Christoph
recently joined
Reged: 05/24/05
Posts: 9
|
|
Hi All:
we were married 3 years this month and the judge ordered the sale of our home. the home was paid for 100% by me and I also paid off the mortgage 100% plus all property taxes and utility bills even after seperating 2.5 months ago. BUT: it is in joint tenants!
these 36 months, I earned only $ 17,000 (illness) and she a lot less. Escrow closed and there are $ 94,... left.
I tried to figure out how a judge might rule. Stricly 50:50? Will he take the rent for using my share of the house into consideration, as the house was sublet by her?
I'm asking because she offered to settle for $ 40,000. My attorney who also does real state says I get the house back.
She also looted all my belongings and forged checks and sold my vehicles etc. Drugs problem...
Thank you - I hope for some general thought on this.
|
Cinder2
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/05
Posts: 4361
Loc: Southern California
|
|
"I bought this 3 BR, 2 BA house 7/2003 and had it rented until 1/2005. We got married 10/2004"
You wrote this in another thread. So, if you bought the house before you married, you are entitled to the equity up until 10/2004. The equity after that (the amount that the house increased in value) is split between you.
You state that the equity was $94K. What was the down payment that you made on the house? Did you refinance while you were married? If so, did you get additional monies out of the house? What did you do with them?
Cinder
p.s. Who paid for the house while you were married is irrelevant as the court will consider it that you both paid for the house.
|
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
|
|
if it has been sold?
Also, when you say you paid for it 100%, do you mean that you purchased it prior to the marriage and paid off the mortgage in full before you married? Because THAT is the only way you could have paid for it 100% yourself. Once you married, then any payments towards the principal are considered having come from BOTH of you and thus any equity earned during the marriage belongs to both of you equally. If you have documents showing that you paid the downpayment before the marriage, then your down payment should come back to you out of the final proceeds. In addition, any mortgage payments made PRIOR to the marriage may be calculated to determine the small percentage over 50% that you would receive of the remaining proceeds. She will get nearly 50% of what is left AFTER you take your downpayment back.
Your incomes are not relevant. Your rental agreement is also not relevant. Your other comments are allegations and have no bearing on the disposition of the profit UNLESS you have proof of her conviction of these crimes and thus may be entitled to some compensation.
WEre these vehicles in your name only or jointly held? If joint, then she is likely entitled to sell them. Looting is usually a crime associated with breaking into a store and stealing merchandise like in LA back in the day.
|
Christoph
recently joined
Reged: 05/24/05
Posts: 9
|
|
Man, my post shows how emotions cloud everything to the point of being unable to ask some clear questions. My apology! Here are some facts:
i) the house had been bought 7/2003 for cash (got married 10/2004).
ii) in Fall 2003, I obtained a hard money loan at 15% interest only for $ 33,925 and while married, I paid off $ 22,000 of the remaining balance by selling land.
ii) The balance was paid off when I got kicked out March 2005. And with looting, I tried to describe a process where simply every single item in that house (family photographs to diving licenses, computers to clothes) were taken for sale and what she could not sell was openly vandalized.
iii) The house cost only $ 55,000 in July 2003. To sell it was very tough do of the $ 119,995 the buyer paid, only $ 94,... were the net proceed.
iv) Gilda offered to settle and sign everything for $ 40,000 and I am wondering whether this is an okay settlement.
v) Using and subletting the house from March 2005 till August 2007 - I thought I would be entitled to rent.
Oh well, thank you all for enlightening me! And please keep telling me if I go wrong in my assumptions!
Hope you all are doing fine,
Chris
|
Melody
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 06/02/04
Posts: 10102
Loc: California
|
|
prior to the marriage. That's good for you.
You took out a loan and then paid it off during the marriage...so that shouldn't change anything. What did you do with the funds from the loan? Since that loan was taken out prior to the marriage, then anything you purchased with it may be your separate property as well. You repaid the loan during the marriage...so community funds were used to do that...what about the land that you sold? Was that your land only or jointly held land?
Actually, I'm not sure it makes a difference, because the house was yours outright....and there is no current debt on it anyway. However, it's possible that equity earned during the marriage may still be liable to community property...unless the fact that the house that earned the equity was your sole property. Better check with a lawyer on that.
So you made $94K on the house....and I'm not sure that any of it should go to her because the instrument for earning the equity did not belong to her, but to you. She may not be entitled to any of that equity. Paying her $40K may be WAAAY too much.
As for the rent/sublet...I"m not sure I understand what you're saying about the situation. She rented it from you? Who rented it?
As for the looting...I'm not sure if it is technically looting. Did she have a legal right to be in the home? Were you still married? Did she have a key? Was there a legal separation? It's quite possible that....while clearly unfair....she may have been within her legal rights to dispose of property from within the home in any manner she chose. I'd have to know a bit more.
Edited by Melody (11/03/07 02:08 AM)
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
