[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=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=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=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=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]

Thanks guys for all the info.
That’s a lot of stuff here and I am still trying to process some of it.

Here is some answers:

[quote=bearishgurl]
In essence, what you did here was agree to pay back the $200K (half of which was your ex’s debt) for $10K in “equity.” This is not even enough to pay a RE commission to a broker to sell it
[/quote]
That’s one way to see the problem but I see it a different way.
After the divorce, we only had 2 choices:
1) Sell the condo, reimburse both loans and split whatever is left which in this case would have been nothing (we would have just break even after closing costs)
2) One party keeps the property. The other party is out of the title and no longer liable for any debts associated with the property.

We went with option #2 because it made sense to me to keep the condo. It is normal that it becomes my sole responsibility to reimburse the $200k loan.

[quote=ucodegen]
Since you mentioned $85k as your 75% into the down from pre-marriage assets, that means that she brought in 25% or about $28K?
[/quote]

It is actually a little more complex.
The purchase price of the condo including closing costs was about $490k.
We took a $145k loan with BofA, $200k with in-laws and $145k down payment.
The down-payment amount was “assembled” as follow:
– $85k came from me as pre-marriage money
– $60k came from our joint saving account
So theoretically I put $115k down and she put $30k

[quote=ucodegen]
There is an interesting quirk in the “stipulation and order” in that you may still have a right to have the $85K reimbursed.
The way it was written does not tie it to the value of the property(condo),
[/quote]
Sure the way it was written does not tie it the property. But when tracing this money, it becomes obvious that it was.

[quote=bearishgurl]
On second thought, how about doing this right away, since you have the proof for $85K? Get the judgment against your ex ASAP. Then file the abstract and obtain your writ of execution. When her employer is served and calls her into HR, she will likely complain to her parents about it.
[/quote]
Frankly I am not sure why everyone here talks about these $85k.
First of all, my ex-parents have nothing to do with that.
Secondly, this is money that served as a down-payment and the equity in the house is gone.
If I had bought a $50k car for both myself and my wife with pre-marriage money and then crashed a car into a wall resulting in a total loss, would I get $50k back from my wife after divorce? Obviously not.
The loss of the car is an analogy to the loss of value in the real estate property. The value is gone so there is nothing for me to claim.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, if you currently owe $330K on the condo and it is only worth $340K, I don’t see how you can successfully refinance. Your condo would have to be worth $412,500 in order to qualify it for a $330K loan at 80% LTV. It could be several years (if at all) before this happens
[/quote]
The question for me is not how much the condo should be worth to refinance. The question is how much extra money do I need to bring on the table to afford to refinance.
The condo is worth $340. I am approved for a $272k loan. I owe $330k. So I need an extra $58k + closing costs. I have a little over $30k in cash. Therefore I need an extra $30k.
Someone launched the idea of reimbursing $170k to the in-laws and keeping a $30k loan with them. That seems like a good plan. Let’s see what they say about that.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, did your ex sign a quitclaim deed on the condo over to you?
[/quote]
I don’t believe so. I would need to be aware of this, right? I mean, can she sign one without getting my signature too?

[frenchlambda]

Thanks guys for all the info.
That’s a lot of stuff here and I am still trying to process some of it.

Here is some answers:

[quote=bearishgurl]
In essence, what you did here was agree to pay back the $200K (half of which was your ex’s debt) for $10K in “equity.” This is not even enough to pay a RE commission to a broker to sell it
[/quote]
That’s one way to see the problem but I see it a different way.
After the divorce, we only had 2 choices:
1) Sell the condo, reimburse both loans and split whatever is left which in this case would have been nothing (we would have just break even after closing costs)
2) One party keeps the property. The other party is out of the title and no longer liable for any debts associated with the property.

We went with option #2 because it made sense to me to keep the condo. It is normal that it becomes my sole responsibility to reimburse the $200k loan.

[quote=ucodegen]
Since you mentioned $85k as your 75% into the down from pre-marriage assets, that means that she brought in 25% or about $28K?
[/quote]

It is actually a little more complex.
The purchase price of the condo including closing costs was about $490k.
We took a $145k loan with BofA, $200k with in-laws and $145k down payment.
The down-payment amount was “assembled” as follow:
– $85k came from me as pre-marriage money
– $60k came from our joint saving account
So theoretically I put $115k down and she put $30k

[quote=ucodegen]
There is an interesting quirk in the “stipulation and order” in that you may still have a right to have the $85K reimbursed.
The way it was written does not tie it to the value of the property(condo),
[/quote]
Sure the way it was written does not tie it the property. But when tracing this money, it becomes obvious that it was.

