call an attorney

Don't talk to him about it. Call an attorney.

Tricia

PS...it's a Quit Claim Deed (not Quick Claim) It basically means to "Quit" any claims you may have on a property.

Your post implies that his name is on the deed (is that the case?). Which means he owns part of the house. Probably 1/2.
You essentially ask him to give up his ownership interest. A unrealistic expectation, regardless of who paid for what.

It is attorney time. Be prepared to buy him out, though. And even that probably requires goodwill from him because it might be impossible to force him to sell his share.

This is happening to a friend of mine right now. You better get a good lawyer. Her "boyfriend" of 10 years is getting 50% of the house. She has to sell, and he gets half of the proceeds. His name is on the mortgage and not the deed.

Find yourself a good attorney, not just any attorney but a really good one. Talk to people, see if anyone that's had a divorce knows of one that will be decent.

I would start getting documents together. Do you have proof you paid the big chunk? How did you work the mortgage & bills? Even if you paid more, if he paid equal to what you spent on the mortgage for bills, consider it even.

You may not recover any of the excess or original money you put into it.

Good luck.

I'm so sorry you are going through this. Yes, you should seek an atty but be prepared to put the house on the market if he won't budge. If he has paid a substantial part of the mortgage and has his name is on both the mortgage and the deed, you may need to sell the house to pay him off and start over.

One arrangement you might propose to him is to sign the quit claim deed in exchange for a lump of cash - but do this through a lawyer. Then you can stay in the house and get him off the papers.

Hope everything works out.

How this works out will is very much depend on what state you live in.

Don't just get "an" attorney. Find one that has considerable experience in this area.

You can't just "get him off the papers". That decision belongs to the lender. You will need to qualify on your own income if he, and his income, are removed from the Promissory Note, the Mortgage, and the Deed.

Start putting your papers together to show the attorney you choose what the paper trail is. You'll need to put together at least the following:

1.) The Purchase & Sale Agreement (who signed?)
2.) Mortgage application (who signed & who's income?)
3.) Copy of Mortgage approval letter
4.) Copy of Closing documents especially the Settlement Sheet, Promissory Note, Mortgage, & Deed (how do you hold title...Tenants in Common, JT, etc.)
5.) Something showing where the down payment funds originated at
6.) Mortgage payments: hopefully, you've got separate checking accounts & the mortgage payments were made from your account. Whatever the arrangements were...put together a paper trail to show the attorney
7.) Oh, I forgot...if you paid for all of the closing costs at the time of settlement...show your attorney where those funds came from as well.
8.) If any improvements have been done to the property since your purchase, provide the attorney copies of invoices, checks, etc. to show where the funds originated.
9.) Who's handled the upkeep & maintenance like yard work, painting, etc. Has he done a lot of "sweat equity"?

As has been noted, Courts in different states will view the situation differently. State laws vary. If you've really paid for most everything, in some states, you may be awarded 100% of the property. But, most assuredly that is not the case everywhere. Locate an attorney who specializes in "Family Law".

Good luck.
Tricia

a very unfortunate situation, but a textbook example of why not to buy a home with a boyfriend/girlfriend

What you should have done in the past is immaterial, what you should do now is consult with a lawyer who specializes in real estate law.

Now for some non-legal thoughts.

It does not matter much who's names are on the mortgage. The mortgage is simply a debt, and the mortgage holder will not be releasing any names from the obligation. The more people they can go after in the case of default, the better. The only way to remove a name from a mortgage is to refinance and get and new loan typically.

What really matters is whose names are on the title of the house. If you and the BF are joint owners, then he has an ownership stake. You can only sell the property if he quit claims it to you, agrees to the sale or you force a partition lawsuit. In the partition lawsuit, distribution of the sale proceeds will be determined.

Good Luck!

You definitely want to distinguish the mortgage vs the title. The mortgage evidences debt to the bank that loaned money to buy the house; the title evidences ownership of the house. Here in Ga, the mortgage is evidenced by a "security deed" and the ownership of the house is evidenced by a "warranty deed"

If BF name is on the mortgage documents but not the title documents, BF is in a bad spot. It means BF owes the bank but does not own the house.

