Property distribution

[Hazle]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington

Can the respondent be held liable for any of the value of property that has been foreclosed?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Hazle

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington

Can the respondent be held liable for any of the value of property that has been foreclosed?

There is no where near enough information here to answer that question.

However, I have seen cases where if one party through negligence or bad faith, caused a repo or foreclosure on an asset that would have had equity otherwise, that the party causing the loss, was responsible for paying to the other party, 1/2 of the value of the equity that was lost.

[Hazle]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

There is no where near enough information here to answer that question.

However, I have seen cases where if one party through negligence or bad faith, caused a repo or foreclosure on an asset that would have had equity otherwise, that the party causing the loss, was responsible for paying to the other party, 1/2 of the value of the equity that was lost.

In this case both parties are at fault. Neither has made a payment nor have they paid back taxes, putting the contract in default.

The foreclosure would be complete before the court date that has been set for distribution of the property.

The petitioners attorney is saying that the respondent will still be responsible for the amount a value there would have been if the property had been sold. That makes no sense to me since they are both responsible for it being in default.

Is that enough info.

Thanks

Hazle

[MFinancier]

Originally Posted by Hazle

In this case both parties are at fault. Neither has made a payment nor have they paid back taxes, putting the contract in default.

The foreclosure would be complete before the court date that has been set for distribution of the property.

The petitioners attorney is saying that the respondent will still be responsible for the amount a value there would have been if the property had been sold. That makes no sense to me since they are both responsible for it being in default.

Is that enough info.

Thanks

Hazle

As Ldij mentioned...was the respondent soley responsible for encumbering this property from being sold or through negligence on their part contributing to any depreciation in it's value or salability? How long was the property owned, who made the downpayment, was it appraised recently? Are there any other assets or debt involved?

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Hazle

In this case both parties are at fault. Neither has made a payment nor have they paid back taxes, putting the contract in default.

The foreclosure would be complete before the court date that has been set for distribution of the property.

The petitioners attorney is saying that the respondent will still be responsible for the amount a value there would have been if the property had been sold. That makes no sense to me since they are both responsible for it being in default.

Is that enough info.

Thanks

Hazle

Whoever was living in the property most likely was responsible for making the mortgage payments. Therefore its likely that person is at fault. However, again, you are being quite vague so its hard to give you an answer.

[Hazle]

Originally Posted by LdiJ

Whoever was living in the property most likely was responsible for making the mortgage payments. Therefore its likely that person is at fault. However, again, you are being quite vague so its hard to give you an answer.

If you will tell me what you need to know I would be happy to fill in the details. I am not sure what is needed.

Thanks

[LdiJ]

Originally Posted by Hazle

If you will tell me what you need to know I would be happy to fill in the details. I am not sure what is needed.

Thanks

I am sorry, but we are all volunteers here and we simply don't have time to "pull teeth".

Just start at the beginning and tell the whole story. Read some of the first posts from some of the other threads to get an idea of how you should be explaining your situation.

[nextwife]

AND,

Was

there

equity?????????????

[Farfalla]

Originally Posted by Hazle

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Washington

Can the respondent be held liable for any of the value of property that has been foreclosed?

Also... let's say one party of the divorce caused the default... it does not matter if it was the respondent or the petitioner.... their place on the heading of the court documents does not impact anything.. so maybe use husband/wife, me/him..... The issue here I believe is if one party can be held libel to the other if the both were at fault and the home was foreclosed on…

Info like who was living there during the default period, how much equity, was it appraised, etc bearing on the answer.

Why do you say that both parties are responsible? Explain that too.

[nextwife]

Originally Posted by Farfalla

Why do you say that both parties are responsible? Explain that too.

AS one who works for a lender and who handles foreclosures, I can tell you that both parties ARE responsible. We underwrote the loan based upon BOTH assuming responsibility for the payments, and both agreeing that we would be paid. WE put no language in our loan that said you agree to be responsible ". . . unless you stop getting along and no longer want to live together". Both parties bear equal responsibility TO THE LENDER to be certain the payments get made. We don't care what they agree to between them about who lives there and who doesn't, we are not a party to their occupancy arrangements.

[Farfalla]

Originally Posted by nextwife

AS one who works for a lender and who handles foreclosures, I can tell you that both parties ARE responsible. We underwrote the loan based upon BOTH assuming responsibility for the payments, and both agreeing that we would be paid. WE put no language in our loan that said you agree to be responsible ". . . unless you stop getting along and no longer want to live together". Both parties bear equal responsibility TO THE LENDER to be certain the payments get made. We don't care what they agree to between them about who lives there and who doesn't, we are not a party to their occupancy arrangements.

You are of course correct in this, both parties are responsible regardless.

However, I think that the OP's question is not about who the mortgage company holds responsible but whether or not in a divorce one part can be held responsible to the other if that party did not make the payments.... say wife was living in the house and their court order stated that wife would make full payment. But wife did not and the house went into forclosure. Thus the equity was lost to the marital assets. Cand the husband now demand that the wife give him 50% of the lost equity.

So my question was why did OP's spouse believe that OP was responsible for the loss to the marital assets.