[quote=bearishgurl]
On second thought, how about doing this right away, since you have the proof for $85K? Get the judgment against your ex ASAP. Then file the abstract and obtain your writ of execution. When her employer is served and calls her into HR, she will likely complain to her parents about it.
[/quote]
Frankly I am not sure why everyone here talks about these $85k.
First of all, my ex-parents have nothing to do with that.
Secondly, this is money that served as a down-payment and the equity in the house is gone.
If I had bought a $50k car for both myself and my wife with pre-marriage money and then crashed a car into a wall resulting in a total loss, would I get $50k back from my wife after divorce? Obviously not.
The loss of the car is an analogy to the loss of value in the real estate property. The value is gone so there is nothing for me to claim.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, if you currently owe $330K on the condo and it is only worth $340K, I don’t see how you can successfully refinance. Your condo would have to be worth $412,500 in order to qualify it for a $330K loan at 80% LTV. It could be several years (if at all) before this happens
[/quote]
The question for me is not how much the condo should be worth to refinance. The question is how much extra money do I need to bring on the table to afford to refinance.
The condo is worth $340. I am approved for a $272k loan. I owe $330k. So I need an extra $58k + closing costs. I have a little over $30k in cash. Therefore I need an extra $30k.
Someone launched the idea of reimbursing $170k to the in-laws and keeping a $30k loan with them. That seems like a good plan. Let’s see what they say about that.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, did your ex sign a quitclaim deed on the condo over to you?
[/quote]
I don’t believe so. I would need to be aware of this, right? I mean, can she sign one without getting my signature too?

[frenchlambda]

Thanks guys for all the info.
That’s a lot of stuff here and I am still trying to process some of it.

Here is some answers:

[quote=bearishgurl]
In essence, what you did here was agree to pay back the $200K (half of which was your ex’s debt) for $10K in “equity.” This is not even enough to pay a RE commission to a broker to sell it
[/quote]
That’s one way to see the problem but I see it a different way.
After the divorce, we only had 2 choices:
1) Sell the condo, reimburse both loans and split whatever is left which in this case would have been nothing (we would have just break even after closing costs)
2) One party keeps the property. The other party is out of the title and no longer liable for any debts associated with the property.

We went with option #2 because it made sense to me to keep the condo. It is normal that it becomes my sole responsibility to reimburse the $200k loan.

[quote=ucodegen]
Since you mentioned $85k as your 75% into the down from pre-marriage assets, that means that she brought in 25% or about $28K?
[/quote]

It is actually a little more complex.
The purchase price of the condo including closing costs was about $490k.
We took a $145k loan with BofA, $200k with in-laws and $145k down payment.
The down-payment amount was “assembled” as follow:
– $85k came from me as pre-marriage money
– $60k came from our joint saving account
So theoretically I put $115k down and she put $30k

[quote=ucodegen]
There is an interesting quirk in the “stipulation and order” in that you may still have a right to have the $85K reimbursed.
The way it was written does not tie it to the value of the property(condo),
[/quote]
Sure the way it was written does not tie it the property. But when tracing this money, it becomes obvious that it was.

[quote=bearishgurl]
On second thought, how about doing this right away, since you have the proof for $85K? Get the judgment against your ex ASAP. Then file the abstract and obtain your writ of execution. When her employer is served and calls her into HR, she will likely complain to her parents about it.
[/quote]
Frankly I am not sure why everyone here talks about these $85k.
First of all, my ex-parents have nothing to do with that.
Secondly, this is money that served as a down-payment and the equity in the house is gone.
If I had bought a $50k car for both myself and my wife with pre-marriage money and then crashed a car into a wall resulting in a total loss, would I get $50k back from my wife after divorce? Obviously not.
The loss of the car is an analogy to the loss of value in the real estate property. The value is gone so there is nothing for me to claim.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, if you currently owe $330K on the condo and it is only worth $340K, I don’t see how you can successfully refinance. Your condo would have to be worth $412,500 in order to qualify it for a $330K loan at 80% LTV. It could be several years (if at all) before this happens
[/quote]
The question for me is not how much the condo should be worth to refinance. The question is how much extra money do I need to bring on the table to afford to refinance.
The condo is worth $340. I am approved for a $272k loan. I owe $330k. So I need an extra $58k + closing costs. I have a little over $30k in cash. Therefore I need an extra $30k.
Someone launched the idea of reimbursing $170k to the in-laws and keeping a $30k loan with them. That seems like a good plan. Let’s see what they say about that.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, did your ex sign a quitclaim deed on the condo over to you?
[/quote]
I don’t believe so. I would need to be aware of this, right? I mean, can she sign one without getting my signature too?

