Need Help with Divorce Decree and what was included

[mandm2008]

Last month my boyfriend's divorce was final. In the divorce decree, his ex-wife was given a vehicle. The problem is that the vehicle is registered to his mother, the loan and insurance are all solely in his mothers name. This vehicle was purchased for the use of them to transport their three children. Nothing was ever signed by his mother giving the vehicle to either party or allowing it to be handed out in the divorce decree. My boyfriend's ex-wife has since passed away very suddenly and now his mother is not legally allowed to retrieve the vehicle as the county his ex-wife lived in is saying what was done in the divorce decree is legal. The divorce decree and her passing were within a few weeks so there was really no time to contest anything. This does not seem like it would be legal. It is the equivalent of when i was getting divorced I asked my lawyer to put in the decree that I would receive my ex-husbands fathers vehicle. I need advice on what to do next and help understanding if there is any way this could possibly be legal. This all happened in the state of Iowa. Thanks

 

[nextwife]

Was the vehicle ever in his name (and perhaps signed over to her pre-divorce, for example) or purchased with the divorced couples marital funds?

Why didn't HE point this out during the divorce? I agree, it should not be possible to award an asset that is and always has been the property of a third party simply because it was used by the couple during the marriage. A divorce court should not have any right to award property that is strictly owned by a third party.

What has BFs attorney said about the dilimma when BF asked about it? Why did he not appeal the award? Why has he done nothing about this until now?

 

[mandm2008]

the vehicle was never in either of their names. it was never given as a gift to either of them. this whole situation happened in another county where the ex-wifes family has money and are friends with the sheriff and county attorney. he was saddled with so much child support that he was unable to afford an attorney and legal aid in our state could not help him at all, as they are so overloaded with family law cases. he currently has an attorney because of the children involved, and the ex-in-laws are withholding them (even though he and ex had joint custody). the attorney he has now is solely for the children issue. the county is basically choosing which parts of the decree to enforce and which not to. he sent a email and registered letter to the attorney who represented his ex-wife asking that she please fix that one part of the decree since she should have done her homework about who the vehicle was owned by and who was actually paying on it. im just looking for any other suggestions or options. his mother cannot afford an attorney and legal aid is just too busy to offer any help. thanks again!

 

[LdiJ]

the vehicle was never in either of their names. it was never given as a gift to either of them. this whole situation happened in another county where the ex-wifes family has money and are friends with the sheriff and county attorney. he was saddled with so much child support that he was unable to afford an attorney and legal aid in our state could not help him at all, as they are so overloaded with family law cases. he currently has an attorney because of the children involved, and the ex-in-laws are withholding them (even though he and ex had joint custody). the attorney he has now is solely for the children issue. the county is basically choosing which parts of the decree to enforce and which not to. he sent a email and registered letter to the attorney who represented his ex-wife asking that she please fix that one part of the decree since she should have done her homework about who the vehicle was owned by and who was actually paying on it. im just looking for any other suggestions or options. his mother cannot afford an attorney and legal aid is just too busy to offer any help. thanks again!

Well, your boyfriend seriously messed up when he didn't seriously kick and scream about them awarding a car that was owned by his mother, to his ex wife.

However, there are some options:

1) Your boyfriend can accept his mistake and take over making the car payments so that his mother isn't stuck with them. Eventually they will realize that they cannot keep the car because they won't be able to renew the license plates.

2) Number 1, plus she could report the car stolen if they refuse to return it to her.

3) Number 1, plus she could sue them for refusing to return her property.

4) She could talk to the loan company, explain the problem and tell them that she is going to discontinue making the payments, but that she WILL agree to buy it back out of repo (by paying the missed payments) if they repo the car. If she goes this route your boyfriend will need to make sure that he saves the money that normally would have gone towards the payments so that it can be bought back of of repossession.

 

[mandm2008]

well the divorce decree was received by him on 10-28, at which point his ex was already in the hospital not doing well. she passed away on 11-3. last wednesday was when we finally noticed what was actually written in the decree. i went with his mother to the sheriff's office and spoke with the county sheriff himself and he stated that we were not able to file a stolen vehicle report, as we knew who had it (the vehicle has since been hidden). the bank is willing to repossess it, but it will cost $300 and they will have to find it. according to that county's attorney, they cannot be sued for stolen property as it was given to her in the divorce decree. could the attorney who represented her in the divorce and added it to the decree be in trouble for not checking facts on the vehicle and giving away someone else's property?

 

[LdiJ]

well the divorce decree was received by him on 10-28, at which point his ex was already in the hospital not doing well. she passed away on 11-3. last wednesday was when we finally noticed what was actually written in the decree. i went with his mother to the sheriff's office and spoke with the county sheriff himself and he stated that we were not able to file a stolen vehicle report, as we knew who had it (the vehicle has since been hidden). the bank is willing to repossess it, but it will cost $300 and they will have to find it. according to that county's attorney, they cannot be sued for stolen property as it was given to her in the divorce decree. could the attorney who represented her in the divorce and added it to the decree be in trouble for not checking facts on the vehicle and giving away someone else's property?

