What happens to our home?

[Anonymous]

You may want to keep an eye on your husbands lawyer if you guys aren't sharing.  The problem with this setup will possibly prevent him from buying a home for a long time because his approval may be based on his obligation to the loan you guys share.   If I were him I would stand firm on you refinancing or moving out and selling two years from now if you are late on a payment he is late on a payment.    Either way good luck and I hope all works out well. 

[creditchild]

The problem is going to come when both of you decide to move on(other relationships) its more

to a divorce than just a house. i wish the both of you luck.

Be Careful This Can Come Around And Bite You!

[brownee]

Thanks, everyone.  Just to be clear, I don't mind refinancing and taking him off the mortgage because I know it will affect his credit just like mine. I'm just not sure if refinancing can happen since the income we originally bought the house on will be cut in half.

We haven't gotten lawyers yet, and I didn't know you could share one. That would be great, right? That way there is no one fighting against what needs to happen, I guess.

[GregB]

Depending on your location, either party hiring their own attorney could end any hope of doing this fairly. Hiring ONE attorney to do this according to what is best for both of you is ideal but there are some potential problems. We need to start with the info for your state of residence and if you are both staying in that state.

[brownee]

We're in Tennessee.

[GregB]

That is way out of my area and the laws could be quite different in TN.

Here, if one party hires an attorney he is required by ethics to work only for the interest of that party. That means the other person needs an attorney also. They love this since they get to charge by the hour and spend lots of the couples money. It can get ugly as most attorneys want to protect themselves by litigating as much as possible. If they settle anything, they can be more open to malpractice suits. If they litigate all issues, then the judge has made the decision.

It is a horrible system designed to be "fair" by making the attorneys a bunch of money as the assets of the couple are destroyed. Once they get you signed up, they figure they will get paid even if all your assets are gone, including the house. Either attorney is allowed to force the sale of the house to get paid even if that means the equalization is totally unbalanced because of that.

If you can hire ONE attorney for both, then everything can become more fair since he is working toward that goal. This isn't as profitable for them since you won't waste a bunch of money. Therefore it might be more difficult to find someone that will work that way. One of the problems with this procedure is that settlement negotiations are not binding so you can settle 99% of it and disagree on the final item and then have to start over. If you can agree on items as you go and make binding agreements that cover that  issue then you can be sure that you don't have to go back and litigate that issue. You need to check and see if that system works where you are.

If you can make an agreement on everything, you could save a bunch of money. It is a very valuable goal but hard to accomplish.

I know that here, your attorney would not allow you to refinance the house in order to get your husband off the loan. That would be a condition that the court would never force on you. He would stay on the loan but be removed from the deed. If he wanted to buy a house, he would then need to show that you are making all payments so that it is not included in his expenses. You should make sure that all payments are coming from your bank account in the meantime. If you don't litigate then you are free to make any agreements that make sense to the two of you.

If you can figure this out before either of you hires an attorney, this could be much better for all three of you.