Divorce and Foreclosure

[TexMom]

I live in Texas. Divorced in 2005 in which the ex husband fought for the house that we had a mortgage together for. He wanted 100% of the profit when it sold. In our decree, it states that he was to have it actively listed for sale with a realtor with a MLS listing. He never did. I tried to help out and offered a realtor (gave her information to atleast list the house). The realtor of course had to contact my ex regarding listing the house for sale. The realtor and I were both broad-sided when she went out to the property to find that someone was living there and gave my ex-husband $10,000 as a down payment to "owner finance" it to her. They did not draw up any sort of contract. Actually the only piece of paper exchanged in the deal was a cashiers check. My ex failed to mention that to the realtor in their descisions and the realtor was how I learned of the transactions. The house has sense entered into the foreclosure process and is behind on the taxes. The mortgage company says that since it is a federally backed loan, that they can tap into my wages to collect on the note even though I have a divorce decree saying that he is 100% responsible for it. I tried several times to get my ex to sign a transfer of equity, refinance it, sale it to someone... he flat out refused. I am trying to find out my rights regarding the situation. Can they really hold me accountable to pay for this? Will I be able to take my ex back to court for reimbursement since he was 100% responible for it according to our decree?

Thanks for listening.

 

[nextwife]

I live in Texas. Divorced in 2005 in which the ex husband fought for the house that we had a mortgage together for. He wanted 100% of the profit when it sold. In our decree, it states that he was to have it actively listed for sale with a realtor with a MLS listing. He never did. I tried to help out and offered a realtor (gave her information to atleast list the house). The realtor of course had to contact my ex regarding listing the house for sale. The realtor and I were both broad-sided when she went out to the property to find that someone was living there and gave my ex-husband $10,000 as a down payment to "owner finance" it to her. They did not draw up any sort of contract. Actually the only piece of paper exchanged in the deal was a cashiers check. My ex failed to mention that to the realtor in their descisions and the realtor was how I learned of the transactions. The house has sense entered into the foreclosure process and is behind on the taxes. The mortgage company says that since it is a federally backed loan, that they can tap into my wages to collect on the note even though I have a divorce decree saying that he is 100% responsible for it. I tried several times to get my ex to sign a transfer of equity, refinance it, sale it to someone... he flat out refused. I am trying to find out my rights regarding the situation. Can they really hold me accountable to pay for this? Will I be able to take my ex back to court for reimbursement since he was 100% responible for it according to our decree?

Thanks for listening.

When this was done, your attorney SHOULD have explained to you that the lender was NOT a party to this agreement and they have every right to hold all the parties to whom they agreed to grant a mortgage responsible for payments.

The only way to cancel liability under a mortgage is to have it paid off - by sale or refi.

 

[Zigner]

Will I be able to take my ex back to court for reimbursement since he was 100% responible for it according to our decree?

Yes, you can take him to court for it...but if he can't pay it now, why do you think he'd be able to pay it then?

 

[Bali Hai]

Yes, you can take him to court for it...but if he can't pay it now, why do you think he'd be able to pay it then?

Because we are a country of laws that's why! When a judge makes a lawful order, the person is expected to lawfully carry it out. No IF's, AND's or BUT's!!

 

[mistoffolees]

Can they really hold me accountable to pay for this?

Yes. Your name is on the mortgage and the bank has no obligation to remove you.

You could send them a copy of your divorce decree and they may be slower to ding your credit rating, but that's entirely up to them- and they're only likely to be flexible if the loan is paid in full.

Will I be able to take my ex back to court for reimbursement since he was 100% responible for it according to our decree?

Yes. Absolutely. You can also ask the court to have him pay your legal fees (whether you'll get this is somewhat dependent on the judge involved, though).

What you can't do is fix your credit rating. As far as the bank is concerned, you were just as liable as him and they have every right to collect.

 

[TexMom]

So basically since this is a federally back loan that I am still on, they can garnish my wages and I won't be able to get a resolution through the courts with my ex until the balance is paid off?

