Adding a name to a deed that is in JTWROS

[steffb503]

What is the name of your state?NY
I know I can break the JTWROS by adding another person to the deed. My question is can I do simply, without a lawyer, like a quick claim deed?

 

[FlyingRon]

There's no such thing as a "quick" claim deed. The term is quit claim. The simple answer is yes. If you're not careful, you'll lose the joint/survivorship nature.

The longer answer is that it is almost always a BAD IDEA to do this. "Putting someone on a deed" is not like membership in a club. Each DEED transfers irrevocably some ownership interest to another. Adding a third person to this deed means you've just given them some share (likely half) of the property. They're free to give it to someone else, or sell it (if they could find a buyer), and you won't be able to force them to give it back. Further, it can mess up tax issues for both parties, as well as disqualify you for certain things (reverse mortgage, Medicaid, etc...).

Why do you think you want to do this?

 

[steffb503]

Well the property is now in JTWROS. It my husband and his sister. It was done at the advise of thier father when my husband got seriously ill. They were not sure he would survive. I was not married to him at the time. I advised against it and thought a simple will would be better but they did what dad wanted. My husband planned to have his dad remove the sister once we were married but sadly his dad passed away before they did. Now his sister says she will not remove her name.
My hope is that adding me to the deed, it will break the JTWROS and if god forbid my husband dies, I will have some claim to the property I have lived and worked on for 20+ years.
Am i correct that if he does die, under the current situation, I have zero claim to the property?

 

[Just Blue]

Well the property is now in JTWROS. It my husband and his sister. It was done at the advise of thier father when my husband got seriously ill. They were not sure he would survive. I was not married to him at the time. I advised against it and thought a simple will would be better but they did what dad wanted. My husband planned to have his dad remove the sister once we were married but sadly his dad passed away before they did. Now his sister says she will not remove her name.
My hope is that adding me to the deed, it will break the JTWROS and if god forbid my husband dies, I will have some claim to the property I have lived and worked on for 20+ years.
Am i correct that if he does die, under the current situation, I have zero claim to the property?

Was the property solely your husband's when this transpired?...or was it your FIL's?

 

[FlyingRon]

You just can't "add" someone to the deed. A deed is a document that conveys ownership from one person to another. Your husband is free to unilaterally break the joint tenant, by the way, without adding anybody else to the deed. That won't change the fact that the sister still owns half the property. There's NOTHING you can do to wrest the property from her unless she willingly gives up her interest.

 

[steffb503]

Was the property solely your husband's when this transpired?...or was it your FIL's?

Yes it was in his name only

 

[steffb503]

You just can't "add" someone to the deed. A deed is a document that conveys ownership from one person to another. Your husband is free to unilaterally break the joint tenant, by the way, without adding anybody else to the deed. That won't change the fact that the sister still owns half the property. There's NOTHING you can do to wrest the property from her unless she willingly gives up her interest.

So he can simply break the right of survivorship part, meaning that if he should die I would automatically get his share?

 

[LdiJ]

So he can simply break the right of survivorship part, meaning that if he should die I would automatically get his share?

Yes, he can break it, but I think that you would all be best served to have an attorney to do handle the paperwork...and you would all be best served if he had a will giving his share to you.

 

[steffb503]

Yes, he can break it, but I think that you would all be best served to have an attorney to do handle the paperwork...and you would all be best served if he had a will giving his share to you.

Can it be done without the sister's consent?

 

[FlyingRon]

So he can simply break the right of survivorship part, meaning that if he should die I would automatically get his share?

You've lost me, You don't have a share at all right now. But yes, any of the joint tenants can break the joint tenancy without the permission fo the other joint tenants. Even if your husband deeded his interest to you and him as joint tenants, that doesn't change the sister's position. She could transfer her half of the house to another TODAY and your neither your husband, nor certainly not you, could do anything about it.

 

[zddoodah]

Let's start with this: at the moment, you can't do a darn thing about this.

Your husband can deed some or all of his interest in the property to you (or to him and you jointly). I assume (although I have not specifically researched NY law on the subject) that doing so would destroy the joint tenancy.

