ms

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

TN

my husband & i are divorcing. his & my name are on the mortgage & 2nd mortgage. he will be moving out of the house. it is not specifically stated in the divorce agreement that he will continue to pay 1/2 the mortgage & 2nd mortgage until the house is sold. is he legally obligated to do so without it being specifically stated in the agreement ?

rhodell craft said:

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

TN

my husband & i are divorcing. his & my name are on the mortgage & 2nd mortgage. he will be moving out of the house. it is not specifically stated in the divorce agreement that he will continue to pay 1/2 the mortgage & 2nd mortgage until the house is sold. is he legally obligated to do so without it being specifically stated in the agreement ?

Click to expand...

The answer to that question is both yes and no.

Yes, because he signed the notes for the mortgages he is just as responsible, legally to ensure that they are paid.

However its also no because typically the party with exclusive use of the residence is the one responsible for paying the mortgage. If that party cannot afford the payments alone, then its up to that party to ask the courts to order that the other spouse continue to share in the payments until its sold.

rhodell craft said:

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

TN

my husband & i are divorcing. his & my name are on the mortgage & 2nd mortgage. he will be moving out of the house. it is not specifically stated in the divorce agreement that he will continue to pay 1/2 the mortgage & 2nd mortgage until the house is sold. is he legally obligated to do so without it being specifically stated in the agreement ?

Click to expand...

Why do you expect him to pay for the home in which you will be living?

LdiJ said:

If that party cannot afford the payments alone, then its up to that party to ask the courts to order that the other spouse continue to share in the payments until its sold.

Click to expand...

And yet many people who cannot afford the payments, for the house they alone are living in, cover the payments by getting a roommate or two. I had roommates for several years to cover the cost of the house I owned before I married my current husband.

There are options beyond expecting a non resident to cover housing in two places at the same time.

nextwife said:

And yet many people who cannot afford the payments, for the house they alone are living in, cover the payments by getting a roommate or two. I had roommates for several years to cover the cost of the house I owned before I married my current husband.

There are options beyond expecting a non resident to cover housing in two places at the same time.

Click to expand...

While that is a valid point, its not necessarily legally workable in a situation where the house is on the market to be sold. One cannot give a roommate a legally valid lease if the house is on the market and must be sold.

Sure they can, as long as it's month to month.

Who gives a roommate a LEASE?

MTM tenancy, so you can kick them out if need be. In seven years I never had a lease with a roommate.

nextwife said:

Who gives a roommate a LEASE?

MTM tenancy, so you can kick them out if need be. In seven years I never had a lease with a roommate.

Click to expand...

Since they're living in the same house, they're probably technically boarders rather than MTM tenants. (depends on the state, but it's probably week to week rather than month to month).

nextwife said:

Who gives a roommate a LEASE?

MTM tenancy, so you can kick them out if need be. In seven years I never had a lease with a roommate.

Click to expand...

Who, in their right mind, is going to move into a place that is on the market and could sell at any time?

LdiJ said:

Who, in their right mind, is going to move into a place that is on the market and could sell at any time?

Click to expand...

A lot of people rent rooms on a month-to-month (or even week to week) basis.

Even if the house sells tomorrow, there's probably at least a month's warning before the boarder would have to be out. For some people, that's sufficient.

One was a special ed student teacher who needed to be closer to a three month assignment. One was a medical student in residency who just needed a nice temporary place. One was a political organizer who only needed a local place for several months.

There are a surprising number of professional people who have need of a pleasant, already decorated and furnished residence for some period of time without a long term commitment. Oh yeah, another was a radio announcer who lived in Madison but was on air during the week in Milwaukee. Her house and husband were in Madison and she had a home there, but didn't always want to commute because of the hours. I also had a roommate whose new condo was under construction and she needed a temporary place, didn't want to ship her furniture back from the east coast until the condo was ready to move in.

mistoffolees said:

A lot of people rent rooms on a month-to-month (or even week to week) basis.

Even if the house sells tomorrow, there's probably at least a month's warning before the boarder would have to be out. For some people, that's sufficient.

Click to expand...

Yup. I always had a security deposit, and we had a one month notice agreement either way. They needed to give me, and I needed to give them one month.

Real estate closings virtually always take about a month or so to finance.