| EZmark |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 02:16 PM |
| 76.110.222.166 |
Preventative Measures
|
I hope this thread gets added to and stays current.
If you are a man and divorce you are most likely to lose posession/equity in your house to your wife. If you have kids it's almost garunteed, they and the house go with her 92% of the time. Here's how you could avoid it.
Unless she put up half the down payment and makes half the mortgage payments, keep it in your name only!!! Doing anything else is a huge mistake!!!
If necessary tell her that dower rights and common law will garuntee her half or more of the equity anyway. That's true. It's also true that you will only be able to take a loan against the property without her agreement if she is not on the title, and she will not be able to run up debts and expose the house to her creditors. You may need money to fight her or survive and she may cut your access in numerous ways. To name a few.
It's not dissapation if three or more years before you plan to divorce you take out 30 year equity loan against the property to it's full value. If it's already in both names it will be difficult to get her her to sign for a loan unless she thinks it's going to benefit her so intimate she will get the blah blah she's always wanted, pull out money for better quality of life, whatever you have to. Place the funds in an offshore interest bearing account in a country listed by the state department website as not having a uniform family court extradition agreement. You can make payments on the loan with the funds you've sequestered without impacting your paycheck, just make sure never to make a paper trail between that account and your everday life. Cash out of that account and cash in elsewhere. Despite the fact that anything over three years prior isn't considered dissapation it doesn't look good. If the marriage works out you'll have a tidy sum of savings someday, and if divorce happens there will be nothing for her to grab from the house.
| Jada |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 03:26 PM |
| 69.115.64.195 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
You said:
I hope this thread gets added to and stays current.
My response:
Only happy to point out the flaws in what you wrote.
You said:
Unless she put up half the down payment and makes half the mortgage payments, keep it in your name only!!! Doing anything else is a huge mistake!!!
My response:
A house that is bought during the marriage is marital property. Even if it is just in one person's name. You can't avoid dividing up the equity by doing this. And a judge CAN order the deed to be signed over to the other spouse if the spouse gets the house in the divorce.
You said:
If necessary tell her that dower rights and common law will garuntee her half or more of the equity anyway. That's true.
My response:
Or the house in its entirety. Both spouses are co-owners of the house regardless of whose name is on the deed.
You said:
It's also true that you will only be able to take a loan against the property without her agreement if she is not on the title, and she will not be able to run up debts and expose the house to her creditors. You may need money to fight her or survive and she may cut your access in numerous ways. To name a few.
My response:
You mean, like you are describing in your post?
You said:
It's not dissapation if three or more years before you plan to divorce you take out 30 year equity loan against the property to it's full value. If it's already in both names it will be difficult to get her her to sign for a loan unless she thinks it's going to benefit her so intimate she will get the blah blah she's always wanted, pull out money for better quality of life, whatever you have to. Place the funds in an offshore interest bearing account in a country listed by the state department website as not having a uniform family court extradition agreement.
My response:
Do you really think that one can get away with that? The judge may not be able order access to those funds, but the judge CAN order more of the assets to the spouse who didn't pull that stunt to compensate for that.
And since it would just be the one spouse's name on the loan, guess who is going to end up being ordered to pay it off? Even if said spouse doesn't get the house.
You said:
You can make payments on the loan with the funds you've sequestered without impacting your paycheck, just make sure never to make a paper trail between that account and your everday life. Cash out of that account and cash in elsewhere. Despite the fact that anything over three years prior isn't considered dissapation it doesn't look good. If the marriage works out you'll have a tidy sum of savings someday, and if divorce happens there will be nothing for her to grab from the house.
My response:
Except half the amount that is in the offshore account. Just because you put it some place that a court can't touch doesn't mean that a court won't compensate the spouse who didn't cheat on the financial settlement.
As an aside, to anyone who is in the process of getting a divorce, ask your attorney what happens if you piss off the judge. Because if you do what the original poster suggests, you have a very good chance of doing just that.
| Samsung |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 03:30 PM |
| 75.163.21.105 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
Sorry, but none of what you wrote will work. One must use a proactive method, which is to marry an equal wage earner.
| EZmark |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 05:27 PM |
| 76.110.222.166 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
Equal wage earner would be a positive indication, but once divorce is in progress the women get the house, kids, CS etc. even when they make more than the Xhusband. Equal wage earner gets better lawyer and manipulates her financials. And that's just her playing by the rules.
Offshore only a suggestion, only point is that it is not visible, not accessible, and over three years old. Dissapation goes back three years. Let's say you give cash to a relative five years ago.
You MAY piss off the judge should you ever get to final hearing. 98% never make it there. Likely you will settle and have something to offer in negs or retain after getting railroaded. Maybe you could "borrow from a relative" and buy her out of alimony, buy more time with the kids, that "relative" could come in handy. Most lawyers don't want to go to court, especially with a man because they know the judge will probably be pissed off at both parties and especially the man at that point.
