husband walked out

[koritora3]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Indiana
My husband left me without explanation (taking our sole vehicle) and moved into his parents house. I stayed in the house we were "renting" from his parents. (we were under a land contract beholden to them) He took all the money, as well. I am not from Indiana and had no friends or family that could assist me. (this is what him and his parents were counting on) He says he stopped paying his parents the rent on our house. (which is a ridiculous lie) This enabled his parents to file a suit to have me evicted from the premises. I agreed to leave by a certain date and they still took me to court because it was not soon enough for them. (they lost and were berated by the judge for filing the case in the first place) Anyway, the day I left they moved my husband and their other son right back in. (which I knew was their intent all along) Problem is, they had to name me AND their son in the eviction and default lawsuit and now they want me to sign over a quit claim deed in exchange for them dropping the lawsuit. I do not believe they had the right to file such a suit to begin with. I do not think they would win if they went to court. My divorce lawyer thinks I should sign the papers just to get it over with. At the very least I want them to pay the attorney fees I had to incur for representation in a case I believe has no merit. My ex had an income and was living rent free at his parents. Was he not obligated to pay the rent on our house? How can it be legal for him to default on purpose?

 

[mistoffolees]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Indiana
My husband left me without explanation (taking our sole vehicle) and moved into his parents house. I stayed in the house we were "renting" from his parents. (we were under a land contract beholden to them) He took all the money, as well. I am not from Indiana and had no friends or family that could assist me. (this is what him and his parents were counting on) He says he stopped paying his parents the rent on our house. (which is a ridiculous lie) This enabled his parents to file a suit to have me evicted from the premises. I agreed to leave by a certain date and they still took me to court because it was not soon enough for them. (they lost and were berated by the judge for filing the case in the first place) Anyway, the day I left they moved my husband and their other son right back in. (which I knew was their intent all along) Problem is, they had to name me AND their son in the eviction and default lawsuit and now they want me to sign over a quit claim deed in exchange for them dropping the lawsuit. I do not believe they had the right to file such a suit to begin with. I do not think they would win if they went to court. My divorce lawyer thinks I should sign the papers just to get it over with. At the very least I want them to pay the attorney fees I had to incur for representation in a case I believe has no merit. My ex had an income and was living rent free at his parents. Was he not obligated to pay the rent on our house? How can it be legal for him to default on purpose?

Go with what your attorney tells you. You could be spending a lot of money fighting over a fairly minor issue. Not to mention that they can easily ruin your credit rating by arguing that you were living there alone and were solely responsible for the rent. Without a lease, they'd probably lose, but it would cost you another bundle to fight it.

 

[koritora3]

Thank you for replying and I think you are right. Is there anything a wife is entitled to if her husband cleans out the accounts and abandons her without transportation?

 

[Proserpina]

Thank you for replying and I think you are right. Is there anything a wife is entitled to if her husband cleans out the accounts and abandons her without transportation?

Yup!

You're entitled to confirm that you're obviously better off without him, and you can hold your head high while retaining your dignity

(it might be just me, but honestly? That'd give me more satisfaction than anything else)

 

[nextwife]

I am confused about why a QC deed would be needed if you and STBX were buying on a Land Contract. Under an LC, you would only have had a Vendee's Interest, and not a Fee Simple interest. And a default in the LC would have resulted in cancellation of that interest anyway during the court action. Maybe it was only to expedite the process?

And, yes, a Vendor can win a lawsuit in which a Vendee is in default on an LC, and is not paying them. The parents are not a party to your marriage and have , themselves, no obligation to provide your housing, other than whatever their CONTRACTUAL obligations may be as the Vendors.

 

[mistoffolees]

Thank you for replying and I think you are right. Is there anything a wife is entitled to if her husband cleans out the accounts and abandons her without transportation?

As for transportation, you're entitled to get a job and buy a car.

As for cleaning out the accounts, you will be entitled to 1/2 of MARITAL assets and 1/2 of marital debt.

 

[koritora3]

I am confused about why a QC deed would be needed if you and STBX were buying on a Land Contract. Under an LC, you would only have had a Vendee's Interest, and not a Fee Simple interest. And a default in the LC would have resulted in cancellation of that interest anyway during the court action. Maybe it was only to expedite the process?

And, yes, a Vendor can win a lawsuit in which a Vendee is in default on an LC, and is not paying them. The parents are not a party to your marriage and have , themselves, no obligation to provide your housing, other than whatever their CONTRACTUAL obligations may be as the Vendors.

Unfortunately, they have made themselves an integral part of the divorce.
They filed their suit (naming both of us as defendants) and then used that case as leverage in their son's divorce. Their son told me during our separation that he was paying the rent on the house (so, I should not be bothering him for money for our billls) Then his parents say in court that they haven't gotten paid. Unfortunately, he is not clever enough to have come up with this strategy on his own. His parents pay his legal bills and have taken control of his legal issues, as well. It is a mess. As I said, they moved Defendant A into the residence that they just had Defendant B evicted from. How would the court look at that if they continued to pursue this case? Would it matter?

 

[koritora3]

As for transportation, you're entitled to get a job and buy a car.

As for cleaning out the accounts, you will be entitled to 1/2 of MARITAL assets and 1/2 of marital debt.

Thanks. I got a car and job. It just took time. (because he cleaned out the accounts and took the sole transportation) I thought I left a wink on that post. Your advice has been wonderful and I am appreciative.

 

[mistoffolees]

Unfortunately, they have made themselves an integral part of the divorce.
They filed their suit (naming both of us as defendants) and then used that case as leverage in their son's divorce. Their son told me during our separation that he was paying the rent on the house (so, I should not be bothering him for money for our billls) Then his parents say in court that they haven't gotten paid. Unfortunately, he is not clever enough to have come up with this strategy on his own. His parents pay his legal bills and have taken control of his legal issues, as well. It is a mess. As I said, they moved Defendant A into the residence that they just had Defendant B evicted from. How would the court look at that if they continued to pursue this case? Would it matter?

