Direction Please

[zero]

My common law partner and I have agreed to seperate/breakup. We currently have a property together. We have agreed that I give her X amount of dollars which would be approx. 1/2 of the equity in the house if we were to sell. I have a put alot of hard work into the house over the last 5 years and would not like to see my investment go for not. My problem is she is on the title and I would like to have her removed from it and in return remortgage in order to pay said amount. I feel it is a fair trade as she would not be able to afford the house herself. I have paid all expenses related to the house since day 1 including the downpayment. I have also paid all other expenses asking her for nothing. This includes paying off a few of her gambling debts. ( I don't want to bring stuff like gambling up, but it shows where I am coming from) We would like to stay out of court if at all possible.
How do I go about taking her off the title?
Am I out in left field?

[Mominneed]

I'm no expert but I wanted to respond anyway - so take it for what it is...

Doesn't matter who paid what during the relationship - debts, household expenses etc. I'm assuming common law is the same as marriage rules...Matrimonial home is 50/50 regardless of who paid down payment, mortgage, maintenance costs. So as far as I know, you should be buying her out for 50% of the current equity. Any other assets/debts accumulated during the relationship would be 'equalized'.

It's possible to transfer title - lawyers would need to be involved to draw up the papers for her to sign over. Assuming you would qualify to re-finance, you've got no problems. i suggest you first visit the bank to find out if you qualify - not sure how it would work to "refinance" for a larger mortgage amount versus just assuming the mortgage as it was. may be some more costs through the bank for this but they can detail this for you. Next, contact a lawyer who deals in real estate transactions about transfering title and costs to do so. Don't think it would be difficult at all but it'll cost you and you'll likely be responsible for all of the costs for this.

Hope it helps!

[AtALoss]

As to what a bank would do. with no extenuating cirumstances a court would handle it as such: say you had a 100,000 mortgage. You have managed to pay off 25,000, that is your joint equity. So 12,500 would be owing to her according to the 50-50 law. You could remortgage for the 75 + the 12,500. The 75 would go to paying out the old mortgage balance. and the new mortgage would be 87,500. Now something to discuss between both of you first and then if need be the bank next is any debt. ie credit cards etc that we all have these days. You could also address those in the remortgaging. if the debt load is not too high and your financially ok enough a bank may consider rolling in all of that. It may cut back on the amount she would recieve but if it is a chance to start over again it may be worth the inquiry. It really would depend on your situation and the bank. I know myself I went to another bank and borrowed to pay of debt and they allowed it but our house didnt get settled til 4 yrs later. So each situation is unique and banks do appreiciate when we talk with them because they know we all go through these life changes. Good luck to you both though and keep trying to do this as amicably as you can, saves alot of heart ache.

[zero]

Thanks for your help, that will be the only debt. My whole life I have tried to do the right thing and I will willingly accept the other debt as my own so as not to create any sort of financial burden for her as it would be in my opinion indirectly taken out on our kids.

[Mess]

To correct what Mominneed brought up, common law is nothing to do with marriage rules for property. There is no matrimonial home and there is no equalization of personal assets. Anything in your name stays in your name, anything in her name stays in her name. Any assets including the house would be split only if they were jointly held. You have a case to make for the bulk of the value of the property since she invested nothing into it. You have to decide if it is worth persuing. Her response will be that the house was put into both names out of an intention that it be equally owned. Your case would be that she is unjustly enriched if she receives half the value after investing nothing. It could possibly cost you more in legal fees than you would save from a 50/50 split. You have to decide if it is worth it, but yes you do have a case.

[tugofwar]

Originally Posted by Mess

unjustly enriched

Mess, does that just apply to common-law? Can it pertain to a separating couple that were married?

[Mess]

I have heard it referred to when it was a very short marriage and then one partner wants to make a full claim for half the mat home, and it was fully paid for going into the marriage. I don't remember how it turned out.