ex refuses to sign escrow refund check without getting 1/2 the money

[fedupw/x]

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

Minnesota

I have been divorced for over 1 year and was awarded our house in the divorce settlement. I have a Torrence Certificate showing me as the sole legal owner. I did not refinance the house, nor did I have my ex husbands name removed from the mortgage account. I have been paying for the mortgage, insurance, taxes myself after a refinance in 2004.

I just sold the house. Yea! thought I was free & clear eh? But NOOOOO......

My problem is that I received an escrow refund check made payable to me and my ex husband. There isn't an and/or on the check, so would it require 2 signatures to cash?

Also, I called the mortgage company and asked if the check could be reissued in my name only. If I fill out a few forms , that the 2 of us would need to sign, in order to get his name off of the closed account that yes they could (issue a new check). I was told that this could take over 30 days. --IF--- my ex would sign the forms.

My ex refused to sign the check unless I give him 1/2 of it. So, I don't think it is likely that he is going to sign a bunch more forms.

I would rather give all of it to an attorney or charity than see him get a single red cent for my hard work. I feel like the little red hen here. He didn't do a thing to earn that money.

Can I do anything legally to get him to sign the check without giving up half?

fedupw/x in Minnesota

 

[HuAi]

why dont you call your bank and ask? you may be able to deposit it in your name only.

 

[CraigFL]

It sounds like they had to put his name on the check because his name is still on the title/deed and mortgage. This means that although you were paying for it, he still had some legal interest in the house even if it was just risk to his good name from the mortgage. Had you removed all references to him after the divorce, you wouldn't be facing this now. I suspect you had good reasons for not doing this-- maybe for convenience or refinancing problems. You need to recognize his risk was worth something and offer him part of the money.

 

[HuAi]

It sounds like they had to put his name on the check because his name is still on the title/deed and mortgage. This means that although you were paying for it, he still had some legal interest in the house even if it was just risk to his good name from the mortgage. Had you removed all references to him after the divorce, you wouldn't be facing this now. I suspect you had good reasons for not doing this-- maybe for convenience or refinancing problems. You need to recognize his risk was worth something and offer him part of the money.

This is not legal advice

 

[mlane58]

This is not legal advice

And your post was?

 

[HuAi]

Yes it will let her know if the bank will legally allow her to deposit said check solely in her name.

 

[Zigner]

Yes it will let her know if the bank will legally allow her to deposit said check solely in her name.

Since when does a BANK give legal advice?

 

[HomeGuru]

Since when does a BANK give legal advice?

**A: correct and the bank gives or takes interest but never gives legal advice.