NFP Investment Property and Payout

[needadvice]

Good evening all,

I am new to this. However, have spent quite some time perusing.
I believe that I have an odd issue, would like to hear back about it.

When I was engaged to be married, we placed an offer on a piece of real estate for investment (rental property) which was closed after our marriage, only because we were going on a 4 week honeymoon.

When we arrived back from our honeymoon, we, or should I say "I" closed on the property. Meaning that; when signing at the Lawyers, my name was the only one needed to officially close and get the keys to the property.

I have been told that whatever properties were purchased after marriage belong to both parties. Is this right, especially pertaining to my situation? Keep reading!

Now, four years later we are in the process of separation.

As you may know there are two sides to the NFP, her possessions/debts and mine.

Could someone please tell me where this would lay? Being that the property is in my name?

As it stands right now, the property value is under my column only.

Best regards,
Needsadvice

[needadvice]

Good evening,

Just wondering if there are any professionals out there that could give me an answer on my questions above?

Thank you,
Needsadvice

[dadtotheend]

The propety belongs to who is on title. A marriage does not confer title rights.

[needadvice]

Thanks Dadtotheend.

So, what you're saying is that the property is mine? And, should be listed on my side of the NFP? This would be astonishing, considering some of the professionals I have spoken with.

If this is true then, the bank account that was set up for this property would also be on my side.

So there is no need to buy her out on this property based on my sole ownership? And, as well if I sell, she would not have to pay capitol gains on it.

In a way this is hurting me by having this property when it comes to being the sole owner on the NFP.

I guess this leads me to one more question. Now this may not make any difference. But here goes;
Does this mean that the property in question, should be in Table 4, Value of property excluded under subs 4(2) of the Family law act?.. or should it stay in the Table 1: Value of Assets owned on the valuation date?

I'm trying to find the real solution to this NFP. Because, the way it looks (which was prepared by my spouse's lawyer) I will be eating Kraft dinner for a while!

The propety belongs to who is on title. A marriage does not confer title rights.

[Rioe]

A lot of property sometimes ends up being legally owned by one spouse or the other on paper, but it's considered a marital asset. It sounds like this one was intended to be joint property, despite it being solely in your name, and was paid for jointly. It could just have easily been your ex that went to get the key that day and signed the documentation. So your ex is entitled to half the value upon equalization. You put it in your column to denote that it is currently in your name, but it's not excluded from equalization. Same with the associated bank account; if it is in your name, it goes in your column, but if it is a joint account, half the balance goes in each column.

If, during the equalization process, it's decided that you should end up with the property in question, you wouldn't have to do any paperwork, but your ex would get a greater amount of other assets. If your ex ends up with the property, there would be increased paperwork to transfer the deed, but you'd get more of the other assets. Or maybe you need more cash to finish the equalization and the property could be sold and the proceeds split according to your equalization needs.

[needadvice]

Thanks Rioe,

I appreciate your answer.