Let's say that your husband deeds his interest (which I assume is an undivided 1/2 interest) "From John Smith to John Smith and Jane Smith, husband and wife." Since death is a matter of when, not if, if you outlive your husband, then, upon his death, his interest would be part of his estate. Assuming his estate is such that his interest does not need to be sold, then you'd probably inherit his interest and would jointly own the property with his sister. As noted, neither you nor cannot force the sister to give up her interest. However, at any point, your husband (and/or you if he deeds some portion of his interest to you) can file a partition lawsuit, which could result in a court ordered sale of the property. That will be an expensive proposition, so I echo the others who have suggested that your husband consult with an attorney.

 

[steffb503]

Thank you all!

 

[Litigator22]

Well the property is now in JTWROS. It my husband and his sister. It was done at the advise of thier father when my husband got seriously ill. They were not sure he would survive. I was not married to him at the time. I advised against it and thought a simple will would be better but they did what dad wanted. My husband planned to have his dad remove the sister once we were married but sadly his dad passed away before they did. Now his sister says she will not remove her name.
My hope is that adding me to the deed, it will break the JTWROS and if god forbid my husband dies, I will have some claim to the property I have lived and worked on for 20+ years.
Am i correct that if he does die, under the current situation, I have zero claim to the property?

Yes, you are correct. If record title to the property remains unchanged and your husband should predecease his sister she would be vested with 100% ownership. (Such a transfer of title would be by operation of law. No more formal paperwork needed other than a death certificate.)

However, that grim prospect can be avoided if your husband were to quitclaim his undivided interest in the property to say him or to himself and you. In either case the character of the overall ownership would be converted from a joint tenancy with right of survivorship to one of a tenancy in common with each his sister and your husband's named grantee(s) owning an undivided one half interest - sans the rights of a survivor.

But once again not an ideal method of holding title to land. In fact it is the worst possible means of ownership as neither can sell the whole without the consent of the other, but with each having equal rights to the possession and use of the property, including the heirs and descendants of either and the attaching creditors of either and their assigns.

Moreover, as has been mentioned, when the co-owners begin butting heads over the management and/or disposition of the property - which more often than not is the case - the only legal recourse is an expensive time consuming, and paper eating court action in which both are losers known as a Petition for Partition of Real Property. And the property being sold by the Sheriff and/or a court appointed Receiver by bids or at a public auction where the only bidders are those looking to steal it.

Adding here that once sister acquired ownership any so-called dad's plan to have ownership solely vested in your husband (short of sister's cooperation) fall into the category of those "schemes laid by mice an' men".

 

[steffb503]

Yes, you are correct. If record title to the property remains unchanged and your husband should predecease his sister she would be vested with 100% ownership. (Such a transfer of title would be by operation of law. No more formal paperwork needed other than a death certificate.)

However, that grim prospect can be avoided if your husband were to quitclaim his undivided interest in the property to say him or to himself and you. In either case the character of the overall ownership would be converted from a joint tenancy with right of survivorship to one of a tenancy in common with each his sister and your husband's named grantee(s) owning an undivided one half interest - sans the rights of a survivor.

But once again not an ideal method of holding title to land. In fact it is the worst possible means of ownership as neither can sell the whole without the consent of the other, but with each having equal rights to the possession and use of the property, including the heirs and descendants of either and the attaching creditors of either and their assigns.


Moreover, as has been mentioned, when the co-owners begin butting heads over the management and/or disposition of the property - which more often than not is the case - the only legal recourse is an expensive time consuming, and paper eating court action in which both are losers known as a Petition for Partition of Real Property. And the property being sold by the Sheriff and/or a court appointed Receiver by bids or at a public auction where the only bidders are those looking to steal it.

Adding here that once sister acquired ownership any so-called dad's plan to have ownership solely vested in your husband (short of sister's cooperation) fall into the category of those "schemes laid by mice an' men".

Yes, I understand, but what has been done is done.

 

[Zigner]

What is your husband's position on this?
Has he discussed it with his sister? Maybe you (plural) can buy out the sister's interest...