Matrimonial home and now nothing ?

B

bestway21

New member
Asking for a friend , home built on inherited land , lived in for 20yrs , apparently the wife has willed the home to the children , what about the husband ? does he have no right to this home ? the deed is in her name
I can't understand how she can now demand the house be sold and he walk away with nothing ? any idea of how this would be looked upon in court
 
bestway21 said:
Asking for a friend , home built on inherited land , lived in for 20yrs , apparently the wife has willed the home to the children , what about the husband ? does he have no right to this home ? the deed is in her name
I can't understand how she can now demand the house be sold and he walk away with nothing ? any idea of how this would be looked upon in court
Click to expand...

did she have the house and land before they married?

How long were they married?
 
bestway21 said:
Asking for a friend , home built on inherited land , lived in for 20yrs , apparently the wife has willed the home to the children , what about the husband ? does he have no right to this home ? the deed is in her name
I can't understand how she can now demand the house be sold and he walk away with nothing ? any idea of how this would be looked upon in court
Click to expand...


There’s two different things here:

1. She is willing the house to the kids.

2. She is demanding it be sold.

What you haven’t provided is this info: is she dying? Are they getting divorced? Were they married or common law? Is your friend concerned about getting a share or simply that if she dies they get nothing?

All of those answers help answer the two questions.
 
Sorry about that
1. Married 25yrs
2. She is demanding the house be sold and he is still living in it , she moved out

My friend is telling me she is saying he gets nothing . She is in complete control of the situation as the home is in her name.
 
She may think she is in control of the situation because the house is in her name. She is mistaken. Family law trumps that. It is considered the matrimonial home and as such he is entitled to a portion of the equity. He needs a lawyer to figure out what he is owed as part of equalization.

As for willing it to the kids. She can only will her portion of the matrimonial home to go to the kids, not his portion. He will get his share of the sale of the home when it sells. He needs a lawyer to advise him.
 
Stillbreathing said:
She may think she is in control of the situation because the house is in her name. She is mistaken. Family law trumps that. It is considered the matrimonial home and as such he is entitled to a portion of the equity. He needs a lawyer to figure out what he is owed as part of equalization.

As for willing it to the kids. She can only will her portion of the matrimonial home to go to the kids, not his portion. He will get his share of the sale of the home when it sells. He needs a lawyer to advise him.
Click to expand...


This.

If the house was built during their marriage then it is split between them. The equalization exercise will outline the value of ALL assets (and liabilities) on the date of marriage and also on date of separation.

She would need an order to have it sold. Your friend may want to also see about getting a mortgage to buy her out.

As for her will, she would be stupid yo redo her will now as she will need to do a new one when the divorce is settled.
 
What Rocksan said plus...if she owned the home and it was already built when they married, she gets the value of the home on the date of marriage( minus any mortgage )...maybe. The equity built up in the home from the date of marriage until their separation will be split 50/50.
 
She is not in complete control of the situation.

Your friend is allowing her to be in control. Your friend should see a lawyer (an initial consult for 30 mins is free, but a more in-depth consult is around $300) to understand their rights. I would recommend a collaborative lawyer to start. Before the meeting with the lawyer have the friend fill out a draft 13.1 and 13c. It will help them organize their thoughts. Also, get them into therapy. A therapist is cheaper than a lawyer and lots of lawyers are happy to charge $400+ an hour to listen to emotional ramblings. Use the lawyer for rights/financials and the therapist to vent. Don’t take legal advice from the therapist (I’ve seen it, eye roll).
 
Thank you all
The home was built together , she did not own the house prior to marriage , it was built for them and the children on land she inherited .
She never worked so it was his hard work that allowed for that home. She is a controlling person and feels entitled to everything . She recently sold another piece of land that was once again inherited and put that in her pocket.
Her way or no way . Yes a lawyer would be required and certainly he just needs to get tough !
 
The inherited land she sold and kept the profits of is completely legal. Inheritance is treated differently and is not a joint asset unless the partner intermingles it (by adding the spouse on the title or using joint money to maintain the asset.
 
tilt said:
The inherited land she sold and kept the profits of is completely legal. Inheritance is treated differently and is not a joint asset unless the partner intermingles it (by adding the spouse on the title or using joint money to maintain the asset.
Click to expand...

The presumption is that the matriomonial home will be split evenly. You cannot place it on the lists of assets you had when you were married, so it is difficult to get credit for it.
 
Janus, I agree about the matrimonial home. But the inherited land she sold and kept the profits is not the matrimonial home. There are two properties being discussed.
 
tilt said:
Janus, I agree about the matrimonial home. But the inherited land she sold and kept the profits is not the matrimonial home. There are two properties being discussed.
Click to expand...

Ah, missed that.

Inherited land that has been kept separate is not split at all. Thanks for the correction :)
 
Not if it was always kept separate. If she didn’t use joint funds to pay the property tax or maintenance, and always kept the deed title in her name it is excluded.
 
She never worked and he paid the bills including any property taxes on the inherited land that she has sold since .So yes he paid for things .
 
If she never worked then she had no access to money. Her not working is considered a joint decision since they didn’t seperate as soon as she was not working. So paying the property bills out of joint funds doesn’t automatically guarentee he is entitled to half, especially if she kept the deed in just her name.

I wouldn’t waste time pursuing the inherited land and instead focus on the solid case he has for an equal split of the matrimonial home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top