If BF name is on the title documents but not the mortgage documents, BF is in great shape. BF shares ownership of the house but does not have to pay the mortgage co.

Oy vey - take heed of Tricae's advice, especially digging up proof of where the downpayment funds originated as well as from what accounts the mortgage was paid.

I sincerely hope if you paid the down payment, that he is not on the title. If you have proof you paid the DP, then it is possible that amount can be subtracted from the equity you have in the house. However, if he's paid the mortgage equally with you, then you will have to buy him out.

I do have to say that I second what qdog said. This may be a very tough and expensive lesson to learn. I'm really sorry you're going through this.

Yikers.. not sure about where you live but here there are differences such as "tenants in common" and "joint tenancy" regarding home ownership. I can't remember the difference other than a tenants in common means that if one party dies the other automatically inherits the whole house regardless of marriage etc,whereas "joint tenancy" if one died their half would go to their next of kin sort of thing. I checked into it once with our lawyer when things were going awry and was told I could file with the court as tenant in common and force the sale of the house after notice to my partner and filing with the court. So it all depends on where you live etc etc.

This would have been just as messy as a divorce and it has been 10 years, many marriages do not last that long

You do need a good divorce lawyer though

You do not want a real estate attorney. You need a FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY! (They are not called "Divorce" attorney...look in the Yellow Pages under "Family Law")

It is highly unlikely any lender would have accepted a signature on a Promissory Note & accompanying security document WITHOUT THE BORROWER ALSO BEING ON THE TITLE for a straight residential home purchase. The only time your going to see that is in the case of a Guarantor & the overall percentage of those is small.

It is simply untrue that the current lender will not release the BF from the note. If the OP can show sufficient personal income to service the debt all lenders have guidelines for just this type of problem. It will mean new documents & possibly a rate change. In essence, a refinance. But, the thing to note is that the current lender should not unilateraly be discounted as part of a solution here. Especially in market conditions like we have now. They don't want that house on their loan loss reserve list!

Tricia

In some states it may be considered common law marriage even though you aren't married. I was really lucky with my divorce as I found a great attorney in the yellow pages. I was fairly new to the area and didn't have any divorced friends. My ex, well he wasn't as lucky with his attorney...

Posting what state you are in may help, but nothing is better than real legal advice. Also, if you are using a member name that is the same one that you always use he may search you out with a google search. The crawlers come here often. I see you've been here since September 2002; does he know you come to GW? If so, you may think about having this post deleted then getting another email addy and rejoining with another name.

I live in GA, so YMMV.

My ex-husband quit claim to our house years ago because he had IRS problems, and I had hoped to avoid a lien. When we divorced, I moved out, but since we were both responsible for the mortgage, the decree specified that he and I split the proceeds upon the eventual sale of the property. Divorce definitely made a difference in my case, but it WAS an amicable split.

You do need to speak with a qualified attorney to sort this out. Every situation will be different.

roselvr - she said in the OP that she's in CT.

Adding to triciae's list, put all of that paperwork in a safe place and make copies of everything. You don't want to lose your proofs, which you will definitely need.

roselvr - Good point. Nothing like having the game plan exposed.

Jen, I agree with all of the above posters. You need an attorney that specializes in family law and divorce. Quit claims, refinancings, partition lawsuits that force the sale of your home are possibilities. You need a full understanding of those options and how they may affect your life. You also need to know his rights and what he may do to assert them. But they are time-consuming, expensive, and can escalate into something very ugly and painful. Mediation may be an avenue your lawyer will suggest.

However, have you and/or your boyfriend tried counseling? I don't mean to rescue the relationship. If he is, indeed, balking because he's grieving the loss of your relationship (and his home of five years), counseling could help him cope better with the loss and provide you with techniques to help him or to defuse the anger he feels. Counseling could also help you channel the anger you must feel over his resistance into actions that keep this situation at a full simmer instead of an angry boil. You can't force him to accept the end of your relationship but you can help lead him there. I know you want this all to over and done with. But, it won't be over until he's in a more cooperative mood. Patience and compassion could keep your losses to a minimum and, were I in your shoes, that would be my goal. That's the 2 cents advice of a total stranger who know nothing about you or your situation.