[frenchlambda]

Thanks guys for all the info.
That’s a lot of stuff here and I am still trying to process some of it.

Here is some answers:

[quote=bearishgurl]
In essence, what you did here was agree to pay back the $200K (half of which was your ex’s debt) for $10K in “equity.” This is not even enough to pay a RE commission to a broker to sell it
[/quote]
That’s one way to see the problem but I see it a different way.
After the divorce, we only had 2 choices:
1) Sell the condo, reimburse both loans and split whatever is left which in this case would have been nothing (we would have just break even after closing costs)
2) One party keeps the property. The other party is out of the title and no longer liable for any debts associated with the property.

We went with option #2 because it made sense to me to keep the condo. It is normal that it becomes my sole responsibility to reimburse the $200k loan.

[quote=ucodegen]
Since you mentioned $85k as your 75% into the down from pre-marriage assets, that means that she brought in 25% or about $28K?
[/quote]

It is actually a little more complex.
The purchase price of the condo including closing costs was about $490k.
We took a $145k loan with BofA, $200k with in-laws and $145k down payment.
The down-payment amount was “assembled” as follow:
– $85k came from me as pre-marriage money
– $60k came from our joint saving account
So theoretically I put $115k down and she put $30k

[quote=ucodegen]
There is an interesting quirk in the “stipulation and order” in that you may still have a right to have the $85K reimbursed.
The way it was written does not tie it to the value of the property(condo),
[/quote]
Sure the way it was written does not tie it the property. But when tracing this money, it becomes obvious that it was.

[quote=bearishgurl]
On second thought, how about doing this right away, since you have the proof for $85K? Get the judgment against your ex ASAP. Then file the abstract and obtain your writ of execution. When her employer is served and calls her into HR, she will likely complain to her parents about it.
[/quote]
Frankly I am not sure why everyone here talks about these $85k.
First of all, my ex-parents have nothing to do with that.
Secondly, this is money that served as a down-payment and the equity in the house is gone.
If I had bought a $50k car for both myself and my wife with pre-marriage money and then crashed a car into a wall resulting in a total loss, would I get $50k back from my wife after divorce? Obviously not.
The loss of the car is an analogy to the loss of value in the real estate property. The value is gone so there is nothing for me to claim.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, if you currently owe $330K on the condo and it is only worth $340K, I don’t see how you can successfully refinance. Your condo would have to be worth $412,500 in order to qualify it for a $330K loan at 80% LTV. It could be several years (if at all) before this happens
[/quote]
The question for me is not how much the condo should be worth to refinance. The question is how much extra money do I need to bring on the table to afford to refinance.
The condo is worth $340. I am approved for a $272k loan. I owe $330k. So I need an extra $58k + closing costs. I have a little over $30k in cash. Therefore I need an extra $30k.
Someone launched the idea of reimbursing $170k to the in-laws and keeping a $30k loan with them. That seems like a good plan. Let’s see what they say about that.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, did your ex sign a quitclaim deed on the condo over to you?
[/quote]
I don’t believe so. I would need to be aware of this, right? I mean, can she sign one without getting my signature too?

[frenchlambda]

Thanks guys for all the info.
That’s a lot of stuff here and I am still trying to process some of it.

Here is some answers:

[quote=bearishgurl]
In essence, what you did here was agree to pay back the $200K (half of which was your ex’s debt) for $10K in “equity.” This is not even enough to pay a RE commission to a broker to sell it
[/quote]
That’s one way to see the problem but I see it a different way.
After the divorce, we only had 2 choices:
1) Sell the condo, reimburse both loans and split whatever is left which in this case would have been nothing (we would have just break even after closing costs)
2) One party keeps the property. The other party is out of the title and no longer liable for any debts associated with the property.

We went with option #2 because it made sense to me to keep the condo. It is normal that it becomes my sole responsibility to reimburse the $200k loan.