It was your boyfriend's responsibility to speak up and be clear that the vehicle was not marital property, but belonged to his mother...not the other way around. He either signed the agreement without reading it or let the divorce default without reading what was served to him.

His mother is NOT a party to the divorce decree and is NOT bound by the divorce decree. Therefore she absolutely CAN sue them for hiding her property from her.

However, I say let the bank repossess it. Yes, it will cost extra, but that's better than not getting the car back.

 

[nextwife]

It was your boyfriend's responsibility to speak up and be clear that the vehicle was not marital property, but belonged to his mother...not the other way around. He either signed the agreement without reading it or let the divorce default without reading what was served to him.

His mother is NOT a party to the divorce decree and is NOT bound by the divorce decree. Therefore she absolutely CAN sue them for hiding her property from her.

However, I say let the bank repossess it. Yes, it will cost extra, but that's better than not getting the car back.

Although, technically, as a third party, one's right to their own property should not be dependent on what someone else does or doesn't read in THIER divorce. If I sign a divorce decree that awards my husband a car that, say, belongs to my neighbor because he put it in the divorce decree, that still should not in any way impact my neighbor's right to keep and drive their own car. MY own action or inaction should have no bearing on a third parties rights to retain their own assets. IT really should not be possible to "award" an asset that was never owned or owed by the ex spouse regardless of what each divorced party signs. They can sign whatever they want - if they don't have a legal right to it, the divorce court shouldn't have any jurisdiction over it's ownership.

 

[Ohiogal]

Although, technically, as a third party, one's right to their own property should not be dependent on what someone else does or doesn't read in THIER divorce. If I sign a divorce decree that awards my husband a car that, say, belongs to my neighbor because he put it in the divorce decree, that still should not in any way impact my neighbor's right to keep and drive their own car. MY own action or inaction should have no bearing on a third parties rights to retain their own assets. IT really should not be possible to "award" an asset that was never owned or owed by the ex spouse regardless of what each divorced party signs. They can sign whatever they want - if they don't have a legal right to it, the divorce court shouldn't have any jurisdiction over it's ownership.

The divorce court has NO JURISDICTION over this property. Boyfriend screwed up. What Mom should do is sue both her son and the estate of her ex-dil OR boyfriend needs to immediately object to the inclusion of the car in the divorce decree.

 

[mandm2008]

thank you for all the great advice......my last question is can the lawyer who put this in the decree get in any sort of trouble for adding this to the decree without first checking to see who actually legally owned the item in question?...i worked for a law firm in high school and know quite a few people who work in law firms and it seems like in a divorce situation, someone is always assigned to check and see what is owned and by who before it is awarded to anyone. thanks again....this has all been very helpful!

 

[Ronin]

Ultimately, it was your boyfriends responsibility to review the proposed decree before it was signed, so it is unlikely he can put the blame on anyone else for this mistake.


Beyond that, such an order is not enforceable against the mothers personal property, as already stated here.

 

[Zigner]

Just to be clear - if a repo is allowed to happen, it WILL show up on mom's credit.

Probably better for mom just to find the car and drive it home.

 

[mistoffolees]

However, I say let the bank repossess it. Yes, it will cost extra, but that's better than not getting the car back.

That's going to harm Mom's credit. I would not suggest that at all. Rather, I would suggest going back to the husband's attorney and tell him to fix it - preferably at his expense. Alternatively, Mom should be able to get the car, although there might be a battle.

 

[Zigner]

I'm wondering how specific the order is.

If the order awards the "...2000 Pontiac Sunfire", then there is no problem.

If the order clearly calls out the VIN and Lic #, then it can be more involved.

 

[LdiJ]

That's going to harm Mom's credit. I would not suggest that at all. Rather, I would suggest going back to the husband's attorney and tell him to fix it - preferably at his expense. Alternatively, Mom should be able to get the car, although there might be a battle.

Actually, it might not harm mom's credit if she makes a "deal" with the finance company. I know of several people who made those kinds of deals in wierd situations like these, and the finance company did not report the repossession to the credit bureaus.

However, as I stated previously and others have backed up, mom is NOT a party to the divorce and therefore the court had no jurisdiction over her property. The problem here appears to be that law enforcement won't do their job, which puts mom in a tough situation.

It really is her son's fault, because he didn't do what he needed to do to ensure that the car was not treated as marital property...and maybe mom's fault a little bit if she had any previous opportunity to collect the car and did not.

What is a little odd about this whole situation is that there is a claim that the parents of the deceased spouse have money and position in their community. Therefore its a little odd that they would make such a production over a car, and would hide the car from the person to whom it was legally titled. After all, a car with payments still pending generally has little to no equity, therefore there would be no basis to try to keep it. Plus, they couldn't even replate it once the plates expired.

I suspect that what is really going on here is a knee jerk reaction to the fact that mom just died, and that her parents are "circling the wagons" until they have a handle on things.