Whatever you decide, consulting a lawyer should be at the top of your TO DO list.

roselvr - she said in the OP that she's in CT.

lol, that's what I get for not rereading the post before posting.

Wow.

Thank you, thank you and thank you.

Everyone here has been more than helpful. I thank you all so much...I haven't had access to a computer so this is overwhelming)

Yes, I have an appointment with a lawyer later this week, and I am also seeking a mediator/counselor.

You live and learn...this is like getting a divorce, basically...Should have, could have, would have...I can not focus on that right now...

I will keep you all updated, again, thank you.

I just wanted to make a point, and this may be totally off topic, but some one said something about this being a textbook example of why not to buy a house with a boyfriend/girlfriend. That's true and I have learned my lesson. But at the time we bought the house, th future was so bright, I never thought in my wildest dreams this would happen.

No one would have questioned me if I chose to marry him 5 years ago. That's legally binding also. The point is this experience has morphed my attitudes towards relationships, money and marriage.

Maybe I will change my mind in the future, but for now I will move forward with the "what's mine is mine, what's yours is yours" attitude. There are NO garantees in life. I never want to be legally bound to anyone ever again...by marriage, real estate or otherwise.

Never wanting to be legally bound to anyone ever again is so sad.
My bride and I have been married for 35 years and I cannot for the life of me consider my life without her. We have owned 5 homes and custom built two of them. We have gone through good times as well as some very bad times. But that marriage certificate MAKES you work it out. If we were just living together we might have split up 25 years ago. But I now know we will be together until God separates us.
When we were married about 10 years we had to make some life altering decisions. That's when I discovered I would rather spend an evening with my wife than with anybody else. Our friends come and go, but we have stayed together as a TEAM and survived while our friends that were living together ALL have gone their separate ways.

"Never wanting to be legally bound to anyone ever again is so sad. "
"But that marriage certificate MAKES you work it out."

I am prevented from being legally bound to my love by popular vote and can say that true _love_ doesn't require a certificate. We are approaching our tenth year together and have a stronger bond than many married people have, even though we are totaly strangers in the eye of the law.

What sounds sad to me is requiring a certificate issued by a third party to affirm love.

I personally see the real value of such a certificate in the numerous legal privileges that the secular state bestows upon the holders of such a certificate, but viewing it as a instrument to MAKE you work problems out, is transforming it into a "love-shackle".

here's a difference, jrldh--and it's the very one you point out.

You *cannot* marry; our original poster can, yet chose quite definitely NOT to, even when purchasing a home (my DH called it our "financial marriage ceremony" and jokes it was the most binding bcs it would be the most difficult to dissolve)

It is in the CHOOSING NOT to marry that the lack of commitment is sometimes revealed.

Therefore, it truly is a "love shackle"--but that's what it's meant to be, actually. Folks like you have to create your own. (and it's not about affirming LOVE--it's about affirming COMMITMENT, publicly enough that the *rest* of us feel we can rely upon it)

If you could marry, I bet you would have 9 or 10 years ago.

I am reminded of an Ann Landers letter in which the writer complained that she and her boyfriend were required to sleep in separate bedrooms when visiting her mom--yet her older brother and his male partner were allowed to share a room. Her mother's response: "If he *could* marry, he would have; you have the choice, and you refuse to make it. Therefore I am entitled to treat him as being married, and you as not."

Being married is totally different than just living with someone. I've done both. The commitment in a marriage is MUCH stronger than when you just share a living arrangement with someone. In addition to the legal ramifications of marriage, the marriage vows themselves are taken very seriously by many married couples.

Remember that line from, if memory serves me correct...Love Story? "Love means never having to say your sorry."

