Getting the house instead of payments... Thoughts?

[torontonian]

I'd love to get our situation resolved after over a year in court. How would you react to an offer of getting the whole house instead of equalization and spousal support (can be roughly equated, if counting about 30 years of SS to come - long term marriage, SS entitlement). That would allow us to be free and move on without more court, legal fees, nitpicking on equalization etc... I welcome any input... Thanks

[ddol1]

boy to not have to worry about your ex makin payments!!!! Actually the bulk buyout is frowned on because later down the road the recipient gets into some really serious financial pinches and then it is back to court to get more support because it wasn't enough to begin with - just sayin but that is the arguement but on the table 9 out 10 times

[torontonian]

Yep - Freedom from mental Ex = priceless!! Ex's last offer was so devious in trying not to pay SS properly that it made me rethink the whole process... What I am really worried about is whether ex can even accept the concept of letting the MH go to me... Anyone having more of a personal experience??

[Tayken]

Originally Posted by torontonian

Yep - Freedom from mental Ex = priceless!! Ex's last offer was so devious in trying not to pay SS properly that it made me rethink the whole process... What I am really worried about is whether ex can even accept the concept of letting the MH go to me... Anyone having more of a personal experience??

Often done and a good solution. I would recommend it. But, it would be a one time payment of SS and generally they will want the agreement / order written in a way that you can never come back on a change in circumstance on SS. If you are prepared to do that... Why not offer it?

Good Luck!
Tayken

[hadenough]

Is the home paid off? So you are considering offering that if he (ex) signs over title to you of the MH, that you will not seek SS? Is that correct?

Sounds like a good idea but ofcourse it depends also on what if any, shared debts there are. What I'm getting at is that if there are shared debts, lines of credit etc - then something to be very careful of is that once he's signed over title to you (all through lawyers etc) that he does not then turn around and file for personal bankruptcy. This is what happened to me - only my house was not paid off. So basically, any/all secured creditors began to pursue me once he filed bankruptcy. Any transfer of title with a bankruptcy that follows (mine did it 6 months later) can be attacked as a fraudulent conveyance or a "preference" given to former spouse over Creditors.

Barring all of that - it's a good idea I think. I certainly didn't realize at the time that title was transferred to me, that I was being basted in preparation for becoming the sacrificial lamb in his plot. His bankruptcy is total fraud and is still before the Bankruptcy Courts. Its been 4 years of that (as well as Family Court). The Bankruptcy matter will wrap up soon I am told. I am still in a conundrum from all of that. One which I'm still not sure how to get out of. Good Luck.

[hadenough]

PS: *formal* offers to settle on your part will put you in an advantageous position providing that they are fair and reasonable - whether he goes for it, or not. The Courts will see that you attempted a formal resolution in order to not drag this out any further and incur both sides more legal costs/time.

[torontonian]

Thanks for the input - yes, MH vs all payments (SS, equalization etc)...
House is paid off, no debts...
Formal offers have been exchanged, mine reasonable, theirs got my lawyer to shake her head.... So no worries there.
I just want to float the idea to ex to see if the concept is acceptable...
It will be made as tight as needed for future consideration.
Thanks!

[Rioe]

I think it's a great idea in principle, because the connection is severed and you can both move on without ever having to be financially linked.

In practice, however, it may be hard to do. Lump sum spousal, which is basically what this is, isn't always desired, because there isn't a tax break for it like there is with monthly spousal support, and also because there isn't a possibility of a lesser amount overall, if, say, you die unexpectedly.

Also, depending on the other assets being equalized, it may not leave him with enough money remaining to get a new house for himself. That alone may make him balk.

So you basically want to make it sound like as advantageous a deal as possible for him. Figure out the math, and make it look good. Give up $100,000 in house now, to avoid paying $200,000 over the next thirty years. Is he the type who would take a $1m lottery payout now vs a $2m payout spread over 20 years? It might be harder to convince him he'd want to do this to save money in the long run.

Good luck!

[torontonian]

Exactly my concerns, the ex will have nothing but an outstanding stable salary which would allow plenty for a mortgage - that is, if the concept of starting from scratch is palatable.... not sure the logical will override the emotional...
In my calculations, I looked at my after-tax numbers, so that should be OK for the ex as well. I think the IDEA of giving me monthly cheques is way worse for the ex than saving on income tax. The ex also wants to re-marry, so I'm hoping this will be the carrot?
Thanks for the advice

[torontonian]

"there isn't a possibility of a lesser amount overall, if, say, you die unexpectedly."
Thanks Rioe - I actually never had considered that aspect, I only had planned around the Ex' demise!!! LOL...