[quote=ucodegen]
Since you mentioned $85k as your 75% into the down from pre-marriage assets, that means that she brought in 25% or about $28K?
[/quote]

It is actually a little more complex.
The purchase price of the condo including closing costs was about $490k.
We took a $145k loan with BofA, $200k with in-laws and $145k down payment.
The down-payment amount was “assembled” as follow:
– $85k came from me as pre-marriage money
– $60k came from our joint saving account
So theoretically I put $115k down and she put $30k

[quote=ucodegen]
There is an interesting quirk in the “stipulation and order” in that you may still have a right to have the $85K reimbursed.
The way it was written does not tie it to the value of the property(condo),
[/quote]
Sure the way it was written does not tie it the property. But when tracing this money, it becomes obvious that it was.

[quote=bearishgurl]
On second thought, how about doing this right away, since you have the proof for $85K? Get the judgment against your ex ASAP. Then file the abstract and obtain your writ of execution. When her employer is served and calls her into HR, she will likely complain to her parents about it.
[/quote]
Frankly I am not sure why everyone here talks about these $85k.
First of all, my ex-parents have nothing to do with that.
Secondly, this is money that served as a down-payment and the equity in the house is gone.
If I had bought a $50k car for both myself and my wife with pre-marriage money and then crashed a car into a wall resulting in a total loss, would I get $50k back from my wife after divorce? Obviously not.
The loss of the car is an analogy to the loss of value in the real estate property. The value is gone so there is nothing for me to claim.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, if you currently owe $330K on the condo and it is only worth $340K, I don’t see how you can successfully refinance. Your condo would have to be worth $412,500 in order to qualify it for a $330K loan at 80% LTV. It could be several years (if at all) before this happens
[/quote]
The question for me is not how much the condo should be worth to refinance. The question is how much extra money do I need to bring on the table to afford to refinance.
The condo is worth $340. I am approved for a $272k loan. I owe $330k. So I need an extra $58k + closing costs. I have a little over $30k in cash. Therefore I need an extra $30k.
Someone launched the idea of reimbursing $170k to the in-laws and keeping a $30k loan with them. That seems like a good plan. Let’s see what they say about that.

[quote=bearishgurl]
frenchlambda, did your ex sign a quitclaim deed on the condo over to you?
[/quote]
I don’t believe so. I would need to be aware of this, right? I mean, can she sign one without getting my signature too?

[frenchlambda]

Thanks bearishgurl, I appreciate the feedback.
You are right on a number of things.

Th only reasons I had mentioned the “stipulation and order” with a right to be reimbursed $85k from my ex-wife is to justify why I ended up signing the Deed of Trust.
These $85k are gone and I never counted on getting it back. It was money that disappeared in a bad investment (real estate). Yes if there was $100K of equity on the condo, I would probably get $85k back but it’s not the case.
And I am not going to fight with my ex-in-laws over this money. They operate as a bank. They gave us a loan the same way Bank of America gave us a loan. BofA doesn’t care about who paid what at the time of purchase.

It’s true that my ex doesn’t have a lot of assets. The only real assets are things (mostly land) that she inherited before even getting married.
She has been employed the whole time except when she was in rehab and right after she got off (about 4 months total).

I was able to trace part of the funds ($85k out of $100k) without any issue. This money was sitting in my bank account in France. Right before we closed escrow, I wired-transfer the full amount to my US account and then wire transfered it to escrow.
Anyway, that’s irrelevant.

Regarding the child custody situation, it is true that I could have gotten pretty much anything I wanted. I wanted to make things simple and easy. 50/50 seemed to be the best thing to do in the interest of my daughter, her mom and myself. No child support, no guilt, bitterness or frustration from either parent etc…
The child custody arrangements were based on the condition that my ex continue attending AA meetings daily and submit to random urine testing twice a month for a period of 1 year. Obviously if she drinks or get intoxicated again and puts my daughter in a dangerous situation the way she already did, all current arrangements can be reverted.

Your assumption about the in-laws getting involved at the last minute is correct. It was a distraction to me. It was also a way to punish me for keeping the condo. They seemed upset that I live in a nice 3-bdr condo while their daughter has to start from scratch and rents a 1-bdr apartment. They probably believe it’s unfair but again, it was my ex decision to move out of the community property. She even left her dog behind!