That's just BS. Love actually means learning to say you're sorry & mean it. Love is all about compromise even though opinions are felt strongly on both sides. Love is about learning to put others best interests before our own in some cases. Love is about learning to listen and appreciate ideas contrary to our own. The commitment of marriage provides a big incentive to take on these challenges & preservere over great hardships. When you just living with someone the option to just walk out the door remains in your head...you are not committed to mutually find compromise.

I've lived with someone outside the commitment of marriage. Now, I've been married 24-1/2 years. We've been through many times where I know, in my heart, I would have walked if it were not for our shared commitment. Having stayed has made me a stronger & better person. I am a better listener, I am a better partner, I am more understanding & compassionate to others who don't share my belief systems. I have benefited from the stability of marriage. My DH is my best & most loyal friend. There's a reason our laws say that a spouse does not have to testify against their partner. It would break the bond & loyalty between husband & wife that the marriage commitment creates.

I feel sad for the OP & hope the day comes when she reevaluates her position.

Tricia

If having a marriage certificate "makes you work it out," then why is the divorce rate in the USA close to 50%?

It isn't at all clear to me how the OP would be in a better position if she and the BF had married. If anything, their finances would be even more entangled. What was dumb, and I'm sure the OP agrees, was buying the house together, not the failure to marry.

And just in case you're wondering, my DH and I will be celebrating our 34th anniversary later this month. So I'm not bitter or jaded or anything, but just realistic. There are many more people who really shouldn't get married, but do anyway, than there are people who don't get married but "should." Wisdom is knowing in which category you belong.

I've been happily unmarried to my SO for 17 years. We co-own all our assets and call each other husband and wife. We've outlasted many marriages. Everyone's different.

feedingfrenzy -- the divorce rate is so high because many people don't understand what a commitment is, and find it easier to walk away than to try to work things out.

(Note to people who are about to jump all over me -- I said "many" people, not "all" people. There are exceptions!)

I agree with the people who noted that a marriage certificate helps strengthen the COMMITMENT between two people in the relationship (has nothing whatsoever to do with love). In my case, I'd have walked out of my relationship long ago if I would not have been married, but marriage to me represents a more serious commitment than living together (just my own personal viewpoint, for me, not others), and I'm a stronger, better, and happier person because I did not walk out.

Others may be able to form a strong bond of commitment without a marriage certificate, and that's fine too. Really it's all about commitment, however you define it, and whatever it will take to get you to do everything within your power to not walk out on a relationship that is having difficulties.

I got in trouble for just reading this thread. :(
I guess I'll have to start sneaking my gardenweb fix.

Sorry, folks, not sure how a discussion of commitment or lack of it is helpful to the OP in dealing with her current circumstances.

Jen, you indicate that you are meeting with a lawyer; I second the advice of those who have recommended that you meet with a good family law attorney as soon as possible. While the laws where I live are undoubtedly different from where you are (different country), please make sure you have good legal information about the rights of co-habiting partners - whether married or not. In some cases, if a partner can prove that he/she contributed to the household (utilities, household expenses), etc., they may have a claim to the assets, whether that be your home, savings, retirement, etc.
HTH.

You know, this is the third time in two days that people (me, I guess) have gotten slammed from others for participating in a discussion that is not directly related to one of the threads.

In my experience on internet forums, conversations may get diverted a bit from the original post. Certainly this has happened many times to conversations I've started, and I don't take it personally when this happens, or assume that it's personally meant as a response to my situation in particular -- it's just human nature for conversations to digress in various directions.

If we are not supposed to say anything that isn't "directly" helpful to the OP or "directly" related to the OP's particular problem, then maybe the moderator should put a cap on the maximum number of responses allowed to a thread. Certainly a thread with 30+ responses has allowed for a sufficient number of people to respond to the OP's problem.

I personally think that these forums are set up so that others can use information too, not just the OP. It's a discussion forum. People can take away what they want from it, and ignore what they don't.

If I were your BF, I'd claim to be a squatter there for 10 yrs. Hopefully he won't try that! Keep us updated but only when this is over with of course.

What was dumb, and I'm sure the OP agrees, was buying the house together,

I'm not so sure that was dumb, and I'm not sure the OP would agree that it was.

