Husband won't put me on title for new home

[soserious1]

It doesn't really matter for donnamaybe because she's not married to her bf and evidently she hasn't put him on the property title. Nothing financially serious is at stake (unless perhaps he has a domestic partnership claim).

 

Whenever she feels he's not pulling his weight she can kick him out and she won't owe him half her personal wealth, alimony, half of her house....

 

None of the folks you are arguing with about this stuff are in or have been in legally committed relationships with significant financial consequences at stake and suffered from it or they wouldn't be disagreeing with you.

 

Relationships are just a game they play until they get tired of it, then they move on to the next one.

 

Let's wait for one of the doubters to actually sign a piece of paper that gives their SO legal entitlement to half of their wordly property before their criticism can be taken seriously.

 

"Lawn tractor?" Big effin deal. How about "The Title to YOUR House." Put his name on THAT.

 

Donnamaybe is actually a pretty decent person & if memory serves me correctly she & her partner are engaged to be married.

 

After my divorce I had a female housemate here, she paid 1K per month, plus half the utilities & cable bill. She was thrilled to be here

as she got a bedroom, her own bathroom & study/ sitting room, she had use of the washer/dryer & full run of all areas of the house aside from my bedroom & office. She also enjoyed a garage with automatic doors, the hot tub & never had to worry about things like snow removal or yard landscaping.

 

Why on earth would I tell some guy " hey just move in, you don't have to pay anything since I own the place" ?

[donnamaybe]

"Lawn tractor?" Big effin deal. How about "The Title to YOUR House." Put his name on THAT.

I have offered to, and I have a very large amount of equity in the house already. Unfortunately, until we get married (and we ARE engaged) I cannot as I am the veteran who secured the VA loan and he CANNOT be put on a VA loan unless he, too, is a veteran or until we are married which will most likely be this summer.

 

So put THAT in your pipe and have a big ol' puff!

[soserious1]

I have offered to, and I have a very large amount of equity in the house already. Unfortunately, until we get married (and we ARE engaged) I cannot as I am the veteran who secured the VA loan and he CANNOT be put on a VA loan unless he, too, is a veteran or until we are married which will most likely be this summer.

 

So put THAT in your pipe and have a big ol' puff!

 

Wow! he hit the lottery big time when he met you, my hats off to him, I do hope things work out for you & you aren't sitting there down the road watching as your stuff is being loaded into the moving truck because you've been court ordered to sell the place & hand him half the proceeds.

[soserious1]

BTW, Donnamaybe, I do sincerely wish you both every happiness. Just because I break out in a cold sweat at the thought of getting married again doesn't mean that I wish sadness on other people.

[Weeser1]

Hello everyone.

Iam new here .

I joined after snooping a bit & liked what I saw in answers and responses.

I was interested in what Nessienu had to say . I have studied some law the last few years , just on my own time. Since Arizona is a community property state , I would think the laws on property woud answer that question. As far as inheritance , Iam quite sure that is untouchable. But, I see how he is going about it with seperate monies.

 

Here both husband & wife must sign paperwork. Even though a property can hold title in one name.

[donnamaybe]

SS1, you have every right to be gun shy. I know what you've been through at the hands of that thief. At least the parts you've shared with us.

 

Makes me SO angry on your behalf!

[donnamaybe]

BTW, Donnamaybe, I do sincerely wish you both every happiness. Just because I break out in a cold sweat at the thought of getting married again doesn't mean that I wish sadness on other people.

Awww, thank you so much!

[donnamaybe]

Wow! he hit the lottery big time when he met you, my hats off to him, I do hope things work out for you & you aren't sitting there down the road watching as your stuff is being loaded into the moving truck because you've been court ordered to sell the place & hand him half the proceeds.

If you only knew him...

 

BTW, the lottery ain't THAT big...

Edited March 26, 2012 by donnamaybe

[donnamaybe]

I'm pretty sure he's not all that new. He posts just like someone else who has had three or four user names deleted. Time will tell on that. For some reason I attract his attention. It's always struck me as a bit over-the-top and weird, but there's nothing I can do about it.

He's just jealous because you're so well liked on this forum.

[maybealone]

I have offered to, and I have a very large amount of equity in the house already. Unfortunately, until we get married (and we ARE engaged) I cannot as I am the veteran who secured the VA loan and he CANNOT be put on a VA loan unless he, too, is a veteran or until we are married which will most likely be this summer.

 

Well, you could put him on the deed now without making him responsible for the loan whatsoever. Not saying you should (especially since there probably would be gift taxes to pay), just that you could.

[donnamaybe]

Well, you could put him on the deed now without making him responsible for the loan whatsoever. Not saying you should (especially since there probably would be gift taxes to pay), just that you could.

