Grant deeded from parents mom n dad signed only moms was notarized dads wasnt

[TigerD]

I am not an attorney in California. You should run any discussion by an attorney you hire to represent you in California. California does not require signatures on a deed to be notarized. It is a best practice. You should be able to file your deed at any time. If you fail to file it, you have not perfected your claim to the property. ******* However, if your father has sold the home and a deed has been filed, you likely just lost out. Talk to a local attorney.

Has anybody opened probate?

 

[LdiJ]

You really need an attorney ASAP! If the home has already been sold you will need to sue your father. He knows that he signed that grant deed.

 

[TigerD]

You really need an attorney ASAP! If the home has already been sold you will need to sue your father. He knows that he signed that grant deed.

Actually, he may not have any recourse against his father -- he needs a lawyer ASAP. If California has a race/notice statute and the buyer has already filed their deed, the OP may be out of luck.

 

[LdiJ]

Actually, he may not have any recourse against his father -- he needs a lawyer ASAP. If California has a race/notice statute and the buyer has already filed their deed, the OP may be out of luck.

On the house, but he might have recourse for the money his father received from the house.

 

[Randallynnyoungblood]

Randall, do you have a copy of your mother's divorce papers?

Yes

 

[Randallynnyoungblood]

Yes I do have a copy. I recorded my mothers half of the deed into my name . That was all the recorders office would let me record because moms signature was notarized. Dads signature was not notarized so they did not allow me to file my dads signature on the grant deed....only my mothers 50%of the property deed ....but it's still his signature in his handwriting on the grant deed, and if as you say california doesn't make it mandatory that it has to be signed by a notary then why did they not allow me to file my dads signature on the deed at the fresno county recorders office?

 

[Randallynnyoungblood]

The recorders office also told me that the request for recording the deed into the new proposed buyer's name had not been processed or approved yet....and that my recording my moms part of the grant deed transferred to me 50% of the deed therefore making it impossible for property to sell or the recording of new buyers deed because it wont to be allowed , because I am half owner and he now needs my signature to do anything. Right?

 

[bcr229]

The recorders office also told me that the request for recording the deed into the new proposed buyer's name had not been processed or approved yet....and that my recording my moms part of the grant deed transferred to me 50% of the deed therefore making it impossible for property to sell or the recording of new buyers deed because it wont to be allowed , because I am half owner and he now needs my signature to do anything. Right?

Based on your last two posts a title search should show that you are also on the deed so yes your signature would be required to transfer your ownership interest in the house to the buyer.

How do you know all of this is going on? Are you being pressured to sign?

 

[not2cleverRed]

You need an attorney, not an internet forum. It's quite possible that the deed you have is either not valid, or only grants you a portion of the house. It's a mess, and it's a shame that you didn't fix this in early 2018.

I think it's a shame that *MOM* didn't get Dad off the deed when they divorced, and am frankly surprised that this wasn't addressed 15 years ago.

Were it solely in Mom's name, her ex-husband would have no claim under intestate succession.

P.S. Randallynn: quincy asked you whether you had a copy of your mother's divorce papers for a reason. "Yes" does not tell us what was to be done with this property per the divorce decree.

 

[Randallynnyoungblood]

I think it's a shame that *MOM* didn't get Dad off the deed when they divorced, and am frankly surprised that this wasn't addressed 15 years ago.

Were it solely in Mom's name, her ex-husband would have no claim under intestate succession.

P.S. Randallynn: quincy asked you whether you had a copy of your mother's divorce papers for a reason. "Yes" does not tell us what was to be done with this property per the divorce decree.

The divorce took place without my mothers carnal knowledge. In fact she had no idea that they were divorced until 2010. My mom had been told that the divorce proceedings were dropped and they got back together a few months later. Well unbeknownst to my mother her mother in law signed moms name to the final divorce paperwork and concealing that fact until my mother discovered the finalization of the divorce proceedings in archives in 2010. It's an insane set of facts throughout this entire situation. My mother was a battered wife for over 40 years. Told how to act walk and talk by my father. Until he nearly beat my mom to death, and sliced her oxygen tubes of her supplemental oxygen unit, trying to reduce her ability to breathe. Back in 2010. That's when my parents finally broke up for good. At that time the domestic violence proceedings granted sole possession of our family home to my mother. Judge imposing a five year restraining order on my father. During that time my dad married another woman. And total abandonment of my mom and the property. My mom suffered so many years from my father's violent alcoholic and methamphetamine use ...leading to abusing my mother . Hes a twisted man

 

[quincy]

With all of the information you have provided, you show that your situation falls outside the scope of what an internet forum can offer in the way of help.

You will need to see an attorney in your area for a personal review and for help in untangling the mess your parents created with their divorce and ownership of the house.

Good luck.

 

[not2cleverRed]

The divorce took place without my mothers carnal knowledge. In fact she had no idea that they were divorced until 2010.

I'm sorry, I know this was a typo, but it's incredibly amusing.

The divorce took place without my mothers carnal knowledge. In fact she had no idea that they were divorced until 2010. My mom had been told that the divorce proceedings were dropped and they got back together a few months later. Well unbeknownst to my mother her mother in law signed moms name to the final divorce paperwork and concealing that fact until my mother discovered the finalization of the divorce proceedings in archives in 2010. It's an insane set of facts throughout this entire situation. My mother was a battered wife for over 40 years. Told how to act walk and talk by my father. Until he nearly beat my mom to death, and sliced her oxygen tubes of her supplemental oxygen unit, trying to reduce her ability to breathe. Back in 2010. That's when my parents finally broke up for good. At that time the domestic violence proceedings granted sole possession of our family home to my mother. Judge imposing a five year restraining order on my father. During that time my dad married another woman. And total abandonment of my mom and the property. My mom suffered so many years from my father's violent alcoholic and methamphetamine use ...leading to abusing my mother . Hes a twisted man

Get a consult with a lawyer to see if in fact she was also supposed to have sole ownership transferred to her.

(It is not uncommon for battered women to get stiffed. After all, going back to court to ask that the batterer be found in contempt costs $ and is emotionally daunting.)

 

[LdiJ]

I'm sorry, I know this was a typo, but it's incredibly amusing.



Get a consult with a lawyer to see if in fact she was also supposed to have sole ownership transferred to her.

(It is not uncommon for battered women to get stiffed. After all, going back to court to ask that the batterer be found in contempt costs $ and is emotionally daunting.)

All that is good and well, but the OP has a deed signed by both his mother AND his father transferring ownership to him. Yes, his father's signature wasn't notarized but it doesn't appear that his state requires notarization. What happened or did not happen as part of their divorce really isn't relevant at this point. They both signed over the deed to him long after the divorce.

 

[quincy]

All that is good and well, but the OP has a deed signed by both his mother AND his father transferring ownership to him. Yes, his father's signature wasn't notarized but it doesn't appear that his state requires notarization. What happened or did not happen as part of their divorce really isn't relevant at this point. They both signed over the deed to him long after the divorce.

Dad is claiming to be the widower. The divorce papers belies this claim (even if it doesn't indicate the home's ownership).

 

[LdiJ]

Dad is claiming to be the widower. The divorce papers belies this claim (even if it doesn't indicate the home's ownership).

Even if dad had been mom's widower, his signature on the transfer deed would belie his claim to having the right to sell the property, as it proves he has no ownership of the property, divorce or not.