buy the other 1/2's interest out.

originally posted by: mysterioustranger
a reply to: rockhndr
Its like a mortgage on a home...the bank owns 1/2 and you own 1/2...you cant sell it...or even on a car note...without the other 1/2 getting their share or by paying it off.

This situation is worse for the original owner than if there were a lienholder (mortgage, etc...) because as long as the payment on that loan were current, the resident owner's right to possession could not be challenged (with rare exception).

A title or deed held in common grants equal owners equal property rights. The problem the home owner in this instance faces is that the occupant's rights of property do not supersede those of the non-occupant tenant UNLESS that occupant has a rental agreement extending them rights of tenancy under the Landlord Tenant Act of that particular state.

This is very straight forward. Fortunately for the OP, Maine is not a community property state, so a good local real estate attorney should be able to kick up enough dust than the non-occupant owner might be more inclined to settle for a lesser amount that the FMV of 50% of the property.

Over the years, I've seen some real nightmares with joint title issues (I'm in land development) that make the OP's situation look like a bowl of Lucky Charms.

If it were me, I would offer the other owner 10% in cash to vacate title (or quitclaim) -- taking out an equity loan if I had to. If they countered with anything over 25% I'd tell them to take me to court.

a reply to: SBMcG

Yep...thats what I meant, and thats what I'd do. Buy the other holder out...

Thanks

UPDATE!! Lawsuit was filed against her, due to "misappropriation of funds" (there is a reasonable expectation that the bill "payer" is doing the right thing when entrusted with monies from another of ANY kind) and believe it or not, EMBEZZLEMENT of funds for 4 years....she FRAUDULANTLY portrayed herself to not be able to work, (though the minute she moved out she got a job) bank statements were able to PROVE she was withholding funds (his check) by transferring it to her own account (she DID pay household bills-but KEPT THE REST and took ALL of it with her when she moved) Not only that, but she ate into his cash settlement and LEFT when her own monies came in, never, EVER putting ONE DIME of her own money into the household.....Justice is served...she is signing off the deed...if this goes to court, not ONLY would the "partition" be offset by the proof, BUT she could do jail time...she has decided to "settle out of court"......Smart girl So my suggestion to those of you who believe "partition" is always 50/50....NOT SO...you just have to "offset" the other persons portion to lower it...not only were we able to do that, BUT also prove she was skimming from the top-ALL OF IT...