Quote:
Therefore the value should not be included in her NFP from before marriage. So neither of your assets at the time of marriage should include any of the value of this home.
OrleansLawyer - This is not correct. While the home was a matrimonial home, because it was sold (or otherwise disposed of) prior to separation, the value of the home on the marriage date may be included as marriage date assets.
Case law - CanLII - 1999 CanLII 787 (ON CA)
I debated this going to a new thread - or more so being very similar to what is being discussed in the OP's circumstance - I left here to add to this thread - I hope this was right:
I am sorry but this has me real baffled, read this limnk several times.....not a good day but if understood, this really is significant..... In simple terms:
If the MH at the date of marriage is sold (which otherwise would meet the exception in that the value of the MH shall allways be divided 50/50) but is this correct??? A MH on the date of marriage which would otherwise fall under the rules for a MH, no longer meets the condition, of the MH, and thus the rules that apply to MHs, once it was sold during the marriage? The proceeds from the sale of this first home became the property of the husband as he was the 100% owner and finally, 100% of the value goes to the husband at least on his net family property calculations?
So my question is: The home which this couple bought together prior to, but was owned on the date of marriage, is the MH and as such, then split 50/50 as to the value of this home on the date of marriage regardless of who paid what of the downpayment and later of the mortgage to pay it off. If this is understood, when the house which was the MH on the date of marriage would be sold during the marriage - the cash proceeds no longer hold the special treatment that the MH offers?
This has been brought up softly in the past, What if the proceeds from the first home was used to buy a second then a third all increasing in value but this third house was sold for (Say $500,000), for the purpose of downsizing, the final home was then purchased for $300,000. How would the remaining $200,000 be treated? Would it loose the MH status thus allowing the return of funds as verbally agreed prior to using the money from which would have otherwise been excluded money (arising from a lump sum payment as a result of my accident/injury years earlier) to pay off the mortgage, eliminate the high interest rates and aside form the ex now developing admesia to (not only this but every single financial detail of our 25 year marriage), this agreement we had before hand, which was to return the money to my retirement savings when either the house was sold and downsized or through increased income which never occurred.
The money trail is really clear from the disability money which was to go to my retiirement savings (as had each bulk non-income payment came my way as a result of my accident/disability over the last twenty years - went to fund my retirement) but now went to the final mortgage - temporarily as agreed before the money transfer. A year later the house was sold and downsized and she returned the money to my seperated retirement savings account and in fact she put the entire sale proceeds into my seperate account. Is there any claim to the return of at least the amount of our original agreement?
Is this what the posted CANLII link implies as far as how the teatment of the MH is concerned, how it was bought, sold, re-invested in the next home which would then become the new MH and finally should it be sold - the final home that was occuppied becomes the actual MH at seperation?
Therefore the value should not be included in her NFP from before marriage. So neither of your assets at the time of marriage should include any of the value of this home.
OrleansLawyer - This is not correct. While the home was a matrimonial home, because it was sold (or otherwise disposed of) prior to separation, the value of the home on the marriage date may be included as marriage date assets.
Case law - CanLII - 1999 CanLII 787 (ON CA)
I debated this going to a new thread - or more so being very similar to what is being discussed in the OP's circumstance - I left here to add to this thread - I hope this was right:
I am sorry but this has me real baffled, read this limnk several times.....not a good day but if understood, this really is significant..... In simple terms:
If the MH at the date of marriage is sold (which otherwise would meet the exception in that the value of the MH shall allways be divided 50/50) but is this correct??? A MH on the date of marriage which would otherwise fall under the rules for a MH, no longer meets the condition, of the MH, and thus the rules that apply to MHs, once it was sold during the marriage? The proceeds from the sale of this first home became the property of the husband as he was the 100% owner and finally, 100% of the value goes to the husband at least on his net family property calculations?
So my question is: The home which this couple bought together prior to, but was owned on the date of marriage, is the MH and as such, then split 50/50 as to the value of this home on the date of marriage regardless of who paid what of the downpayment and later of the mortgage to pay it off. If this is understood, when the house which was the MH on the date of marriage would be sold during the marriage - the cash proceeds no longer hold the special treatment that the MH offers?
This has been brought up softly in the past, What if the proceeds from the first home was used to buy a second then a third all increasing in value but this third house was sold for (Say $500,000), for the purpose of downsizing, the final home was then purchased for $300,000. How would the remaining $200,000 be treated? Would it loose the MH status thus allowing the return of funds as verbally agreed prior to using the money from which would have otherwise been excluded money (arising from a lump sum payment as a result of my accident/injury years earlier) to pay off the mortgage, eliminate the high interest rates and aside form the ex now developing admesia to (not only this but every single financial detail of our 25 year marriage), this agreement we had before hand, which was to return the money to my retirement savings when either the house was sold and downsized or through increased income which never occurred.
The money trail is really clear from the disability money which was to go to my retiirement savings (as had each bulk non-income payment came my way as a result of my accident/disability over the last twenty years - went to fund my retirement) but now went to the final mortgage - temporarily as agreed before the money transfer. A year later the house was sold and downsized and she returned the money to my seperated retirement savings account and in fact she put the entire sale proceeds into my seperate account. Is there any claim to the return of at least the amount of our original agreement?
Is this what the posted CANLII link implies as far as how the teatment of the MH is concerned, how it was bought, sold, re-invested in the next home which would then become the new MH and finally should it be sold - the final home that was occuppied becomes the actual MH at seperation?
Comment