Ex-in-laws (3rd party creditors) want to foreclose on my condo

[frenchlambda]

[quote=bearishgurl]Eugene, why quibble over $5K to $10K in “theoretical” monies the “community” owes him when, if the tactic I suggested works, the OP can live in the same county as the mom, not have to move and just owe the 1st TD amt. [/quote]

I don’t get it. The $200k will never go away.
If I default on the loan from the ex-in-laws, then they do have a solid case for foreclosing.
The “stipulation and order” with the $85k never made it to the final divorce agreement.

[frenchlambda]

[quote=Eugene][quote]
Loss of equity should be divided equally between you and your wife. But if you forget about those 85k, you lose your entire contribution towards down payment (115k) but your wife only loses 30k. Do you think it’s fair?[/quote]

My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?

[frenchlambda]

[quote=Eugene][quote]
Loss of equity should be divided equally between you and your wife. But if you forget about those 85k, you lose your entire contribution towards down payment (115k) but your wife only loses 30k. Do you think it’s fair?[/quote]

My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?

[frenchlambda]

[quote=Eugene][quote]
Loss of equity should be divided equally between you and your wife. But if you forget about those 85k, you lose your entire contribution towards down payment (115k) but your wife only loses 30k. Do you think it’s fair?[/quote]

My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?

[frenchlambda]

[quote=Eugene][quote]
Loss of equity should be divided equally between you and your wife. But if you forget about those 85k, you lose your entire contribution towards down payment (115k) but your wife only loses 30k. Do you think it’s fair?[/quote]

My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?

[frenchlambda]

[quote=Eugene][quote]
Loss of equity should be divided equally between you and your wife. But if you forget about those 85k, you lose your entire contribution towards down payment (115k) but your wife only loses 30k. Do you think it’s fair?[/quote]

My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?

[moneymaker]

Read about halfway through the thread and I think you are screwed. It’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t things. If you keep the condo you won’t be able to afford it, ever hear of child support?, if you lose it in foreclosure you lose your down payment. So you are in the same boat as many people that bought around 2005, you’re boat is just sinking a little faster. If you think the inlaws will give in, in the interest of the child, then you can try that tactic. Otherwise stop paying everyone and wait until the eviction. Believe it or not you can rent cheaper than your mortgage would be on the condo.

[moneymaker]

Read about halfway through the thread and I think you are screwed. It’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t things. If you keep the condo you won’t be able to afford it, ever hear of child support?, if you lose it in foreclosure you lose your down payment. So you are in the same boat as many people that bought around 2005, you’re boat is just sinking a little faster. If you think the inlaws will give in, in the interest of the child, then you can try that tactic. Otherwise stop paying everyone and wait until the eviction. Believe it or not you can rent cheaper than your mortgage would be on the condo.

[moneymaker]

Read about halfway through the thread and I think you are screwed. It’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t things. If you keep the condo you won’t be able to afford it, ever hear of child support?, if you lose it in foreclosure you lose your down payment. So you are in the same boat as many people that bought around 2005, you’re boat is just sinking a little faster. If you think the inlaws will give in, in the interest of the child, then you can try that tactic. Otherwise stop paying everyone and wait until the eviction. Believe it or not you can rent cheaper than your mortgage would be on the condo.

[moneymaker]

Read about halfway through the thread and I think you are screwed. It’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t things. If you keep the condo you won’t be able to afford it, ever hear of child support?, if you lose it in foreclosure you lose your down payment. So you are in the same boat as many people that bought around 2005, you’re boat is just sinking a little faster. If you think the inlaws will give in, in the interest of the child, then you can try that tactic. Otherwise stop paying everyone and wait until the eviction. Believe it or not you can rent cheaper than your mortgage would be on the condo.

[moneymaker]

Read about halfway through the thread and I think you are screwed. It’s one of those damned if you do damned if you don’t things. If you keep the condo you won’t be able to afford it, ever hear of child support?, if you lose it in foreclosure you lose your down payment. So you are in the same boat as many people that bought around 2005, you’re boat is just sinking a little faster. If you think the inlaws will give in, in the interest of the child, then you can try that tactic. Otherwise stop paying everyone and wait until the eviction. Believe it or not you can rent cheaper than your mortgage would be on the condo.

[Eugene]

[quote=frenchlambda]
My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?[/quote]

You _had_ the right to be reimbursed $85k out of the community estate during division of assets when you were divorcing. (Which, in practice, would have meant that you’d get $43k more and she’d get $43k less.) For example, if there was a joint savings account with more than $85k in it, you could have taken $85k to yourself and evenly divided the rest.

Whatever rights you have now, two months after the divorce has been finalized, and after countless signed papers, it’s really hard for me to say.

Edit: actually I’m not sure. CFC §2640 mentions “net value of the property”. What is net value of the property? Is it the fair market value or is it the amount of equity?

[Eugene]

[quote=frenchlambda]
My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?[/quote]

You _had_ the right to be reimbursed $85k out of the community estate during division of assets when you were divorcing. (Which, in practice, would have meant that you’d get $43k more and she’d get $43k less.) For example, if there was a joint savings account with more than $85k in it, you could have taken $85k to yourself and evenly divided the rest.

Whatever rights you have now, two months after the divorce has been finalized, and after countless signed papers, it’s really hard for me to say.

Edit: actually I’m not sure. CFC §2640 mentions “net value of the property”. What is net value of the property? Is it the fair market value or is it the amount of equity?

[Eugene]

[quote=frenchlambda]
My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?[/quote]

You _had_ the right to be reimbursed $85k out of the community estate during division of assets when you were divorcing. (Which, in practice, would have meant that you’d get $43k more and she’d get $43k less.) For example, if there was a joint savings account with more than $85k in it, you could have taken $85k to yourself and evenly divided the rest.

Whatever rights you have now, two months after the divorce has been finalized, and after countless signed papers, it’s really hard for me to say.

Edit: actually I’m not sure. CFC §2640 mentions “net value of the property”. What is net value of the property? Is it the fair market value or is it the amount of equity?

[Eugene]

[quote=frenchlambda]
My understanding was that whatever down-payment was used to purchase the property could only be recuperated from the equity that’s in it.
Am I wrong?
If so, am I legally entitled to get $85k (or even a percentage of it) from my ex?[/quote]

You _had_ the right to be reimbursed $85k out of the community estate during division of assets when you were divorcing. (Which, in practice, would have meant that you’d get $43k more and she’d get $43k less.) For example, if there was a joint savings account with more than $85k in it, you could have taken $85k to yourself and evenly divided the rest.

Whatever rights you have now, two months after the divorce has been finalized, and after countless signed papers, it’s really hard for me to say.

Edit: actually I’m not sure. CFC §2640 mentions “net value of the property”. What is net value of the property? Is it the fair market value or is it the amount of equity?

[Author]

Posts