[ucodegen]

First things first:
[quote frenchlambda]- a few months ago, while my then wife and I were trying to reach an agreement, her parents freaked out about the loan they gave us. They hired an attorney who threatened me to take legal action against me if I refused to sign a deed of trust for the benefit of his clients.
– at this time, my wife was refusing to sign a “stipulation and order” that showed that I was entitled to some other reimbursement
– so we worked out a deal. I signed the deed of trust and my wife signed the “stipulation and order” document.[/quote]
This is where you screwed up. Did you have an attorney representing you at the time? If not, and considering that coercion/duress was used by their attorney (under threat of legal action but w/o legal representation), it could invalidate the deed of trust (signatures under coercion are often not enforceable – more so if the counter party is not represented by an attorney, even more so if the threat from the counter party or counter party’s attorney contains the implied — “if you get an attorney to check this, then we will definitely sue”). The reason why they threatened here is that they didn’t have a leg to stand on w/ respect to the loan. With the deed, they now do.
NOTE: It might have been useful to offset the loan owed to parents by the amounts under consideration under the “stipulation and order”, thereby reducing your payments and loan amount — and making it easier to refi the ex-inlaw portion. But now you may have to take the effort to make sure the “stipulation and order” is enforced.

What this signature did, was convert an unsecured loan into a secured loan. This is a huge benefit to your wife and parents. From what I am seeing so far, the loan still looks open-ended though, so they aren’t really able to foreclose. The note was not callable as was written, unless you also signed something that changed the loan into something callable.

Was the divorce proceedings done through court or arbitration? $13K sounds like court(but not drawn out). Was the “stipulation and order” part of the divorce agreement? If it was a court divorce proceedings AND was part of the agreement AND she then refused, she could be in contempt of court. What was in the “stipulation and order”?
[quote frenchlambda]I was nice enough to offer her shared child custody when my attorney recommended full custody for me.[/quote]
Should have listened to your attorney. Shared custody is hard enough when both parties are healthy and of fit mind. They are a nightmare if one is addicted, pathological or has revenge in mind. Until she is 100% clean for a period of time, it should have been visitation with supervision- for the sake of your daughter. Once she is 100% clean for a period of time, it is always possible to go back and amend to give her more rights/shared custody. It is hard to take back or re-establish custody once given though.

[quote frenchlambda]I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move.[/quote]
Moving is less disruptive to kids than it is to parents. Kids adapt a lot faster than their parents – just look how fast they can learn and pick up on new things.. ie technology.

[quote frenchlambda]I guess I will have no other choice than taking $30K from my 401(k). Is it even possible to do so? What are the costs associated with taking money from a 401(k)? Will I have to pay a huge tax next year?[/quote]
There is a way to use 401k money for real-estate purchases. I am not up 100% on how. Someone on the board may be. The problem may be that it can(maybe) only be used on original purchase, not refinance.
http://www.ehow.com/how_2075559_purchase-home-using-401k.html
http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/24/tapping-retirement-funds-ira-401k-personal-finance-house-downpayment.html
http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/04/ira-401k-hardship-personal-finance-retirement-ten-percent-penalty.html

And I am stressing again, when they bring an attorney to the table, make sure you have one too.. otherwise, you are the one getting screwed. Their attorney is only there to protect their rights, assets, wishes.. not yours. Considering that you tried to help their daughter and now they want the money immediately, this thing has already gone ‘adversarial’. No point in trying to ‘be nice’. Just deal with the facts.

For the IRA withdrawal, check w/ Accountant/IRS before committing.

