JTWROS question

[goodaughter]

What is the name of your state? Georgia
I currently own a home with 2 other people with a JTWROS deed making us each 1/3 owners. My question is can one of those three people remove their name from the deed and put someone else on the deed for their 1/3 ownership? If so, what is the process for this kind of deed change and what rights do the other 2 owners have?

[justalayman]

My understanding is that you can transfer your share to another (even without knowledge of the others) but it will alter the type of title to a tenancy in common with no rights of survivorship.

I read one place where you could transfer your share to another and continue the JT but since a JT must fulfilll the 4 "unities" of time, title, interest, and possession, I do ot believe it is possible to conttinue the JT

Time; means that the interest of all the tenants must vest at the same time

title; all the tenants must acquire title by the same instument

interest; all tenants have identical interest as to duration and scope

possession; all tenants have the same rights of possession and enjoyment.

From my understanding, your situation would not fulfill the unities of time or title.

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by goodaughter

What is the name of your state? Georgia
I currently own a home with 2 other people with a JTWROS deed making us each 1/3 owners. My question is can one of those three people remove their name from the deed and put someone else on the deed for their 1/3 ownership? If so, what is the process for this kind of deed change and what rights do the other 2 owners have?

JTWROS does NOT mean that you each own 1/3. It means that all three of you own the property. AS JustAlayman said, all three owners would have to agree to alter title to tenants in common in order for one of you to deed his/her interest to another party.

[tranquility]

You can break up a joint tenancy by selling a portion (or do anything else to evidence the intent to destroy the JT) without the permission of the other owners. Only that portion of the property owned is severed and the other people maintain their deed. Something like "A and B as joint tenants and 1/3 interest to C as tenant in common."

Only a tenancy by the entierties (sp?) [The marriage joint tenancy] requires permission of the other tenant to break it up. Putitng another name on the deed would break the JT.

[justalayman]

Originally Posted by tranquility

You can break up a joint tenancy by selling a portion (or do anything else to evidence the intent to destroy the JT) without the permission of the other owners. Only that portion of the property owned is severed and the other people maintain their deed. Something like "A and B as joint tenants and 1/3 interest to C as tenant in common."

Only a tenancy by the entierties (sp?) [The marriage joint tenancy] requires permission of the other tenant to break it up. Putitng another name on the deed would break the JT.

isn't that what I said (except tossing in the tenancy by the entireties)?

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by justalayman

isn't that what I said (except tossing in the tenancy by the entireties)?

I believe he was responding to me, however, that is also what I said. I guess I may not have been quite clear enough for Tranquility's liking when I said that to alter to tenants in common with 1/3 interest all parties would have to agree. Since the one could alter his portion of interest, but the other's would remain the same.

[tranquility]

We all write to try to make it clear. If I respond to a person, I will quote the person. Sorry if it seems I overstepped. I only wish to convey:

-An owner can easily break his portion of a joint tenancy.
-If he does break it, he only breaks the portion he controls by rights.
-The rest of the joint tenancy remains.
-One way to break the joint tenancy is to transfer it to another person.

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by tranquility

We all write to try to make it clear. If I respond to a person, I will quote the person. Sorry if it seems I overstepped. I only wish to convey:

-An owner can easily break his portion of a joint tenancy.
-If he does break it, he only breaks the portion he controls by rights.
-The rest of the joint tenancy remains.
-One way to break the joint tenancy is to transfer it to another person.

of course you didn't overstep, I just didn't want layman to think you were correcting him, I understood exactly why you wrote what you did.

[justalayman]

Originally Posted by fairisfair

of course you didn't overstep, I just didn't want layman to think you were correcting him, I understood exactly why you wrote what you did.

what! you think I never make mistakes? I make them all the time.

Just kidding. My post was meant mostly as humor but this continuation does bring up a question for me.

How would the remaining JT remain? As I understand the situation, the JT would become a tenants in common.