Can't legally do that. It cannot be done. The Veterans Administration has something to say about it since they are guaranteeing the loan until the mortgage is paid. That's all there is to it. I've bought and paid off a couple homes with a VA loan. Have you?

[soserious1]

SS1, you have every right to be gun shy. I know what you've been through at the hands of that thief. At least the parts you've shared with us.

 

Makes me SO angry on your behalf!

 

At my age the types of men I meet fall into two distinct camps.

 

1. Never married or divorced guys who have no ongoing child support or alimony payments to make. Most of these guys either own homes or rent in upscale parts of town.

 

2.Divorced guys who's kids are still in their teen years, most of these guys are struggling just to keep themselves in beater cars & cheap studio apartments.

 

As much as I sympathize with group number 2, I cannot sign up to be in a relationship with such a person as I'm not signing up to be a step mother & I'm not interested in assuming the fiscal obligations that will most assuredly come along with it. You'd be amazed at how many of these guys get upset once they find out you aren't interested in "helping out" in some way that pretty much always involves money.

 

I'm wary & gun shy not only because of my divorce but because I've witnessed woman friends falling for guys who's lives are like train wrecks & seen them literally put through the wringer emotionally & hung out to dry fiscally.

 

Btw, before anybody gets upset, let me say that when a man says he avoids single/ divorced mothers for the same reasons, I totally understand & support their position.

 

Should I get serious with a guy in group number one, we'd have to decide if we were both going to rent out our homes & buy or rent a new place to share. If it was decided that I'd be moving in with him, I'd rent this place out and write him a monthly rent check. My owning or not owning this place would have no bearing on my feeling that if I move into somebody's house, I owe them a set amount of rent every month.

[maybealone]

Can't legally do that. It cannot be done. The Veterans Administration has something to say about it since they are guaranteeing the loan until the mortgage is paid. That's all there is to it. I've bought and paid off a couple homes with a VA loan. Have you?

 

Geez, I wasn't trying to be snarky. I will obviously defer to your knowledge. Of course, you could refinance with a regular bank too. I would not expect you to (and I wouldn't do it if I were you), but if you really wanted his name on the deed before the wedding technically there are ways.

[nofool4u]

He's not "excluding" her from anything. He's letting her live in his house

 

Oh geez, do I really need to explain? He is excluding her from equity building in the house, which, depending on the state, he might have a right to do.

 

But then he needs to let her build equity somehow that is solely hers.

 

 

 

She can do as she pleases with her money, after she's paid her fair share of the day to day household expenses.

 

Only if he agrees and its drafted by an attorney. Because, unless she inherits money too, anything she makes, by law, is marital. He needs to agree. Sucks that she'd have to get his approval, but thats the way it is.

 

 

 

If he was excluding her from living there, you're correct. But he's not.

 

If I were talking about excluding her from living there, you'd have a point. But I'm not.

 

 

By your faulty logic, if I rent an apartment, then unless my landlord is willing to share the title to the property with him, I don't have to pay any rent.

 

Faulty logic indeed...on your part. You aren't married to your landlord(or at least I'd hope you aren't). You don't have a life partnership there.

 

Sorry, your example doesn't work.

 

 

No attorney would draft anything for her since the law is clear that she's not entitled to his inheritance. There's nothing to draft.

 

Again, you aren't comprehending. She needs to have something drafted by her attorney, and agreed to by him to let HER BUILD HER OWN investment portfolio with her money after she has paid for the necessary living expenses, except for any expenses to the house.

 

Do try to understand the conversation before chiming in and talking about that which I am not.

[donnamaybe]

Geez, I wasn't trying to be snarky. I will obviously defer to your knowledge. Of course, you could refinance with a regular bank too. I would not expect you to (and I wouldn't do it if I were you), but if you really wanted his name on the deed before the wedding technically there are ways.

 

Sure, if I wanted to cut our throats financially, but it would be foolish to do so for both our sakes, and he wouldn't have it any other way. He appreciates my acumen for all things financial. He also trusts me, and I trust him.

[carhill]

Fascinating. My parents had a VA loan back in the day and I was curious so I looked it up.

 

Sounds like Donnamaybe has a traditional VA loan where only a spouse can be added to the loan during a refinancing. However, there are new hybrid loans out there where the VA will guarantee loan money to two unmarried people where one is a civilian and the only portion of the loan which is guaranteed is the military member's portion and there are rules regarding apportionment and qualifying.

 

All the sources I viewed indicated it was entirely legal and within policy for the veteran to add another person's name, military or civilian, to the deed on the property at any time; the actual debtor guarantee is the sticky wicket. I looked up US VA sources so what I read only applies to US military veterans. Although I didn't see direct evidence, I wonder if this, if a change in policy, respects non-traditional relationships like domestic partnerships and gay partnerships, the latter where marriage is not legally possible in many jurisdictions. In any event, interesting.