[ucodegen]

First things first:
[quote frenchlambda]- a few months ago, while my then wife and I were trying to reach an agreement, her parents freaked out about the loan they gave us. They hired an attorney who threatened me to take legal action against me if I refused to sign a deed of trust for the benefit of his clients.
– at this time, my wife was refusing to sign a “stipulation and order” that showed that I was entitled to some other reimbursement
– so we worked out a deal. I signed the deed of trust and my wife signed the “stipulation and order” document.[/quote]
This is where you screwed up. Did you have an attorney representing you at the time? If not, and considering that coercion/duress was used by their attorney (under threat of legal action but w/o legal representation), it could invalidate the deed of trust (signatures under coercion are often not enforceable – more so if the counter party is not represented by an attorney, even more so if the threat from the counter party or counter party’s attorney contains the implied — “if you get an attorney to check this, then we will definitely sue”). The reason why they threatened here is that they didn’t have a leg to stand on w/ respect to the loan. With the deed, they now do.
NOTE: It might have been useful to offset the loan owed to parents by the amounts under consideration under the “stipulation and order”, thereby reducing your payments and loan amount — and making it easier to refi the ex-inlaw portion. But now you may have to take the effort to make sure the “stipulation and order” is enforced.

What this signature did, was convert an unsecured loan into a secured loan. This is a huge benefit to your wife and parents. From what I am seeing so far, the loan still looks open-ended though, so they aren’t really able to foreclose. The note was not callable as was written, unless you also signed something that changed the loan into something callable.

Was the divorce proceedings done through court or arbitration? $13K sounds like court(but not drawn out). Was the “stipulation and order” part of the divorce agreement? If it was a court divorce proceedings AND was part of the agreement AND she then refused, she could be in contempt of court. What was in the “stipulation and order”?
[quote frenchlambda]I was nice enough to offer her shared child custody when my attorney recommended full custody for me.[/quote]
Should have listened to your attorney. Shared custody is hard enough when both parties are healthy and of fit mind. They are a nightmare if one is addicted, pathological or has revenge in mind. Until she is 100% clean for a period of time, it should have been visitation with supervision- for the sake of your daughter. Once she is 100% clean for a period of time, it is always possible to go back and amend to give her more rights/shared custody. It is hard to take back or re-establish custody once given though.

[quote frenchlambda]I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move.[/quote]
Moving is less disruptive to kids than it is to parents. Kids adapt a lot faster than their parents – just look how fast they can learn and pick up on new things.. ie technology.

[quote frenchlambda]I guess I will have no other choice than taking $30K from my 401(k). Is it even possible to do so? What are the costs associated with taking money from a 401(k)? Will I have to pay a huge tax next year?[/quote]
There is a way to use 401k money for real-estate purchases. I am not up 100% on how. Someone on the board may be. The problem may be that it can(maybe) only be used on original purchase, not refinance.
http://www.ehow.com/how_2075559_purchase-home-using-401k.html
http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/24/tapping-retirement-funds-ira-401k-personal-finance-house-downpayment.html
http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/04/ira-401k-hardship-personal-finance-retirement-ten-percent-penalty.html

And I am stressing again, when they bring an attorney to the table, make sure you have one too.. otherwise, you are the one getting screwed. Their attorney is only there to protect their rights, assets, wishes.. not yours. Considering that you tried to help their daughter and now they want the money immediately, this thing has already gone ‘adversarial’. No point in trying to ‘be nice’. Just deal with the facts.

For the IRA withdrawal, check w/ Accountant/IRS before committing.

[ucodegen]

First things first:
[quote frenchlambda]- a few months ago, while my then wife and I were trying to reach an agreement, her parents freaked out about the loan they gave us. They hired an attorney who threatened me to take legal action against me if I refused to sign a deed of trust for the benefit of his clients.
– at this time, my wife was refusing to sign a “stipulation and order” that showed that I was entitled to some other reimbursement
– so we worked out a deal. I signed the deed of trust and my wife signed the “stipulation and order” document.[/quote]
This is where you screwed up. Did you have an attorney representing you at the time? If not, and considering that coercion/duress was used by their attorney (under threat of legal action but w/o legal representation), it could invalidate the deed of trust (signatures under coercion are often not enforceable – more so if the counter party is not represented by an attorney, even more so if the threat from the counter party or counter party’s attorney contains the implied — “if you get an attorney to check this, then we will definitely sue”). The reason why they threatened here is that they didn’t have a leg to stand on w/ respect to the loan. With the deed, they now do.
NOTE: It might have been useful to offset the loan owed to parents by the amounts under consideration under the “stipulation and order”, thereby reducing your payments and loan amount — and making it easier to refi the ex-inlaw portion. But now you may have to take the effort to make sure the “stipulation and order” is enforced.