A JT consists of equal shares of interest only. By including a tenant in common, that would allow an unequal interest to be included at some time. The simplest example would be if title had been transferrred to 2 title names (the 1/3 of the OP's). That alone would cause a 1/3, 1/3, 1/6, 1/6 interest. Not allowable in JT as far as I understand.

[tranquility]

A JT consists of equal shares of interest only. By including a tenant in common, that would allow an unequal interest to be included at some time. The simplest example would be if title had been transferrred to 2 title names (the 1/3 of the OP's). That alone would cause a 1/3, 1/3, 1/6, 1/6 interest. Not allowable in JT as far as I understand.

The unities are required at formation. (Even then the law is changing and there has been some discussion on a real property list I'm on that the unities are no longer required in all states.) You can break portions of the joint tenancy and leave the rest intact. You cannot transfer the joint tenancy (for obvious reasons), but can create a new one if the unities are intact. So in the case above, the property would be in joint tenancy for the 2/3 and tenants in common for 1/6 and 1/6. If one of the joint tenants were to die, the other would get the property and then all parties would be tenants in common with A 2/3 and D 1/6 and E 1/6.

[justalayman]

Originally Posted by tranquility

The unities are required at formation. (Even then the law is changing and there has been some discussion on a real property list I'm on that the unities are no longer required in all states.) You can break portions of the joint tenancy and leave the rest intact. You cannot transfer the joint tenancy (for obvious reasons), but can create a new one if the unities are intact. So in the case above, the property would be in joint tenancy for the 2/3 and tenants in common for 1/6 and 1/6. If one of the joint tenants were to die, the other would get the property and then all parties would be tenants in common with A 2/3 and D 1/6 and E 1/6.

I understand but as further definition;

Since there are now only 2 joint tenants (A and B) and each of them hold 1/3 and (for ease of example) there is only 1 TIC (C) with a 1/3 interest.

If A or B were to die, their 1/3 would transfer to the other (A or B) and none would go to C. If C were to die, A or B would recieve none of C's interest (unless willed or otherwise deeded as a remainder or such) but that interest would go to the estate of C and subsequently disbursed by will or intestate succession.

If A and B die in the same accident, their shares would become an asset of their respective estates and distributed as such with none going to C.

Correct?

[LindaP777]

Originally Posted by goodaughter

What is the name of your state? Georgia
I currently own a home with 2 other people with a JTWROS deed making us each 1/3 owners. My question is can one of those three people remove their name from the deed and put someone else on the deed for their 1/3 ownership? If so, what is the process for this kind of deed change and what rights do the other 2 owners have?

Is there currently a mortgage on the property?

[goodaughter]

No, there is no mortgage.

[tranquility]

Everthing else you wrote is correct, but:

If A and B die in the same accident, their shares would become an asset of their respective estates and distributed as such with none going to C.

None would go to C. There has been much litigation through the years to determine who died first, so "same accident" is not enough. Some states have a statute saying that deaths of people within a certain amount of time is considered similtaneous, and have procedures to handle it. I don't know offhand what such a death would do to the joint tenancy.

[justalayman]

Everthing else you wrote is correct, but:

Quote:
If A and B die in the same accident, their shares would become an asset of their respective estates and distributed as such with none going to C.

None would go to C. There has been much litigation through the years to determine who died first, so "same accident" is not enough. Some states have a statute saying that deaths of people within a certain amount of time is considered similtaneous, and have procedures to handle it. I don't know offhand what such a death would do to the joint tenancy.

Nothing would go to C if A and B died at the same time.

Nothing would ever go to C unless it was willed to C by the last survivor of the JT side of things.

That was the pertinent point in that post. as to what would happen to the JT, let me be more specific. a man was walking down the road and found A and B in a car. Both were dead from decapitation due to the accident that caused the car to be where it is.

The medical examiner concluded that both parties died simultaneously.

I feel slighted. Even you state you do not know what would happen to the JT so how can you state I am wrong???