My goal is to keep to the place and refinance. It is doable in my opinion. I do not want to go into foreclosure. I also want to be financially detached from my ex-in-laws. I really don’t want to have anything to do with them anymore but I can live with continuing to pay them for another 2 years.

[frenchlambda]

Thanks bearishgurl, I appreciate the feedback.
You are right on a number of things.

Th only reasons I had mentioned the “stipulation and order” with a right to be reimbursed $85k from my ex-wife is to justify why I ended up signing the Deed of Trust.
These $85k are gone and I never counted on getting it back. It was money that disappeared in a bad investment (real estate). Yes if there was $100K of equity on the condo, I would probably get $85k back but it’s not the case.
And I am not going to fight with my ex-in-laws over this money. They operate as a bank. They gave us a loan the same way Bank of America gave us a loan. BofA doesn’t care about who paid what at the time of purchase.

It’s true that my ex doesn’t have a lot of assets. The only real assets are things (mostly land) that she inherited before even getting married.
She has been employed the whole time except when she was in rehab and right after she got off (about 4 months total).

I was able to trace part of the funds ($85k out of $100k) without any issue. This money was sitting in my bank account in France. Right before we closed escrow, I wired-transfer the full amount to my US account and then wire transfered it to escrow.
Anyway, that’s irrelevant.

Regarding the child custody situation, it is true that I could have gotten pretty much anything I wanted. I wanted to make things simple and easy. 50/50 seemed to be the best thing to do in the interest of my daughter, her mom and myself. No child support, no guilt, bitterness or frustration from either parent etc…
The child custody arrangements were based on the condition that my ex continue attending AA meetings daily and submit to random urine testing twice a month for a period of 1 year. Obviously if she drinks or get intoxicated again and puts my daughter in a dangerous situation the way she already did, all current arrangements can be reverted.

Your assumption about the in-laws getting involved at the last minute is correct. It was a distraction to me. It was also a way to punish me for keeping the condo. They seemed upset that I live in a nice 3-bdr condo while their daughter has to start from scratch and rents a 1-bdr apartment. They probably believe it’s unfair but again, it was my ex decision to move out of the community property. She even left her dog behind!

My goal is to keep to the place and refinance. It is doable in my opinion. I do not want to go into foreclosure. I also want to be financially detached from my ex-in-laws. I really don’t want to have anything to do with them anymore but I can live with continuing to pay them for another 2 years.

[frenchlambda]

Thanks bearishgurl, I appreciate the feedback.
You are right on a number of things.

Th only reasons I had mentioned the “stipulation and order” with a right to be reimbursed $85k from my ex-wife is to justify why I ended up signing the Deed of Trust.
These $85k are gone and I never counted on getting it back. It was money that disappeared in a bad investment (real estate). Yes if there was $100K of equity on the condo, I would probably get $85k back but it’s not the case.
And I am not going to fight with my ex-in-laws over this money. They operate as a bank. They gave us a loan the same way Bank of America gave us a loan. BofA doesn’t care about who paid what at the time of purchase.

It’s true that my ex doesn’t have a lot of assets. The only real assets are things (mostly land) that she inherited before even getting married.
She has been employed the whole time except when she was in rehab and right after she got off (about 4 months total).

I was able to trace part of the funds ($85k out of $100k) without any issue. This money was sitting in my bank account in France. Right before we closed escrow, I wired-transfer the full amount to my US account and then wire transfered it to escrow.
Anyway, that’s irrelevant.

Regarding the child custody situation, it is true that I could have gotten pretty much anything I wanted. I wanted to make things simple and easy. 50/50 seemed to be the best thing to do in the interest of my daughter, her mom and myself. No child support, no guilt, bitterness or frustration from either parent etc…
The child custody arrangements were based on the condition that my ex continue attending AA meetings daily and submit to random urine testing twice a month for a period of 1 year. Obviously if she drinks or get intoxicated again and puts my daughter in a dangerous situation the way she already did, all current arrangements can be reverted.

Your assumption about the in-laws getting involved at the last minute is correct. It was a distraction to me. It was also a way to punish me for keeping the condo. They seemed upset that I live in a nice 3-bdr condo while their daughter has to start from scratch and rents a 1-bdr apartment. They probably believe it’s unfair but again, it was my ex decision to move out of the community property. She even left her dog behind!

My goal is to keep to the place and refinance. It is doable in my opinion. I do not want to go into foreclosure. I also want to be financially detached from my ex-in-laws. I really don’t want to have anything to do with them anymore but I can live with continuing to pay them for another 2 years.

