Grandparent died and morgage company is threatening to sue next of kin for morgage am

[kitkat2856]

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

I have a friend who lived with his grandmother who recently died. She put his name on a quick claim dead but not on the mortgage. His intention was to live in the house and he was paying the mortgage because they fixed the house up and has quite a bit of equity in the house and wanted to eventually sell it. He has been getting the run around from them saying that they won't put his name on the mortgage because they don't accept a quick-claim dead but expect him to pay it and he stopped paying it when they told him they where going to foreclose on the house anyways since he isn't on the mortgage. They are now threatening to sue him for the full amount of the mortgage and foreclose on the house. From what I understand, being on the dead does not make you responsible for the mortgage. I have advised him to see a lawyer but he has no money and is dealing with many other financial burdens due to this death. There is no will. Any advice would be appreciated.

[HomeGuru]

Originally Posted by kitkat2856

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

I have a friend who lived with his grandmother who recently died. She put his name on a quick claim dead but not on the mortgage. His intention was to live in the house and he was paying the mortgage because they fixed the house up and has quite a bit of equity in the house and wanted to eventually sell it. He has been getting the run around from them saying that they won't put his name on the mortgage because they don't accept a quick-claim dead but expect him to pay it and he stopped paying it when they told him they where going to foreclose on the house anyways since he isn't on the mortgage. They are now threatening to sue him for the full amount of the mortgage and foreclose on the house. From what I understand, being on the dead does not make you responsible for the mortgage. I have advised him to see a lawyer but he has no money and is dealing with many other financial burdens due to this death. There is no will. Any advice would be appreciated.

**A: he made a grave error by not paying the mortgage. He is in deep. He needs an attorney like yesterday.

[kitkat2856]

Originally Posted by HomeGuru

**A: he made a grave error by not paying the mortgage. He is in deep. He needs an attorney like yesterday.

Yeah, I agree he needs an attorney but he has no money for an attorney.

[Some Random Guy]

Yeah, I agree he needs an attorney but he has no money for an attorney.

Then he has no money for a house. Make plans for him to move.

His mistake was taking a shaky situation with a quit claim deed and making it worese by not paying the mortgage. The bank is now unlikely to cut him a break even if he wants to start paying again.

Is there equity in the home?

[FlyingRon]

Being on the deed doesn't make you liable for the mortgage, but if the mortgage isn't paid then the bank can still foreclose. That's what having the mortgage secured by the property is all about. His only option is to quick refinance the place in his own name to satisfy the original loan. They were blowing smoke about foreclosing before. They can't invoke a due-on-sale clause solely because of the death. However, once he stopped paying they could. He screwed himself.

[kitkat2856]

Originally Posted by Some Random Guy

Then he has no money for a house. Make plans for him to move.

His mistake was taking a shaky situation with a quit claim deed and making it worese by not paying the mortgage. The bank is now unlikely to cut him a break even if he wants to start paying again.

Is there equity in the home?

Well most people can't afford a lawyer, right now most people can't afford the rising food costs, he didn't buy the house, his only remaining family member died. His parents died, his grandma died, and he has no family to advise him and he has no idea what he is doing. Needless to say its a long story and there are many things going on all due to the death of his grandma and other debts he has been left to pay. He was making the payments and even then they where unwilling to "cut him a break". They where never willing to cut him a break. That was then, time has passed and things have changed. He is trying to move and get out of this situation. And yes, as I mentioned there is equity in the home.

Though none of that is really relevant to my question. While I truly do appreciate interest and response I am really looking for insight specifically into what I asked about. How can they hold him responsible for something they where unwilling to give him responsibility for. His name is not on the mortgage and they refused to put him on it, and refuse to recognize his interest in the asset, so how can they now claim him responsible for it?

[kitkat2856]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

Being on the deed doesn't make you liable for the mortgage, but if the mortgage isn't paid then the bank can still foreclose. That's what having the mortgage secured by the property is all about. His only option is to quick refinance the place in his own name to satisfy the original loan. They were blowing smoke about foreclosing before. They can't invoke a due-on-sale clause solely because of the death. However, once he stopped paying they could. He screwed himself.

Thanks, although I wouldn't say he screwed himself since they lied to him, manipulated him, and took advantage of him. He had no idea what he was doing and they knew that.
I know they can foreclose for non-payment, and he knows that as well, but he stopped paying because he believed their threats. What I really have a hard time believing is that they can sue him for the amount owed on the mortgage.

I only wish he'd asked for advise much sooner... Thanks for the response!

[FlyingRon]

Originally Posted by kitkat2856

He was making the payments and even then they where unwilling to "cut him a break".

They didn't need to cut him a break.

How can they hold him responsible for something they where unwilling to give him responsibility for.

They can't. They'll foreclose (he will be named in the suit, but it really mean much other than to put him on notice the property will be sold).

His name is not on the mortgage and they refused to put him on it, and refuse to recognize his interest in the asset, so how can they now claim him responsible for it?

They do not need to put him on the mortgage. They don't need to recognize his interest in it. His "interest" in the property has nothing to do with the mortgage or what the bank says. He should have come here (or otherwise gotten competent advice) before defaulting on the loan.

[FlyingRon]

Originally Posted by kitkat2856

What I really have a hard time believing is that they can sue him for the amount owed on the mortgage.

They aren't.

They are foreclosing which requires the owner(s) of record to be informed of the proceeding (and to offet to let them make good on it).

[kitkat2856]

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

They didn't need to cut him a break.

No they didn't, but the origional response from somerandom guy was that they are sure to not cut him a break after stopping payment, which was mute point which I was pointing out.

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

They can't. They'll foreclose (he will be named in the suit, but it really mean much other than to put him on notice the property will be sold).

That's what I thought, thank you for confirmation.

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

His "interest" in the property has nothing to do with the mortgage or what the bank says.

What I meant by that was his interest as a property owner int he equity of the house. The told him he could not sell the house. (which also sounds preposterous to me)

I can't roll back time and give him the advise he needed when he needed it anymore than he can roll back time and do anything differently, he didn't get himself into this and he is the victim so enough "he should of" please. Thanks very much for your responses. I appreciate your time very much!