What this signature did, was convert an unsecured loan into a secured loan. This is a huge benefit to your wife and parents. From what I am seeing so far, the loan still looks open-ended though, so they aren’t really able to foreclose. The note was not callable as was written, unless you also signed something that changed the loan into something callable.

Was the divorce proceedings done through court or arbitration? $13K sounds like court(but not drawn out). Was the “stipulation and order” part of the divorce agreement? If it was a court divorce proceedings AND was part of the agreement AND she then refused, she could be in contempt of court. What was in the “stipulation and order”?
[quote frenchlambda]I was nice enough to offer her shared child custody when my attorney recommended full custody for me.[/quote]
Should have listened to your attorney. Shared custody is hard enough when both parties are healthy and of fit mind. They are a nightmare if one is addicted, pathological or has revenge in mind. Until she is 100% clean for a period of time, it should have been visitation with supervision- for the sake of your daughter. Once she is 100% clean for a period of time, it is always possible to go back and amend to give her more rights/shared custody. It is hard to take back or re-establish custody once given though.

[quote frenchlambda]I think that it would be extremely disruptive to my daughter if I move.[/quote]
Moving is less disruptive to kids than it is to parents. Kids adapt a lot faster than their parents – just look how fast they can learn and pick up on new things.. ie technology.

[quote frenchlambda]I guess I will have no other choice than taking $30K from my 401(k). Is it even possible to do so? What are the costs associated with taking money from a 401(k)? Will I have to pay a huge tax next year?[/quote]
There is a way to use 401k money for real-estate purchases. I am not up 100% on how. Someone on the board may be. The problem may be that it can(maybe) only be used on original purchase, not refinance.
http://www.ehow.com/how_2075559_purchase-home-using-401k.html
http://www.forbes.com/2010/03/24/tapping-retirement-funds-ira-401k-personal-finance-house-downpayment.html
http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/04/ira-401k-hardship-personal-finance-retirement-ten-percent-penalty.html

And I am stressing again, when they bring an attorney to the table, make sure you have one too.. otherwise, you are the one getting screwed. Their attorney is only there to protect their rights, assets, wishes.. not yours. Considering that you tried to help their daughter and now they want the money immediately, this thing has already gone ‘adversarial’. No point in trying to ‘be nice’. Just deal with the facts.

For the IRA withdrawal, check w/ Accountant/IRS before committing.

[ucodegen]

I agree with the previous posters about not getting attached to the property, as well as reserving the services of an attorney. I think something is fishy with the claimed deed of trust. Looking at what you present as the note reads that it is unsecured (no mention of the loan being secured by the property, right to take possession if in arrears etc). You can’t get it converted to a deed of trust without you being in arrears (behind in payments to in-laws) and them going to the court to place a lien on the property, followed by using the lien to get deed of trust.

There is also nothing in the loan arrangements from the in-laws indicating that the note is callable. This means that if you are not in arrears, they legally can’t take action. One thing that does bother me about the note, is that it is open-ended. It states principal and interest but does not state to total time-period for the loan (30day? 15year? 30year? 50year? – which is required for amortization calculations for principal and interest). There is also nothing in the note saying that it becomes callable should the two of you get divorced.

There is also the issue of how the divorce occurs. California is a community property state. How were the assets divided upon divorce? Is it final yet? Was the property in both your names?(did she forge your signature to quit-claim your portion of the property to get the dead of trust – if this occurred, it can be straight to jail for her) – again this is why you need an attorney.

[ucodegen]

I agree with the previous posters about not getting attached to the property, as well as reserving the services of an attorney. I think something is fishy with the claimed deed of trust. Looking at what you present as the note reads that it is unsecured (no mention of the loan being secured by the property, right to take possession if in arrears etc). You can’t get it converted to a deed of trust without you being in arrears (behind in payments to in-laws) and them going to the court to place a lien on the property, followed by using the lien to get deed of trust.