It's more than possible that, at the time, whatever it is that has soured the relationship, didn't exist. Or was not that huge a deal. (of course it's also possible she ignored warning signs, since sometimes people do, but that would just be making things up, frankly).

I'm w/ akkw on thinking these "you're off topic" posts are not quite kosher. This forum is a democracy; conversations go where they will. And I'm sure it's frustrating to an OP to have lots of conversation and little help, and painful sometimes when that conversation seems to (or does) cast judgment, it's still just what forums are.

You have to have a slightly thick skin; you have to be willing to let the conversation go where it will.

The OP has gotten a lot of good advice (mostly lots of people saing the same thing), several sets of good wishes, some cautions, some support, and yes, some negative judgment.

That's just forums.

She came prety close to saying it was. I don't necessarily think that unrelated people buying a house together is dumb, but when one party provides the downpayment and makes most of the mortgage payments, problems are almost certain to develope.

Hi, OP here. My apologies.

ItÂs my fault the topic diverted.

I honestly did not mean for this topic to go the way it has. I understand that marriage vs. co-habitation is a heated issue. EveryoneÂs situation is different. It really is.

My way is not the only way, and neither is yours.

Hopefully my story will be a reality check for some.

If I knew how to delete this post, I would.

I am sorry your feel that your post needs to be deleted. I thank you for the reality check about buying property with someone with whom you do not have a legal tie. I learned something about that situation by reading here, and hope to learn more when you return from the lawyer and fill us in. I hope the conversation going astray did not hurt your feelings, I know that opinions that say you shouldn't have done what you did can be hurtful, but I hope you were not hurt by them. We all have seen people give their $0.02 worth when not asked for an opinion. People seem to forget sometimes that the thread is tied to a person, the OP, and that opinions can sound accusatory or hurtful. I support you in posting about your situation and in living your life the way that made sense to you. I hope things will work out for you, and I hope you will both tell us how you are doing and allow us to give you emotional support in this difficult time.

Maybe I will change my mind in the future, but for now I will move forward with the "what's mine is mine, what's yours is yours" attitude. There are NO garantees in life. I never want to be legally bound to anyone ever again...by marriage, real estate or otherwise.

My current husband was the same way. He never wanted to marry again. Eventually, when the hurt wears off you too may change your mind. These days, to even last 10 years is against the odds. A lot can happen in 10 years, people change, married or not. Hopefully, you won't lose a lot & hopefully you can recover from this financially.

Hi, OP here. My apologies.
ItÂs my fault the topic diverted.
I honestly did not mean for this topic to go the way it has.

Waking up this morning and reading the latest input, taking in everyone's views on marriage / non marriage. There is a lot of great feedback. No one knows what happened with your relationship, hopefully not being married will be to your advantage.

I am 3 times married myself, 1st time too young, 2nd too blind, 3rd much older & wiser. I've seen a lot in my 40 years, people change whether you have that piece of paper or not. Trying to work through things depends on what the situation is. Should I have tried to work out marriage 1? No. Marriage 2 - staying wasn't an option - verbal abuse turned to physical abuse. Currently 8 years that I'm with my husband. He's a good guy, more so then my other choices. He has his moments, some how we've worked through some really rough times. It wasn't that piece of paper that made me stay, being disabled & having no income has made me stick it out. After almost divorcing a few times we're doing really well.

It isn't at all clear to me how the OP would be in a better position if she and the BF had married. If anything, their finances would be even more entangled.

I have to agree. Divorce #2 for me was costly. Doing a google of Connecticut divorce law, it may be to the OP's benefit that she was not married...

Division of Marital Property - Connecticut is referred to as an "all property equitable distribution state." In Connecticut, the Court has the power to "assign to either the husband or wife all or any part of the estate of the other." Conn. Gen. Stats. § 46b-81. Any property, therefore, regardless of when or how acquired, can be re-distributed by the Court.

Conn doesn't recognize common law, so that's a plus. I'm interested to hear what the attorney says.

