Spouse gets half; buy a house for mom?

User Forum Topic
Submitted by Stradivarius on May 16, 2008 - 10:35pm

My sister is filing for financial separation from her husband. They have 2 small children. She resides in WA where your spouse gets half of all of your assets including businesses (she has her own pediatric dental practice). If her husband's orthodontic practice were doing as well as her practice, it wouldn't be as much of an issue, but it's not. Over the past year, he has borrowed 42k from their "emergency only" HELOC and 55k from my sister's business so he can make payroll. He would have borrowed even more from the HELOC if my sister hadn't put a block on it (25k was taken out without telling her). She has given him plenty of referrals, contact information for advertising, she has had his accountant and lawyer try to help, they have gone to counseling, etc. She feels like she has done everything she can but he is neither taking her advice nor being proactive by his own methods. She's at the end of her rope (and pediatric dentists have a whole lot of patience) and is worried that his habits are going to not only hurt the family financially but also set a bad example for their children.

That said, she is wondering if investing in a house for our mom would offset some of the amount her husband would get in the separation, or if it doesn't matter and he gets half of the new house. For the past couple of years, Mom has considered purchasing a second home in the area to help take care of her grandkids, and I keep talking her out of it especially since the Seattle area market peaked later (July 2007) and is still quite overpriced. The house (or condo) would be further out in the suburbs where things are slightly less overpriced. Price range around 300k, not planning on selling for at least 10 years, could be paid in cash.

Is this a plausible option or should she just cut her losses and move on?

Any advice is much appreciated.

‹ Take Over Payments Ok, help me out guys ›
Sorry to hear about your
Submitted by fat_lazy_union_... on May 16, 2008 - 10:43pm.

Sorry to hear about your sister's plight. Divorces suck.  BUT, you really shouldn't ever try to get serious legal advice on a blog. Most  people aren't qualified to offer that sort of advice, and those that are probably won't beyond telling you to tell your sister to seek counsel.

 

selfportrait

----- Sour grapes for everyone!

Thanks, FLU. You're
Submitted by Stradivarius on May 17, 2008 - 12:06am.

Thanks, FLU. You're right.

She has a good lawyer and I'm sure they can work out the details. Aside from this, I wonder if wanting to live near your grandchildren (instead of across the country), who may soon have a single parent, is reason enough to buy an overpriced house that is losing value while the country is on shaky economic ground. I'm a little skeptical. But in the end, it's not my decision and if mom calculates that the risk/reward ratio is in her benefit, then I'll just make sure she has a few worst-case scenario backup plans.

If your mom is retired and
Submitted by CA renter on May 17, 2008 - 12:28am.

If your mom is retired and has no reason to stay where she is, why not move to WA? She could rent there if prices are still over-valued. Would she be willing to rent? Where is your sister going to live? Could your mom live with her there? It might be nice for the kids to have her as a neutralizing force in the divorce hell. I think grandparents can really help kids through the transition and later, as they grow up in the "divorce environment."

Very sorry to hear about your sister and her family. Hope everything gets resolved in a way that everyone can be somewhat satisfied. Best of luck to your family!!!

My mom doesn't really want
Submitted by Stradivarius on May 17, 2008 - 5:44pm.

My mom doesn't really want to rent. I tried talking her into it today, but she seems willing to wait to buy until she comes across a really good deal (I've warned her that it might be a few years). She is also not going to sell her home in PA. My dad is content with their current situation of flying to Seattle every few months (he hates change) and would probably spend less time there then my mom, who would be there at least half the year. As for living with my sister and her kids--I think she needs her own privacy, and this is not the best option for her.

We decided that our safest option is to wait and see what happens with the separation, and if he gets half of everything, so be it. We'll worry about the house for mom later.

CA renter, you make a good point that it might be nice for my mom to be around the grandkids during transition time. I think she would be willing to live with them temporarily while everything settles (I had no idea how excruciatingly long the whole divorce process is!). Maybe by then the Seattle housing market will be more affordable.

Thank you for your questions and your support.

I would second
Submitted by ucodegen on May 18, 2008 - 12:10am.

I would second "fat_lazy_union_..." statement that you really shouldn't ever try to get serious legal advice on a blog." That being said, I am going to wade in for a little.

First: Investing in an house for your mom will not offset some of the amount your sister's husband would get in separation. The assets used to purchase or as part of the purchase are considered assets owned in common in a marriage. That means he will get 'consideration' for the amount used in that purchase. This could me a greater share of your sister's pediatric dental practice.

I assume that your sister wants to get free and clear of her soon to be ex-husband, in particular when it comes to financial dealings. If not, I would recommend trying to separate the businesses as much as possible, so that she retains her business wholly. I am assuming that both businesses are operated as a separate registered legal entity, and that both businesses were formed when they were married. If it is, and they were, his using the HELOC from the house to meet payroll could be a legal issue (blurring the separation be entities)... might be useful.

My suggestion would be to treat the separation/divorce as a separation of businesses. Considering that hers is doing better and is probably valued more than his business, she should expect to have to sacrifice something else to maintain sole ownership (which she should try to do). First establish a value on both businesses by themselves (do not consider any loans/HELOCs etc at this point). You can't get into his missed opportunities at this point either because that can become a go-nowhere situation. Once the respective values are established, the $55K loan from the sister's business should be shown as a value owed the sister's business from the husbands business. This may help offset the greater valuation of the sister's business. Likewise deal with the HELOC being used to meet his payroll. That money is owed back to the marriage by the business. It may help to also offset the greater valuation of her business. The sister may have to eat the $55k owed her business and her portion of the HELOC that he took out, in order to preserve her sole ownership of her pediatric dental practice upon divorce. She may also have to sacrifice part of other shared assets, to preserve the sole ownership, but I would recommend that she strive to maintain the sole ownership. Having shared ownership in a business with someone who sounds as financially irresponsible as he, is not a very pleasant experience. This is where the missed opportunities on his side etc can be used to justify why she wants sole ownership of the business she created.