House Refi after divorce

[tranquility]

Read and weep:

Dow Jones Five Worst One Year Performances (in points)

2008, -4488.43 points....Obama inherits Bush's pathetic economy.
2002, -1679.94 points....Bush goes to war with money that your great great grand kids will pay for.
2001, -766.42 points.....Bush ignores authorities that there was a major terrorist attack coming inside the US.
2000, -709.13 points....Bush implements economy crushing policies.
1974, -234.62 points....Tricky Dick caught lying and erasing White House tapes.

See the trend starting in year 2000? Five of the five worst years for the Dow Jones belong to Republicans. We can't let them wreak anymore havoc.

What is the common theme here? Republican! Trickle down! Reganomics!

Sigh. That is all this president has, silly people making silly arguments they don't even understand. For what the CURRENT president has done (I only chose pictures to make sure even those who believe such silly claims are relevant could understand.), see:
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/153013/
http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/09/chart-debt-to-gdp-ratio-is-terrible-wors
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/10/10/vital-signs-chart-paychecks-losing-ground/?mod=e2tw
http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/a-big-and-updated-version-of-the-biggest-most-important-chart-in-american-politics/

Oops, forgot. Edit:

Obama, derp.

 

[Ohiogal]

OP ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS:

Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?

 

[tranquility]

OP ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS:

Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?

Look at you being all legal like; just when I was getting ready to pour some funsuckers. Answering the question would certainly help guide what a court would feel was equitable in this situation.

 

[nextwife]

OP ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS:

Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?
Did you "win" this house in the divorce or settle and get this house? If so, why didn't you suggest at that time that it be sold and you two split the deficit rather than you wanting to keep the house AND still expect to tie up her credit?

I see LOTS of seperation loan defaults, and often the party that didn't bail sort of ends up with the house by default. And many DON"T want it ordered sold because NEITHER actually "loses money" on it UNLESS it is sold at low market. If one keeps paying and keeps the loan current, the possibility exists of the market returning and NEITHER need contribute to a short payout.

UNTIL sold or refinanced at low market, it is a paper loss, and not a realized loss.

 

[Bali Hai]

Sigh. That is all this president has, silly people making silly arguments they don't even understand. For what the CURRENT president has done (I only chose pictures to make sure even those who believe such silly claims are relevant could understand.), see:
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/153013/
http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/09/chart-debt-to-gdp-ratio-is-terrible-wors
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/10/10/vital-signs-chart-paychecks-losing-ground/?mod=e2tw
http://news.investors.com/100312-627990-presidents-case-for-re-election-rests-on-five-claims-all-phony.aspx
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/a-big-and-updated-version-of-the-biggest-most-important-chart-in-american-politics/

Oops, forgot. Edit:

Obama, derp.

Well you must be in the elite 1%. You certainly don't appear to be in the 46% that are lazy, stupid, single parent, handicapped, elderly, non-college educated "victims" that Romeny said wouldn't vote for him.

My advice: If Romney wins move your holdings to the money market and hope you have some left in 4 years.

 

[tranquility]

I see LOTS of seperation loan defaults, and often the party that didn't bail sort of ends up with the house by default. And many DON"T want it ordered sold because NEITHER actually "loses money" on it UNLESS it is sold at low market. If one keeps paying and keeps the loan current, the possibility exists of the market returning and NEITHER need contribute to a short payout.

UNTIL sold or refinanced at low market, it is a paper loss, and not a realized loss.

Of course, the "paper" loss is projected to increase 2.5% in IL over the next year. (From Aug 31, 2012 to Aug 31, 2013.)

That means, statistically, we would expect the house to be an additional 2.5% upside down next year. Those projections only deal with broad economic issues. For a scary reason why some believe the market is even weaker, google: shadow REO inventory 2012.

 

[LdiJ]

I see LOTS of seperation loan defaults, and often the party that didn't bail sort of ends up with the house by default. And many DON"T want it ordered sold because NEITHER actually "loses money" on it UNLESS it is sold at low market. If one keeps paying and keeps the loan current, the possibility exists of the market returning and NEITHER need contribute to a short payout.

UNTIL sold or refinanced at low market, it is a paper loss, and not a realized loss.

I agree. Many people don't want it ordered sold because they hope for a longer term result that will not negatively impact their credit. I happen to be one of those people that leans that way.

I am all for settling the house once and for all during the pendency of the divorce as long as neither party has to walk away with bad dings on their credit...in other words, when the house is not underwater. However, when the house is underwater, then the parties have to seriously understand what is and is not possible and to make their decisions accordingly.

This thread is a huge example of many different opinions about what is and is not possible...and what is and is not the most practical.

 

[Zigner]

I am certainly pleased that this thread has remained so on-topic.

 

[nextwife]

Why don't the judges force jointly financed autos to be sold or refinanced at a loss?

 

[tranquility]

Well you must be in the elite 1%. You certainly don't appear to be in the 46% that are lazy, stupid, single parent, handicapped, elderly, non-college educated "victims" that Romeny said wouldn't vote for him.

My advice: If Romney wins move your holdings to the money market and hope you have some left in 4 years.

They're just facts being presented here to counter the emotional rubbish that some feel constitute an argument for who would make a better president. I'm sorry facts presented in a logical manner seem to cause you distress. My advice, no matter who wins, is guns and whiskey. They should hold value against the inflation to come. Property too, but that can easily be taxed after the fact and can be difficult to sell.

 

[LdiJ]

Why don't the judges force jointly financed autos to be sold or refinanced at a loss?

Two reasons: Almost every car would have to be sold or refinanced at a loss because an auto is a depreciating asset that rarely has more equity than the principal payment due...and...

The terms of auto loans are so much shorter that few people, in a divorce situation have their credit tied up for any more than a couple of years waiting for a car loan to be paid off.

You could even add a third reason and that is that a value of a car is so much less than a house would ever be, that tying up credit is simply not the same.

 

[nextwife]

You could even add a third reason and that is that a value of a car is so much less than a house would ever be, that tying up credit is simply not the same.

Not in MY world of foreclosures! We get LOTS of places that cost way less than even a used car! And I see lots of folks with modest incomes plunk 25k, 35k, even more on a car (see the balances in the BK filings or mod requests!), while I have had a great many properties sell under 25k, some even under 10k.

 

[nextwife]

Of course, the "paper" loss is projected to increase 2.5% in IL over the next year. (From Aug 31, 2012 to Aug 31, 2013.)

That means, statistically, we would expect the house to be an additional 2.5% upside down next year. Those projections only deal with broad economic issues. For a scary reason why some believe the market is even weaker, google: shadow REO inventory 2012.

WE aren't seeing that in our IL places.

 

[tranquility]

WE aren't seeing that in our IL places.

Statistics are for all properties, not specific ones. I suspect your sample size is not large enough for you to be able to tell, or your loan processes were better than average.

http://www.forecast-chart.com/real-estate-illinois.html

Reading edit:
Properties under $25K? That is so below the median of even the poorest markets in IL (http://www.trulia.com/home_prices/Illinois/), I suspect it is simply not really an outlier as much as the "sample size" bias I mentioned earlier.

 

[Ohiogal]

Why don't the judges force jointly financed autos to be sold or refinanced at a loss?

They do. I have seen it happen.