[Black Jack]

Can't back up your statement. Thats what I thought.

 

You don't even have an argument to begin with.

[frozensprouts]

We rent our home ( miltary housing is really affordable, and it costs to much to buy a new house every 2 or 3 years anyway), snd I don't know if this is true for every rental situation but...

 

CFHA is our "landlord", and, as such, are responsible for any repairs to our home. If something goes wrong and we need a plumber, electrician, etc. then they pay for it ( again, not sure what it's like for other landlords).

 

If the guy who own this house treats her as a "tenant" and requires her to pay rent, doesn't that mean that the rent is to be used to cover expenses like insurance on the property, repairs, upkeep, property taxes, etc. ? This would come from the money collected for rent, and she should not be charged extra for these things?

 

in our case, our rent covers these things, and some of them exceed the rent collected each month. If that happens, CFHA can't come to us and say " you've paid your rent, but the property taxes re due so now you have to pay that too"

 

It wouldn't be fair for him to expect her to pay "rent" as well as for upkeep, property taxes, etc. This doesn't happen in other "rental" situations, why should it happen in hers? The same goes for taking any money out of "the community pot", as again,that would be using her money solely for his benefit.

That's if one wants to look at it strictly as "renter/tenant" relationship...

 

isn't there better way, where both parties can feel good about it? Instead of expecting her to pay the equivalent of "rent", couldn't they split the costs down the middle ( or some other equitable arrangement), since they are both living there, while making sure that she has some funds left over to start building her own asset reserve?

 

They need to find a way to sort it out that works for both of them...it may very well be the first real "test" in their marriage...I hope they can pass it.

[Black Jack]

Again, I never said any such thing. Keep trying to put things out that aren't there.

 

That's right, keep deflecting.

[Art_Critic]

Throughout this thread you have made "legal pronouncements" about what OP's property rights are/aren't and what she should get a lawyer to do and it's very clear that you simply have no experience or education in the area of marital property rights.

 

 

 

As you have done the same.... we don't even know what state the OP is in...

[nofool4u]

No he doesn't need to "let" her do anything. She can do as she pleases with her own money, assuming she has paid her fair share of the joint living expenses. Besides she never said she cared about the equity anyway, she said the contrary.

 

You obviously don't know a thing about marital assets and how it works.

 

If she didn't inherit the money, or she had the assets before they were married, then it is marital money. She cannot invest money she earns while married and keep the investment for herself. He is entitled to 1/2 of it.

 

Unless he agrees to not lay claim, he gets half of anything she invested in with earnings during the marriage.

 

 

He doesn't have to agree to anything. The law is clear that she is not entitled to share in a house bought with his inheritance money and she is well aware of that.

 

If in her state that is the way it is, you are correct. And yes, she realizes that. I'm not contesting that.

 

 

That's why she's never returned to the thread--her position is legally ridiculous, she knows it, she's a law student.

 

How is it legally ridiculous if she knows it and she already said she doesn't really want his inheritance or money? She doesn't even want any of the inheritance. She was just making a point about his behavior.

 

 

She can get whatever she wants "drafted by an attorney" but she can't force him to agree to it.

 

No, she can't, but if he had any integrity, and cared about her, he'd let her build her own equity without laying claim to it.

 

She should be able to have investments of her own if he feels he should be able to do the same.

 

 

Correct. And the same applies to any money he makes during the marriage as well. So nothing needs to be drafted by anyone. She wanted something she's clearly not entitled to

 

 

*sigh*. Once again, you don't comprehend a thing. They need not draft anything with regards to his inheritance. But she would need to have something drafted that says she can take her money, after paying necessary living expenses, etc, and invest it as she sees fit without him laying claim to it.

 

Got it now?

 

 

he told her "No." That's the end of the matter, which she knows, and is why she hasn't been back. There is no issue at all other than her desire for property that she has no legal entitlement to.

 

 

Now I really know you don't comprehend what you read. She already said she has no desire for anything of his inheritance.

 

Please read before you write.

 

 

She doesn't have to get his approval since as you say it's marital property. You seem to resist the notion that these folks have well-recognized legal property rights, there is no reason to fiddle with those rights. He has no obligation to agree to give up his rights in any marital property, nor does she.

 

 

Where did I say he has an obligation? What I said was that if he is concerned about fairness, that since she won't be building any equity with the house, then he should allow her to build her own equity. Which again is why there is a need for her to have something drafted by an attorney to allow her to make her own investments.

 

You seem to have a thinking problem here.