Here is a link that might be useful: Connecticut Divorce

Just for future reference of anybody reading. When nonrelated people buy a house together, they should put together a contract specifying what happens in when certain events occur.

I've read about this before, plus I have a friend who received downpayment aid from another friend to buy his house. They have a contract specifying percentages of ownership, how proceeds are divided when selling it, etc. My friend is the only one living there, but they also split the mortgage payment.

I hope someday we'll find out how the OP fairs in all this.

Here's an article on the subject.

Here is a link that might be useful: Tribune Article

All the above statements about marriage and commitment are EXACTLY why it's wrong and unfair for same-sex partners to be legally unable to marry. There's no reason for it; they can be just as committed (or not) as hetero couples, and yet they're treated differently.

It used to be considered sick and wrong for people of different races to marry; nowadays no one would dare question Derek Jeter's or Halle Berry's parents. Some day, it will be the same for gays.

To the OP: if the BF's name is on the mortgage, but not the deed, then hopefully it won't be too hard to straighten out.

To follow on clg7067's good advice above... I've owned my house with my partner for 5 years. We signed a tenant-in-common agreement that outlines all the terms of our ownership, to protect us both in case something unforeseen happens. If anyone is considering this, you can find a sample legal document to use on lawvantage.com, and you don't need to pay a lawyer to do it for you.

And, just to add my two cents on the discussion of commitment above... I really wouldn't want to be with someone who stayed with me only for legal reasons.

This sort of reminds me of the movie Breaking Up.

Hopefully its not too off topic to bring this topic of marriage around to lessons learned in big finanacial decsions such as the OP's.
I don't think she's necessarily any better or worse off for not being married or being single. Its just a situation with certain legal technicalities. Would marriage really have protected her investment in the case of divorce? Is it really never buy anything with a boyfriend?
My ex-BIL is going through an incredibly hard divorce - his soon to be ex has vowed to take him for everything she's got. And she can. By forcing him to sell all his farm assets (lots of land and equipment, barns, the house etc.) and split the proceeds - he'll never be able to get even most of that back at a price he can afford. She has stated "I'll see to it you'll never farm again". He's 60. What else is he going to do? I don't think he's better off in this situation for having been married. Nor is the OP in some better situation for not - she's still financially tied, divorce would make it different, not necessarily easier or harder. Some divorces may be more amicable.
So all sugar and personal accounts of how wonderful marriages are aside - any time you enter into a financial arrangement with anyone - even direct blood family, parents, siblings - you can end up in personal, emotional and financial hell. Happens all the time to all sorts. You never know when its going to happen. That's just life and the way it is. Their are no guarantees. Some people take the risk and keep on taking them. Some people decide not to, long term or short term. Its all just people. Saying that your sad because someone has decided to, at least for the time being, be financially independent is sort of judgmental.
Evaluating financial risk when emotions are involved is hard - maybe the lesson learned here is to seek objective advice. Perhaps some sort of family law attorney could have been used when buying the property together and come up with various clauses and stipulations for possible situations.
I think particularly for those who may be in a position to offer advice to family members in the future - people often don't listen to family and friends about finances vs. love. Maybe just try to convince someone to go to a lawyer.

OP- is there any update? How did your appt with the lawyer go?

Someone mentioned the tenant in common thing upthread. When we bought this house, our realtor asked us how we wanted the title registered even though we're married - tenant in common or right of survivorship (I think that's what it's called). The latter means that we own the house equally and can't sell it from under the other. I believe Tenant in common is a specified percentage of ownership. You will be very lucky if he's not on the title.

So, can you provide us an update?

When the OP said that she wanted the BF out of the house--I thought initially that there was issue of threat there---
if she is afraid of him and his reaction, she needs to know that she has legal recourse by calling the police in her area---
if he has threatened her physically or verbally--that is legally wrong--no matter who owns the house or whose name is on the title, married or not...

Depending on the situation, she can have him legally removed from the home by court order--of course that is expensive and would certainly heighten the hostility already there...but no one--woman or man--should have to live with someone who scares them...