[frenchlambda]

Thanks bearishgurl, I appreciate the feedback.
You are right on a number of things.

Th only reasons I had mentioned the “stipulation and order” with a right to be reimbursed $85k from my ex-wife is to justify why I ended up signing the Deed of Trust.
These $85k are gone and I never counted on getting it back. It was money that disappeared in a bad investment (real estate). Yes if there was $100K of equity on the condo, I would probably get $85k back but it’s not the case.
And I am not going to fight with my ex-in-laws over this money. They operate as a bank. They gave us a loan the same way Bank of America gave us a loan. BofA doesn’t care about who paid what at the time of purchase.

It’s true that my ex doesn’t have a lot of assets. The only real assets are things (mostly land) that she inherited before even getting married.
She has been employed the whole time except when she was in rehab and right after she got off (about 4 months total).

I was able to trace part of the funds ($85k out of $100k) without any issue. This money was sitting in my bank account in France. Right before we closed escrow, I wired-transfer the full amount to my US account and then wire transfered it to escrow.
Anyway, that’s irrelevant.

Regarding the child custody situation, it is true that I could have gotten pretty much anything I wanted. I wanted to make things simple and easy. 50/50 seemed to be the best thing to do in the interest of my daughter, her mom and myself. No child support, no guilt, bitterness or frustration from either parent etc…
The child custody arrangements were based on the condition that my ex continue attending AA meetings daily and submit to random urine testing twice a month for a period of 1 year. Obviously if she drinks or get intoxicated again and puts my daughter in a dangerous situation the way she already did, all current arrangements can be reverted.

Your assumption about the in-laws getting involved at the last minute is correct. It was a distraction to me. It was also a way to punish me for keeping the condo. They seemed upset that I live in a nice 3-bdr condo while their daughter has to start from scratch and rents a 1-bdr apartment. They probably believe it’s unfair but again, it was my ex decision to move out of the community property. She even left her dog behind!

My goal is to keep to the place and refinance. It is doable in my opinion. I do not want to go into foreclosure. I also want to be financially detached from my ex-in-laws. I really don’t want to have anything to do with them anymore but I can live with continuing to pay them for another 2 years.

[frenchlambda]

Thanks bearishgurl, I appreciate the feedback.
You are right on a number of things.

Th only reasons I had mentioned the “stipulation and order” with a right to be reimbursed $85k from my ex-wife is to justify why I ended up signing the Deed of Trust.
These $85k are gone and I never counted on getting it back. It was money that disappeared in a bad investment (real estate). Yes if there was $100K of equity on the condo, I would probably get $85k back but it’s not the case.
And I am not going to fight with my ex-in-laws over this money. They operate as a bank. They gave us a loan the same way Bank of America gave us a loan. BofA doesn’t care about who paid what at the time of purchase.

It’s true that my ex doesn’t have a lot of assets. The only real assets are things (mostly land) that she inherited before even getting married.
She has been employed the whole time except when she was in rehab and right after she got off (about 4 months total).

I was able to trace part of the funds ($85k out of $100k) without any issue. This money was sitting in my bank account in France. Right before we closed escrow, I wired-transfer the full amount to my US account and then wire transfered it to escrow.
Anyway, that’s irrelevant.

Regarding the child custody situation, it is true that I could have gotten pretty much anything I wanted. I wanted to make things simple and easy. 50/50 seemed to be the best thing to do in the interest of my daughter, her mom and myself. No child support, no guilt, bitterness or frustration from either parent etc…
The child custody arrangements were based on the condition that my ex continue attending AA meetings daily and submit to random urine testing twice a month for a period of 1 year. Obviously if she drinks or get intoxicated again and puts my daughter in a dangerous situation the way she already did, all current arrangements can be reverted.

Your assumption about the in-laws getting involved at the last minute is correct. It was a distraction to me. It was also a way to punish me for keeping the condo. They seemed upset that I live in a nice 3-bdr condo while their daughter has to start from scratch and rents a 1-bdr apartment. They probably believe it’s unfair but again, it was my ex decision to move out of the community property. She even left her dog behind!

My goal is to keep to the place and refinance. It is doable in my opinion. I do not want to go into foreclosure. I also want to be financially detached from my ex-in-laws. I really don’t want to have anything to do with them anymore but I can live with continuing to pay them for another 2 years.

[Author]

Posts