There has to be a law broken here...

[paulrod]

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

Divorce wrapped up in early 2014. 2 checks were issued to ex that from refinance in late 2014 of marital home. Both checks required her and my signatures. Total ~2600.00. A forgotten joint account that had been inactive for over 14 months, has just this past month be re-activated by her depositing of the 2 checks.

I have received copies of the front/back of the checks but she did not forge my signature. The banks accepted the checks with just hers.

I, being pro-se, have fired off a letter to her attorney requesting 50% of the amount deposited, however what I really want is to nail her for her maliciousness.

I personally feel this teeters on the verge of identity theft, being that we are divorced and all joint accounts were to have been dissolved. What is the difference between this and her finding one of my credit cards and using it? She purposefully activated an abandoned joint account AND deposited the checks because that is the only account that has my name on it.

Thoughts anyone? What can i do? Im not an evil person, but this woman has been a nightmare.

Thanks for reading.

 

[Zigner]

To start with, she did nothing illegal. Why do you feel you're entitled to 50%?

 

[paulrod]

To start with, she did nothing illegal. Why do you feel you're entitled to 50%?

The checks were the balances of escrow and homeowners insurance. The marital home was refinanced by her, getting me off the loan, in 11/2014. Those checks are 50% mine.

 

[Zigner]

The checks were the balances of escrow and homeowners insurance. The marital home was refinanced by her, getting me off the loan, in 11/2014. Those checks are 50% mine.

I see that you're saying they are half yours, but I don't see any proof of it. Why do you think they are half yours? Was it addressed in your decree?

 

[single317dad]

Have you actually discussed the matter with your ex? Maybe she deposited the checks in that account because she knew part of the money was yours, and that you could access it from that account.

It's a stretch, I know, but what I'm trying to do here is slow down the hate train and make a stop at rationality station.

 

[Silverplum]

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

Divorce wrapped up in early 2014. 2 checks were issued to ex that from refinance in late 2014 of marital home. Both checks required her and my signatures. Total ~2600.00. A forgotten joint account that had been inactive for over 14 months, has just this past month be re-activated by her depositing of the 2 checks.

I have received copies of the front/back of the checks but she did not forge my signature. The banks accepted the checks with just hers.

I, being pro-se, have fired off a letter to her attorney requesting 50% of the amount deposited, however what I really want is to nail her for her maliciousness.

I personally feel this teeters on the verge of identity theft, being that we are divorced and all joint accounts were to have been dissolved. What is the difference between this and her finding one of my credit cards and using it? She purposefully activated an abandoned joint account AND deposited the checks because that is the only account that has my name on it.

Thoughts anyone? What can i do? Im not an evil person, but this woman has been a nightmare.

Thanks for reading.

She didn't steal your identity, and she didn't forge your signature. I don't know why you think that both signatures are "required" to deposit checks: they're not.

Your plan to go after your ex and "nail her for her maliciousness" is really overboard. Have you had post-divorce counseling? It might really help.

 

[Ohiogal]

The checks were the balances of escrow and homeowners insurance. The marital home was refinanced by her, getting me off the loan, in 11/2014. Those checks are 50% mine.

Actually no they weren't yours. The divorce was done early 2014. Who was paying the home insurance? The mortgage since the divorce? And even before?

 

[Just Blue]

As an FYI to the OP:

If the check was made to "John Smith and Jane Smith", that would require both sigs.

If the check was made to " John Smith or Jane Smith" . it only requires one sig.

 

[paulrod]

I see that you're saying they are half yours, but I don't see any proof of it. Why do you think they are half yours? Was it addressed in your decree?

Yes. However - "escrows" specifically were not. I am open to splitting the escrow amount effective the date of divorce.

Have you actually discussed the matter with your ex? Maybe she deposited the checks in that account because she knew part of the money was yours, and that you could access it from that account.

It's a stretch, I know, but what I'm trying to do here is slow down the hate train and make a stop at rationality station.

I appreciate your position. I do. I divorced her. What I deal with when trying to communicate with this woman is a multitude of emotions and personalities. I am not a doctor, but in my opinion she is a high conflict personality that cannot own her wrongdoings. She is also (again my opinion) still suffering from "scorned woman" complex.

She didn't steal your identity, and she didn't forge your signature. I don't know why you think that both signatures are "required" to deposit checks: they're not.

Your plan to go after your ex and "nail her for her maliciousness" is really overboard. Have you had post-divorce counseling? It might really help.