There is also nothing in the loan arrangements from the in-laws indicating that the note is callable. This means that if you are not in arrears, they legally can’t take action. One thing that does bother me about the note, is that it is open-ended. It states principal and interest but does not state to total time-period for the loan (30day? 15year? 30year? 50year? – which is required for amortization calculations for principal and interest). There is also nothing in the note saying that it becomes callable should the two of you get divorced.

There is also the issue of how the divorce occurs. California is a community property state. How were the assets divided upon divorce? Is it final yet? Was the property in both your names?(did she forge your signature to quit-claim your portion of the property to get the dead of trust – if this occurred, it can be straight to jail for her) – again this is why you need an attorney.

[ucodegen]

I agree with the previous posters about not getting attached to the property, as well as reserving the services of an attorney. I think something is fishy with the claimed deed of trust. Looking at what you present as the note reads that it is unsecured (no mention of the loan being secured by the property, right to take possession if in arrears etc). You can’t get it converted to a deed of trust without you being in arrears (behind in payments to in-laws) and them going to the court to place a lien on the property, followed by using the lien to get deed of trust.

There is also nothing in the loan arrangements from the in-laws indicating that the note is callable. This means that if you are not in arrears, they legally can’t take action. One thing that does bother me about the note, is that it is open-ended. It states principal and interest but does not state to total time-period for the loan (30day? 15year? 30year? 50year? – which is required for amortization calculations for principal and interest). There is also nothing in the note saying that it becomes callable should the two of you get divorced.

There is also the issue of how the divorce occurs. California is a community property state. How were the assets divided upon divorce? Is it final yet? Was the property in both your names?(did she forge your signature to quit-claim your portion of the property to get the dead of trust – if this occurred, it can be straight to jail for her) – again this is why you need an attorney.

[ucodegen]

I agree with the previous posters about not getting attached to the property, as well as reserving the services of an attorney. I think something is fishy with the claimed deed of trust. Looking at what you present as the note reads that it is unsecured (no mention of the loan being secured by the property, right to take possession if in arrears etc). You can’t get it converted to a deed of trust without you being in arrears (behind in payments to in-laws) and them going to the court to place a lien on the property, followed by using the lien to get deed of trust.

There is also nothing in the loan arrangements from the in-laws indicating that the note is callable. This means that if you are not in arrears, they legally can’t take action. One thing that does bother me about the note, is that it is open-ended. It states principal and interest but does not state to total time-period for the loan (30day? 15year? 30year? 50year? – which is required for amortization calculations for principal and interest). There is also nothing in the note saying that it becomes callable should the two of you get divorced.

There is also the issue of how the divorce occurs. California is a community property state. How were the assets divided upon divorce? Is it final yet? Was the property in both your names?(did she forge your signature to quit-claim your portion of the property to get the dead of trust – if this occurred, it can be straight to jail for her) – again this is why you need an attorney.

[ucodegen]

I agree with the previous posters about not getting attached to the property, as well as reserving the services of an attorney. I think something is fishy with the claimed deed of trust. Looking at what you present as the note reads that it is unsecured (no mention of the loan being secured by the property, right to take possession if in arrears etc). You can’t get it converted to a deed of trust without you being in arrears (behind in payments to in-laws) and them going to the court to place a lien on the property, followed by using the lien to get deed of trust.

There is also nothing in the loan arrangements from the in-laws indicating that the note is callable. This means that if you are not in arrears, they legally can’t take action. One thing that does bother me about the note, is that it is open-ended. It states principal and interest but does not state to total time-period for the loan (30day? 15year? 30year? 50year? – which is required for amortization calculations for principal and interest). There is also nothing in the note saying that it becomes callable should the two of you get divorced.

There is also the issue of how the divorce occurs. California is a community property state. How were the assets divided upon divorce? Is it final yet? Was the property in both your names?(did she forge your signature to quit-claim your portion of the property to get the dead of trust – if this occurred, it can be straight to jail for her) – again this is why you need an attorney.

[ucodegen]

[quote briansd1]I don’t think you’re been around many gay men. Gay men that I know love to party, have friends over, especially if they have places to host. That means somone has to clean and repair the house.[/quote]
No, just different gay men than the ones you seem to run into. Maybe the ones your are running to are more bi than gay?

