Complex divorce and real estate issue

[rlsmith789]

I live in Oregon. My spouse and I got divorced over two years ago. As part of the divorce my spouse was awarded the home but he would have to buy me out within four years. He also moved out and I was granted the right to stay in the house in the decree for these four years. Now he is saying he no longer wants the house to avoid the buy out. I am okay with this but how do I proceed forward to now get the house solely in my name when the divorce decree has him getting it? He never refinanced it or had my name removed during this time so my name is still on the deed as is his.

 

[Taxing Matters]

If you and your ex can come to some agreement on the issue then that solves the problem. Otherwise, how it would play out if you can't agree and have to go to court on the issue depends greatly on exactly what the divorce decree property split says. For advice on that you'd need to ask the lawyer who represented you in the divorce or take the order to another family law attorney for review.

 

[LdiJ]

I live in Oregon. My spouse and I got divorced over two years ago. As part of the divorce my spouse was awarded the home but he would have to buy me out within four years. He also moved out and I was granted the right to stay in the house in the decree for these four years. Now he is saying he no longer wants the house to avoid the buy out. I am okay with this but how do I proceed forward to now get the house solely in my name when the divorce decree has him getting it? He never refinanced it or had my name removed during this time so my name is still on the deed as is his.

You get him to sign a quit claim deed turning the house over to you, OR, you take it back to court and get the judge to order it. You will need to refinance the mortgage into your name only as part of that transaction. If you cannot do that, then the house should be sold and the proceeds split.

 

[rlsmith789]

If you and your ex can come to some agreement on the issue then that solves the problem. Otherwise, how it would play out if you can't agree and have to go to court on the issue depends greatly on exactly what the divorce decree property split says. For advice on that you'd need to ask the lawyer who represented you in the divorce or take the order to another family law attorney for review.

We’ve agreed to this in writing now. If I do a quit claim form and refinance and he signs all that would the property then be mine even though the divorce decree says differently?

 

[rlsmith789]

You get him to sign a quit claim deed turning the house over to you, OR, you take it back to court and get the judge to order it. You will need to refinance the mortgage into your name only as part of that transaction. If you cannot do that, then the house should be sold and the proceeds split.

We’ve agreed to this new agreement. Do we need to modify the decree or is the quit claim and a refinance sufficient even though the decree from two years back says differently?

 

[zddoodah]

how do I proceed forward to now get the house solely in my name when the divorce decree has him getting it? He never refinanced it or had my name removed during this time so my name is still on the deed as is his.

So...both names are on title, and I assume you are both obligated on the mortgage. Right?

Do you have the financial wherewithal to refinance in your name only? If the answer is no, then this is all moot (unless your ex-husband is an idiot who will transfer title to you without you refinancing only in your name). If the answer is yes, then it's a pretty simple transaction, although I would suggest that you engage an attorney (i.e., a family law attorney in Oregon, as opposed to anonymous strangers on the internet) to document what you're doing and advise you about whether you should seek a modification of the divorce decree.

 

[rlsmith789]

Yes I am planning on hiring an attorney soon I just wanted to see what the process might look like. For the past two years I've solely been paying the mortgage. Additionally I do have the finances to refinance solely in my name. From what I am gathering it seems all I need to do is have him sign off on the quit claim deed form then re-finance. Is this correct? Either way I'll run it through a licensed attorney to make sure it's done right just trying to wrap my head around it.

 

[LdiJ]

Yes I am planning on hiring an attorney soon I just wanted to see what the process might look like. For the past two years I've solely been paying the mortgage. Additionally I do have the finances to refinance solely in my name. From what I am gathering it seems all I need to do is have him sign off on the quit claim deed form then re-finance. Is this correct? Either way I'll run it through a licensed attorney to make sure it's done right just trying to wrap my head around it.

He would be foolish to do it that way. If he were here we would advise him not to sign the quit claim deed unless its at the closing table of your refinance. In other words, unless the two things are happening simultaneously.

 

[Just Blue]

Yes I am planning on hiring an attorney soon I just wanted to see what the process might look like. For the past two years I've solely been paying the mortgage. Additionally I do have the finances to refinance solely in my name. From what I am gathering it seems all I need to do is have him sign off on the quit claim deed form then re-finance. Is this correct? Either way I'll run it through a licensed attorney to make sure it's done right just trying to wrap my head around it.

The quit claim should be done at the same time as the refi (signed at closing).

 

[rlsmith789]

The quit claim should be done at the same time as the refi (signed at closing).

That makes total sense. Not trying to screw him over.

 

[zddoodah]

From what I am gathering it seems all I need to do is have him sign off on the quit claim deed form then re-finance. Is this correct?

More or less (although the process should be simultaneous through an escrow). A lawyer can advise you about whether the divorce decree should also be modified or the deal papered in some other way.

 

[Zigner]

I hear an echo...

 

[Litigator22]

I live in Oregon. My spouse and I got divorced over two years ago. As part of the divorce my spouse was awarded the home but he would have to buy me out within four years. He also moved out and I was granted the right to stay in the house in the decree for these four years. Now he is saying he no longer wants the house to avoid the buy out. I am okay with this but how do I proceed forward to now get the house solely in my name when the divorce decree has him getting it? He never refinanced it or had my name removed during this time so my name is still on the deed as is his.

Obviously the answer to your basic question is that the ex would convey title to you the same as to any person or entity.

But what arouses my curiosity is knowing who is responsible for the drafting, submission and/or consenting to the entry of a decree of divorce in which the marital home was awarded to one spouse; that spouse it denied its use and the income from its use for as much as four years; yet two years hence the other spouse still appears as an owner of record!

Why wasn't the decree - or at least an abstract of the order vesting sole title in the ex - placed of record, and/or you were ordered to quitclaim over your ownership and that instrument recorded? Whose decision was it to so hobble the ex's ownership?

Also, I would be interested in knowing (among other significant things) what the decree has to say regarding the mechanics to be followed to implement this particular clause, "but he would have to buy me out within four years". Setting aside the complex details in fixing a price and terms of payment, interest, the treatment of credits for the mortgage payments, taxes, insurance, needed repairs, etc., etc., what does the decree have to say in the contingency that he should fail to buy you out within four years?

Hopefully the lawyer you select to guide you in procuring sole ownership of the home will have had no hand in the manner it was so poorly treated in the divorce proceedings.