90% chance the house/equity will be given to her regardless, the lien will not dissappear. She can pay the loan and live there, sell it and satisfy the lein, or the bank will foreclose and get theirs. Give her what other assets? If there are no assets she can only take 65% of your paycheck. Adjust your income accordingly (another post). Sorry Jada, you can't squeeze blood from a rock no matter how bitter you are!
| Jada |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 06:43 PM |
| 69.115.64.195 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
You said:
90% chance the house/equity will be given to her regardless, the lien will not dissappear. She can pay the loan and live there, sell it and satisfy the lein, or the bank will foreclose and get theirs. Give her what other assets? If there are no assets she can only take 65% of your paycheck. Adjust your income accordingly (another post). Sorry Jada, you can't squeeze blood from a rock no matter how bitter you are!
My response:
The only problem with your scenario is that you suggested that one spouse just keep everything in his (and I am using a specific gender because you are) name.
Whose credit is going to be hurt more by a foreclosure?
BTW, his declaring bankrupcy won't clear his debt to his spouse. He will still have to pay that. And if he persists in not paying it, she can get a judgement against him and ask that it is automatically garnished from his wages.
No, no matter how bitter you are, you are not going to get away with what you are suggesting.
An FYI, the 65% is for child support only. And if the person gets behind on that or just doesn't pay, that person can go to jail. And they will continue to garnish the wages long after the child is emancipated. And if the state adds on interest, then it's going to take longer to pay it off and cost the person more.
Oh, and lowering income isn't going to work. States will impute income if it is a willing reduction in income.
| jbar |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 07:23 PM |
| 68.88.73.218 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
I have explained before here that the only sensible way to do this, at least in Texas, is to get a home equity loan secured by the house. The proceeds of this loan are community property, unless "one spouse waives their right to the community share of it, thereby making these proceeds exclusively the seperate property of the recipient". The way you sell this to her is by explaining that you want to spend this money on a good vacation together with her, and invest the rest so that "we can get a much better income", and that you don't want her to be responsible for any repayments of the loan. Think of the one place where she has always wanted to go.
All of this will sound great to her, and she won't be able to sign fast enough. You have now effectively converted all of the equity in your house into your own seperate property. The next thing you have to do is to PROTECT these assets from her and all other creditors. I would buy the specific gold coins (American quarter Eagles) which do not carry any reporting requirements to anyone, and U.S. solid silver dimes. Soon such things will be freely exchanged, as normal money, by every merchant. I would invest the remainder in untouchable Swiss annuities. Annuities are always untouchable, but Swiss annuities have added advantages. Spend any other money you may come into, on good times, as soon as you get it.
At some point you will receive Social Security benefits, and these are immune to any seizure or judgement of any court in the land, and are seperate property. You will also qualify for medicade--and long term care--after the waiting period has expired. If you had to go into long term care you might have to surrender the annuity payments, for the time that you are in the nursing home, but they would only be a fraction of the nursing home cost, anyway.
Any questions?
| EZmark |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 09:35 PM |
| 76.110.222.166 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
"I have explained before here that the only sensible way to do this, at least in Texas, is to get a home equity loan secured by the house."
>>That is exactly what I am saying but if you title the house in your name only you won't even have to tell her you're taking the loan, you just go to the bank and get the loan and sign the additional security note on the house. If done early enough it can't be presented as dissapation.
"Spend any other money you may come into, on good times, as soon as you get it."
>>Exactly, More great advice, enjoy life because you never know what tomorrow may bring, especially if you suspect divorce in the future. Set the status quo for your private lifestyle and put any savings in stuff for the kids only like prepaid college funds.
I'm not bitter, it could be worse for me. I just wish I was informed years ago. Hopefully some father reading this website miserably ready to get a divorce and thinking of getting justice will benefit by taking measures to prevent losing his house, children, savings, and income.
| jbar |
| (Platinum) |
| 05/04/08 11:25 PM |
| 68.88.73.218 |
|
Re: Preventative Measures
|
===========================================================
That is exactly what I am saying but if you title the house in your name only you won't even have to tell her you're taking the loan, you just go to the bank and get the loan and sign the additional security note on the house. If done early enough it can't be presented as dissapation.
===========================================================
If it is that simple in Florida, then go for it. In Texas you might have to do it more as I described, or the bank might not make you a loan if you are married, and you might be accused of "fraudulent conveyance" of the marital property in the loan. I know that here you cannot sell a house if you are married, even if it is titled in your name only, unless your wife signs a release of any claim of marital property. That is to say, the buyer can't get title insurance otherwise.
You know, you can freely discuss plans like these with a lawyer and, as long as you paid him for the consultation, he cannot divulge any of it to a third party under the attorney-client privileged relationship. The only exception to this is if your plans include any kind of violence or immediate theft or robbery. I wouldn't discuss this with a female attorney!
Good luck!