[quote briansd1]Anal-retentive is derogatory. I like fastidious better.[/quote]
fastidious would fit better with ‘neat’. How then would you describe always being on time with payments, notifying you promptly if there are problems with the property, and not abusing energy/water usage in a shared environment? -as a personality trait.

[ucodegen]

[quote briansd1]I don’t think you’re been around many gay men. Gay men that I know love to party, have friends over, especially if they have places to host. That means somone has to clean and repair the house.[/quote]
No, just different gay men than the ones you seem to run into. Maybe the ones your are running to are more bi than gay?

[quote briansd1]Anal-retentive is derogatory. I like fastidious better.[/quote]
fastidious would fit better with ‘neat’. How then would you describe always being on time with payments, notifying you promptly if there are problems with the property, and not abusing energy/water usage in a shared environment? -as a personality trait.

[ucodegen]

[quote briansd1]I don’t think you’re been around many gay men. Gay men that I know love to party, have friends over, especially if they have places to host. That means somone has to clean and repair the house.[/quote]
No, just different gay men than the ones you seem to run into. Maybe the ones your are running to are more bi than gay?

[quote briansd1]Anal-retentive is derogatory. I like fastidious better.[/quote]
fastidious would fit better with ‘neat’. How then would you describe always being on time with payments, notifying you promptly if there are problems with the property, and not abusing energy/water usage in a shared environment? -as a personality trait.

[ucodegen]

[quote briansd1]I don’t think you’re been around many gay men. Gay men that I know love to party, have friends over, especially if they have places to host. That means somone has to clean and repair the house.[/quote]
No, just different gay men than the ones you seem to run into. Maybe the ones your are running to are more bi than gay?

[quote briansd1]Anal-retentive is derogatory. I like fastidious better.[/quote]
fastidious would fit better with ‘neat’. How then would you describe always being on time with payments, notifying you promptly if there are problems with the property, and not abusing energy/water usage in a shared environment? -as a personality trait.

[ucodegen]

[quote briansd1]I don’t think you’re been around many gay men. Gay men that I know love to party, have friends over, especially if they have places to host. That means somone has to clean and repair the house.[/quote]
No, just different gay men than the ones you seem to run into. Maybe the ones your are running to are more bi than gay?

[quote briansd1]Anal-retentive is derogatory. I like fastidious better.[/quote]
fastidious would fit better with ‘neat’. How then would you describe always being on time with payments, notifying you promptly if there are problems with the property, and not abusing energy/water usage in a shared environment? -as a personality trait.

[ucodegen]

[quote=njtosd]Don’t really know how relevant this is to anything. MERS seems to have failed to file a timely answer – so the result was independent of the underlying facts of the case.[/quote]

I concur. Quoted:

MERS was served with process but failed to file an answer, and Groves filed a motion for default judgment. The trial court signed a default judgment against MERS stating that (1) Groves owns the property in question; (2) the deed of trust is “void and of no force or effect;” and (3) the deed of trust be removed from the property title.

The problem is that MERS tried to appeal making claim that her action was invalid. This should have been their first response instead of not responding and getting a default judgment. MERS had their chance and the door closed. You have to appeal based on new ground or invalidity of process. Problem is that if you don’t respond – you can get hit with a default judgment – which is normal process.

It just means that MERS has to wake up when it gets served…

[ucodegen]

[quote=njtosd]Don’t really know how relevant this is to anything. MERS seems to have failed to file a timely answer – so the result was independent of the underlying facts of the case.[/quote]

I concur. Quoted:

MERS was served with process but failed to file an answer, and Groves filed a motion for default judgment. The trial court signed a default judgment against MERS stating that (1) Groves owns the property in question; (2) the deed of trust is “void and of no force or effect;” and (3) the deed of trust be removed from the property title.

The problem is that MERS tried to appeal making claim that her action was invalid. This should have been their first response instead of not responding and getting a default judgment. MERS had their chance and the door closed. You have to appeal based on new ground or invalidity of process. Problem is that if you don’t respond – you can get hit with a default judgment – which is normal process.

It just means that MERS has to wake up when it gets served…

[Author]

Posts