The divorce court isn't going to like HIS behavior. They have no reason to consider the parents' behavior since the parents are not party to the divorce. However, since the landlords are his parents, it will likely be assumed that HE is part of all the actions they're taking against you.

In the end, though, it really doesn't matter. Divorce courts don't like to get dragged into "he was mean to me" type of stuff - and it really won't matter much. In the end, you will be divorced. He will be living in the house and you won't. You will have your own place, your own car, your own job, your own life. Whether the divorce court thinks it was an underhanded action doesn't mean a whole lot.

The only place it MIGHT matter a little bit is in property division. IN is an equitable distribution state which means the judge can divide assets differently than 50:50 in the interests of fairness. You will certainly want to document how much money was in the accounts before he started depleting them. If the money was used for normal living expenses and/or legal fees, that's legitimate. If it was used for anything else, you can recover half. Since it's equitable distribution, you MAY be able to recover more than half because of their treatment of you, but it really doesn't seem to be particularly unusual for the parents to want you out of their house, so that may not be an issue.

 

[nextwife]

you MAY be able to recover more than half because of their treatment of you, but it really doesn't seem to be particularly unusual for the parents to want you out of their house, so that may not be an issue.

Because his parents didn't treat her nice?

Question: after sonny boy moved out, did our poster continue to make the mortgage payments? If not, they acted no differently than any other vendor for whom the vendee has defaulted on their LC. It is standard practice to evict a buyer who is in default of an LC. She had exclusive use of the property and she too could have made sure the payments were made somehow.

 

[mistoffolees]

Because his parents didn't treat her nice?

Question: after sonny boy moved out, did our poster continue to make the mortgage payments? If not, they acted no differently than any other vendor for whom the vendee has defaulted on their LC. It is standard practice to evict a buyer who is in default of an LC. She had exclusive use of the property and she too could have made sure the payments were made somehow.

Well, there's actually more to it than that. Their filing of an eviction suit when the son said he was paying the rent is pretty aggressive. Did they send her written notice? Was she served? It doesn't sound like it. In that scenario, treating her differently than the son (since they were both the tenants) is a pretty obvious abuse.

She's been mistreated. Whether that rises to the level where she'd get more than 50% of marital assets is anyone's guess. It certainly won't affect the progress of the divorce itself.

 

[nextwife]

Well, there's actually more to it than that. Their filing of an eviction suit when the son said he was paying the rent is pretty aggressive. Did they send her written notice? Was she served? It doesn't sound like it. In that scenario, treating her differently than the son (since they were both the tenants) is a pretty obvious abuse.

She's been mistreated. Whether that rises to the level where she'd get more than 50% of marital assets is anyone's guess. It certainly won't affect the progress of the divorce itself.

If the Vendors didn't follow LT law, that is a civil matter between the Vendors and her. Not a family law matter that would impact PROPERTY SETTLEMENT.

 

[mistoffolees]

If the Vendors didn't follow LT law, that is a civil matter between the Vendors and her. Not a family law matter that would impact PROPERTY SETTLEMENT.

It's not a civil matter because they never signed a lease.

Husband is using his parents to force her out of the home and incur unnecessary legal expenses.

 

[koritora3]

Well, there's actually more to it than that. Their filing of an eviction suit when the son said he was paying the rent is pretty aggressive. Did they send her written notice? Was she served? It doesn't sound like it. In that scenario, treating her differently than the son (since they were both the tenants) is a pretty obvious abuse.

She's been mistreated. Whether that rises to the level where she'd get more than 50% of marital assets is anyone's guess. It certainly won't affect the progress of the divorce itself.

When my husband first moved into his parents home he told me he was paying rent. (in fact, I took on an equal amount of the bills to keep things fair and now he never even paid that after I kept up my end.) He intercepted the notice from the post office informing me that I had a letter to be picked up. He signed for it (obviously, he already knew what it was and when it would be expected) and I never saw it. The first I was informed that we had defaulted was after they had filed the suit. I apologize if anyone else does not think that this was carefully orchestrated for maximum effect. At this time, they knew I had nothing because they had instructed their son to make sure of that when he left. They were counting on my desperation of circumstance in the hopes that I would fall apart and be grateful for whatever settlement their son deigned to offer. I find that reprehensible.They brought me into eviction court twice just to have me out two weeks earlier than the date everyone had already agreed upon. My father in law was almost held in contempt at the last hearing for his angry comments to the judge after he was ruled against. The judge then openly berated him for his obvious lies on the stand and the fact that they were fighting their son's battles for him. I have not the desire to go into the countless crude and hateful things they have done but you would be amazed.
I do not want the house. In fact, the ONLY thing I've asked for is that he pay his half of our shared credit card debt. He refuses. (which I can't understand given the fact that he has found a way to keep the house without it even being a consideration in the divorce since his parents have the mortgage)
My only concern was how can they legally be able to pull this off? Like I said, if I don't sign and it goes to court how stupid is it going to look that they evicted Defendant A and moved Defendant B into the residence that they are suing him for two days later? I would only like them to pay the eviction court fees resulting from this farce. Because honestly, had my husband and I fallen behind on the payments as a happily married couple then they would have let it slide. Truth be told, they made it clear from the engagement that they did not want him to marry and the ONLY reason they filed suit is because they were thrilled at the prospect of being able to facillitate a ruinous outcome.
As always, thanks for the generosity of time and sound advice.

 

[koritora3]

new question

what are reasonable grounds for a continuance? and usually, how far in advance should one file a motion for one?
thanks.