See my comment back to single317dad. If counseling didnt work while in the marriage I am certainly not going to to entertain the thought of it working after the marriage. I understand that it is not identity theft. I feel her antics are done maliciously and feel that it is time for her to pay for her bad behavior.

Checks requiring two signatures do in fact need two signatures, especially when the check spells out just that right on it.

Actually no they weren't yours. The divorce was done early 2014. Who was paying the home insurance? The mortgage since the divorce? And even before?

The monies in question are not 100% hers.

My post isn't about what I feel is owed to me or not. My post was simply;
1. abandoned joint account was used for the purpose of depositing 2 checks made out to both her and I.
2. The account was then cleaned out of all money, including (also forgotten) an additional 200.00 from this forgotten joint account.
3. Both checks required both signatures - confirmed such with the issuing bank. Check face also stipulates same.

This is a malicious move on her end. If everything she did is legal, then I appreciate all your assistance and will close the thread. I understand that additional information may be needed, but please - I understand that this is "free" advice, but I dont really see the need for anyone to waste time on suggesting things that are out of scope of the question.

Thanks again!

 

[paulrod]

As an FYI to the OP:

If the check was made to "John Smith and Jane Smith", that would require both sigs.

If the check was made to " John Smith or Jane Smith" . it only requires one sig.

Thank you Blue Meanie - your are exactly correct.
The checks in question contained AND between our names.
Actually one of them clearly indicated "both parties signatures required"

Thanks

 

[Silverplum]

Yes. However - "escrows" specifically were not. I am open to splitting the escrow amount effective the date of divorce.



I appreciate your position. I do. I divorced her. What I deal with when trying to communicate with this woman is a multitude of emotions and personalities. I am not a doctor, but in my opinion she is a high conflict personality that cannot own her wrongdoings. She is also (again my opinion) still suffering from "scorned woman" complex.



See my comment back to single317dad. If counseling didnt work while in the marriage I am certainly not going to to entertain the thought of it working after the marriage. I understand that it is not identity theft. I feel her antics are done maliciously and feel that it is time for her to pay for her bad behavior.

Checks requiring two signatures do in fact need two signatures, especially when the check spells out just that right on it.



The monies in question are not 100% hers.

My post isn't about what I feel is owed to me or not. My post was simply;
1. abandoned joint account was used for the purpose of depositing 2 checks made out to both her and I.
2. The account was then cleaned out of all money, including (also forgotten) an additional 200.00 from this forgotten joint account.
3. Both checks required both signatures - confirmed such with the issuing bank. Check face also stipulates same.

This is a malicious move on her end. If everything she did is legal, then I appreciate all your assistance and will close the thread. I understand that additional information may be needed, but please - I understand that this is "free" advice, but I dont really see the need for anyone to waste time on suggesting things that are out of scope of the question.

Thanks again!

Your posts have been about how to get what is not clearly awarded to you in your divorce, and about how your ex is an awful person.

If you think you can claim some of the money you think is yours, feel free to file for it in court.

We're not at all interested in explaining how to attempt to use the courts for "punishing" an awful person.

 

[single317dad]

If counseling didnt work while in the marriage I am certainly not going to to entertain the thought of it working after the marriage.

Ah, but here's the difference: if counseling doesn't work during the marriage, it's the fault of either one or both of you. If counseling doesn't work for you after the marriage, there's only one person to blame. Think about that, then consider whether counseling might help you.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

If the divorce has been finalized, take her to small claims.

 

[Zigner]

If the divorce has been finalized, take her to small claims.

For what? It doesn't even seem like the OP is entitled to any of the money at this point.

 

[tuffbrk]

Was your mortgage addressed in your settlement? As in - you were awarded $XX that represents your share of the marital equity and your ex ordered to finance in their own name within XX time to remove you from the liability? If so, you would have already received your share and anything related to the payoff proceeds, etc. would belong solely to the ex. As an example, the escrow could have been used to reduce the payoff amount of the mortgage that your ex financed. But instead the servicer held the escrow funds to be certain all taxes and insurance were paid up to date prior to releasing the lien from their books. In that instance, those escrow funds would solely belong to your ex. The checks would have listed both names as the mortgage being paid off was in both names. That doesn't necessarily translate to you being entitled to any of the funds.

I agree that your ex should have requested you sign the checks and that it was underhanded of her to have used an old account to work around having to obtain your signature. That being said, depending on the wording in your decree addressing your interest in the home, it is entirely possible (very likely) that all funds related to the payoff are due her and she just used a work around to avoid having to interact with you and obtain your signature.

Hope that puts your mind at ease.