 

In one paragraph you say she doesn't need his permission to make her own investments. Then in another you say he has no obligation and it is marital property and he is entitled to it. The latter is correct, which is why she needs to get an agreement drafted.

 

But you contradict yourself at every turn.

 

 

She can get whatever she wants drafted by an attorney. You keep assuming that somehow she can force her husband to waive his marital property rights. Why should he?

 

Because he cares about her and would want her to have at least a little bit of investment that she can call hers in the event they ever do split. He is obviously thinking about it. And again, if you could read, it isn't just about the inheritance, or the house. He seeks to keep all other things separate, like checking and savings accounts, which will be a futile endeavor for him.

 

So its obviously on his mind that something might happen in the future.

 

So why shouldn't he let her build at least some small bank account or investment portfolio.

 

Why should he? Because hopefully he might care for her and wouldn't want her to left with nothing should something happen?

 

 

She can build whatever she wants and it will still be marital property, just like anything he builds with his marital income.

 

Well, there is the other avenue she can take. She can not take any of her income, and let him invest, then if something happens, she can take half the retirement.

 

But really, and again, not because of the inheritance issue, but all the other things he is acting shifty about, she should really just get done with college, get a job, then dump the corksucker.

 

 

 

Wrong again, she's equally responsible for the operating expenses (but not capital expenditures) to maintain the house--if she lives in it.

 

Wrong again. Look it up. If she puts any money into the house to "maintain the house" she THEN would have some legal claim to it.

 

If he doesn't want her to have anything to do with the equity in the house, law or not, then she shouldn't pay for jack crap with its regards.

 

 

Throughout this thread you have made "legal pronouncements" about what OP's property rights are/aren't and what she should get a lawyer to do and it's very clear that you simply have no experience or education in the area of marital property rights.

 

You are not one to talk to anyone about education since you can't comprehend what you read. The advice to get an attorney is about possibly getting him to allow her to make her own investments, NOT because of the property rights or the inheritance.

 

Again, read before you write.

 

I now can ignore anything you say since you can't comprehend what you attempt to read.

[nofool4u]

 

 

As you have done the same.... we don't even know what state the OP is in...

 

Exactly.

 

And I have kept saying that she should merely try to get him to agree to building a little something of her own if she is not able to build anything with a primary residence. Thats all. He just doesn't get it.

 

Initially, as you have stated, it depends on the state. And even then, its not hard and fast. It will depend on circumstances. In general, it is correct that she is not entitled to any of the inheritance. In some states, however, if he purchases a house with it, it ceases to be separate. But again, depends on which state.

 

And even if it is that she isn't entitled to any equity in the house, which very well may be the case, its not about her being able to get any of it.

 

She has said from the onset she doesn't want any of it, but that its the principle of it all, and his motives for seeking to attempt to keep everything else separate, which will do him no good if he is up to something shifty.

 

She fully understands about not having claim to the inheritance. It was just icing on the cake for her and all the other stuff smacked of disrespect. He doesn't get to keep earnings, that have nothing to do with inheritance, during the marriage and think that it will shield him from his marital obligations. And he is doing just that.

 

He is trying to keep all that is his from her, although it will do him no good. But she should seek to get an agreement that says he can keep his effin' money, and when she is out of school, she gets to keep hers if thats the way he wants to be about it.

 

If I were her, I wouldn't want a damn thing from the azzhole.

[nofool4u]

No I haven't, unless Angry Clownie, you can point out something I've written that is legally wrong w/r/t marital property rights.

 

Here is one that shows you don't know a thing about how marital property works

 

She can do as she pleases with her own money

 

No, she can't. Because it isn't her "own" money. Money made during marriage, with the exception of inheritance, depending on the state, is MARITAL. Half of any money she will make is his too, and vice versa.

 

But lets not forget in the same post, you contradicted yourself and went against your own words.

 

Here endeth the lesson. Kerplunk.

[soserious1]

 

If I were her, I wouldn't want a damn thing from the azzhole.

 

And this is exactly the reason pre and post nups are useful!

 

Personally I favor each partner paying 50% of mutually agreed upon living expenses with each partner retaining sole ownership of any earnings they can manage to accumulate over and above that amount.

 

Around here, unless you are seriously ill & totally disabled as confirmed by medical experts, you'll pay your own personal bills & 50% of our shared costs. If you aren't interested in doing that, you can fade to black.

[nofool4u]

And this is exactly the reason pre and post nups are useful!

 

Personally I favor each partner paying 50% of mutually agreed upon living expenses with each partner retaining sole ownership of any earnings they can manage to accumulate over and above that amount.

 

I like this idea.

 

How would you handle, for example, a husband wanting the wife to be a SAHM?