Divorced 5 years ago - husband wants $$$$

[wendys8861]

What is the name of your state? CA

I'm writing on behalf of my sister.

Here's the situation. Last night, she received a call from a paralegal telling her that her ex-husband is suing her and she needs to appear in court on Friday morning for an Ex-Parte hearing. She was never served with any papers, etc.

Here's what he is suing her for:

When they were married, the lived in a home that was entirely in my sister's husband's (I'll call him Bill) name with his first wife (I'll call her Mary).

During their marriage, Bill and my sister took out a second mortgage in the amount of $20,000.00. The loan was in both names, meaning both my sister and Bill were equally responsible, although my sister's name was never on the home. This was all done through an attorney.

When my sister and Bill divorced, he continued to live in the house, assumed the debt of the original and second mortage in the settlement and my sister assumed the auto loan debt as well as credit card debt and other debt.

After 5 years now, Bill is trying to sue my sister for 1/2 of the amoount of the second mortgage ($10,000), even though she has never had any rights to the house and he's had all the tax benefits.

Can someone shed some light on what she needs to do? She is in the process of trying to secure an attorney, however it's difficult with such short notice.

Please advise ASAP.

Thank you.
Wendys8861What is the name of your state?

 

[Zephyr]

what did the divorce decree state about the house and debt?

 

[wendys8861]

what did the divorce decree state about the house and debt?

The Decree clearly states that he will assume the 2nd mortgage and she is to assume the automobile loans and credit card debt in addition to other personal debths they had.

Can he do this?

 

[seniorjudge]

...After 5 years now, Bill is trying to sue my sister for 1/2 of the amoount of the second mortgage ($10,000), even though she has never had any rights to the house and he's had all the tax benefits....


What do you mean? Bill and Sis owe the lender the amount of the second mortgage. You're not making sense.

 

[Silverplum]

The Decree clearly states that he will assume the 2nd mortgage and she is to assume the automobile loans and credit card debt in addition to other personal debths they had.

Can he do this?

Did they do the paperwork to get her off the mortgage/s?? A quit-claim deed?

 

[LdiJ]

If the divorce decree assigned that debt to him, then he isn't going to get anywhere suing your sister for it. If he defaulted on the loan the CREDITOR could sue your sister, because the creditor is not a party to the divorce as is bound only by the original loan contract, but her ex IS bound by the divorce.

 

[wendys8861]

Did they do the paperwork to get her off the mortgage/s?? A quit-claim deed?

I'm sorry if this doesn't make sense. Let me try to clarify.

When sister married Bill, he had a home in his name and the name of wife #1. Sister was NEVER on the original first deed.

A second mortgage was taken out on the property - second mortgage is in the names of Sister and Bill.

Sister obviously never had any rights to the home, nor did she want any.

Bill has resided in house since the divorce, sister moved out before divorce.

Divorce decree states he is to assume the second mortgage as his own debt (since he has the house and the house is the collateral for the loan). Per decree, Sister assumed other marital debt (car loans, credit card debt, etc.).

Now Bill has gone on disability and wants her to pay him $10,000 on the second mortgage. He still owns the house and has all of the benefits of home ownership, including a substantial equity (over $150,000.)

This sounds like he's just trying to soak her for $$ she doesn't have. He re-married a few months after the divorce was finalized and she hasn't spoken to him in 5 years.

Since he assumed this debt in the divorce and it's in the final decree, does he have a leg to stand on?

 

[Silverplum]

I'm sorry if this doesn't make sense. Let me try to clarify.

When sister married Bill, he had a home in his name and the name of wife #1. Sister was NEVER on the original first deed.

A second mortgage was taken out on the property - second mortgage is in the names of Sister and Bill.

Sister obviously never had any rights to the home, nor did she want any.

Bill has resided in house since the divorce, sister moved out before divorce.

Divorce decree states he is to assume the second mortgage as his own debt (since he has the house and the house is the collateral for the loan). Per decree, Sister assumed other marital debt (car loans, credit card debt, etc.).

Now Bill has gone on disability and wants her to pay him $10,000 on the second mortgage. He still owns the house and has all of the benefits of home ownership, including a substantial equity (over $150,000.)

This sounds like he's just trying to soak her for $$ she doesn't have. He re-married a few months after the divorce was finalized and she hasn't spoken to him in 5 years.

Since he assumed this debt in the divorce and it's in the final decree, does he have a leg to stand on?

Here's the deal, so far as I know -- others more experienced in this area will no doubt also respond:
The BANK is NOT a party to the divorce decree. The bank doesn't care who does what to whom -- they want their money.
If your sister didn't get her name off the 2nd mortgage, she's liable. To the bank.

 

[Zephyr]

no he does not

 

[Zephyr]

Here's the deal, so far as I know -- others more experienced in this area will no doubt also respond:
The BANK is NOT a party to the divorce decree. The bank doesn't care who does what to whom -- they want their money.
If your sister didn't get her name off the 2nd mortgage, she's liable. To the bank.

but my understanding is- he's suing her- not the bank.....

 

[wendys8861]

but my understanding is- he's suing her- not the bank.....

That is correct. The bank is not involved in this lawsuit. I could understand if they were suing her for the $$, but ex-husband is suing. It just doesn't make sense for him to do this.

 

[LdiJ]

Here's the deal, so far as I know -- others more experienced in this area will no doubt also respond:
The BANK is NOT a party to the divorce decree. The bank doesn't care who does what to whom -- they want their money.
If your sister didn't get her name off the 2nd mortgage, she's liable. To the bank.

With the additional information she gave I actually disagree. I agree that she is technically liable to the bank, but not practically liable. The home is collateral for the second mortgage. The home has plenty of equity to cover both the primary and secondary mortgages. She is not going to be practically liable to the bank until/unless he defaults (although it will effect her credit). Therefore the creditor will never go after her for the money, because they will be easily able to recoup it in a foreclosure.

I will repeat, her being technically liable to the bank does not invalidate the divorce decree and allow her ex to sue her over the loan.

 

[seniorjudge]

That is correct. The bank is not involved in this lawsuit. I could understand if they were suing her for the $$, but ex-husband is suing. It just doesn't make sense for him to do this.

Your right; what you are posting does not make sense.

Get some more details.

Someone is not filling you in with all the facts.