 

[mistoffolees]

So basically since this is a federally back loan that I am still on, they can garnish my wages and I won't be able to get a resolution through the courts with my ex until the balance is paid off?

It doesn't matter if it's federally backed or not. Your name is on the mortgage and the mortgage isn't being paid. You are therefore liable.

Federal backing only makes it easier for them to collect. They could collect anyway, just with a little more effort.

 

[TexMom]

Ok.. a more straight forward question.

Would I have to wait until whatever amount is garnished from my wages is paid and the amount that is owed is paid in full, before being able to take my ex back to court to try to get reimbursed?

 

[mistoffolees]

Ok.. a more straight forward question.

Would I have to wait until whatever amount is garnished from my wages is paid and the amount that is owed is paid in full, before being able to take my ex back to court to try to get reimbursed?

Absolutely not.

First, he did not have the legal authority to offer to sell it and you are entitled to half of the $10 K he received. In addition, he is in contempt for not putting it on the market. Depending on the wording of the decree, he may also be in contempt for letting it go into foreclosure.

Find an attorney and go after him for contempt of court and hiding assets (the $10 K 'deposit' for the purchase of the house) as well as failing to try to sell the house.

 

[TexMom]

The wording provided him with 100% of the profit once it sold. He was to have it actively listed for sale, but never did. He acquired the 10K by "owner financing" it (under mine and his credit though). I am not sure if the person who was dumb enough to give him 10K is looking for any legal recourse against him since they did not have a contract and the house has entered into foreclosure.

Since he attempted to "owner finance" the house instead of selling it outright (which the decree only sales that he is to sale it, doesn't specify if owner financing is or is not an option) would I be entitled to 1/2 of the 10k in assests? I assumed that would fall under the 100% profit, since he didn't use any of it toward the mortgage.

 

[mistoffolees]

The wording provided him with 100% of the profit once it sold. He was to have it actively listed for sale, but never did. He acquired the 10K by "owner financing" it (under mine and his credit though). I am not sure if the person who was dumb enough to give him 10K is looking for any legal recourse against him since they did not have a contract and the house has entered into foreclosure.

Since he attempted to "owner finance" the house instead of selling it outright (which the decree only sales that he is to sale it, doesn't specify if owner financing is or is not an option) would I be entitled to 1/2 of the 10k in assests? I assumed that would fall under the 100% profit, since he didn't use any of it toward the mortgage.

If the decree says that he gets 100% of the profit, then you don't have any claim on the $10 K. You could, however, ask the court to order it to be paid against the mortgage (the 'purchaser' OTOH, would likely ask for it to be returned and they might or might not have the stronger claim. One of the principles involved is that verbal agreements are generally not valid in real estate deals).

Whether he's in contempt would depend on the exact wording of the clause requiring him to list it. If it says he needs to list it for sale and he puts it on Craigslist, then he's not in contempt. If it says he needs to list it with an MLS and he puts it on MLS at 10 times the appraised value, he's still not in contempt. If it says he must list it with MLS and he never did so, then he's in contempt. So what does the 'sale' clause say?

The exact wording is going to be critical in determining what he can be charged with and how much you can protect yourself. But in any event, with your name on the mortgage, you're stuck for any default amounts. If the wording of the decree says he's responsible for the mortgage payment and he didn't make it, then he's in contempt, as well.

 

[LdiJ]

The wording provided him with 100% of the profit once it sold. He was to have it actively listed for sale, but never did. He acquired the 10K by "owner financing" it (under mine and his credit though). I am not sure if the person who was dumb enough to give him 10K is looking for any legal recourse against him since they did not have a contract and the house has entered into foreclosure.

Since he attempted to "owner finance" the house instead of selling it outright (which the decree only sales that he is to sale it, doesn't specify if owner financing is or is not an option) would I be entitled to 1/2 of the 10k in assests? I assumed that would fall under the 100% profit, since he didn't use any of it toward the mortgage.

I find it difficult to believe that anyone with 10k lying around to pay someone in cash, would be stupid enough to do it without having a contract.

However, if that really happened, he may have committed an actual criminal act.