this is in regards to a 50/50 ownership in a condo
2006-06-18 03:03:24 · 9 answers · asked by lona54 1 in Business & Finance ➔ Renting & Real Estate
Are they both on the title? there is no reason to have a second document if the title is in order.
2006-06-18 03:26:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whether or not the document is legal depends on the purpose of the document. If the purpose is to show that Person A owns 50% of the condo and Person B owns the other 50%, then the document is legal as it concerns the agreement between A and B.
But if you are using this document to show other people that A and B are the owners of the condo, then the document is legal only if it describes the condo accurately and is recorded in the county office where deeds are recorded. Only then is it considered as accurate notice to the public.
So if you are Person A and you are having a dispute with Person B about who owns what percentage of the condo, then the document you describe is most likely legal and will be controlling as long as both have signed it and as long as you are already listed as an owner on the deed. But if you are Person A and you are trying to convince a bank that you are one of the owners of the condo, then this document by itself won't do the job. You would have to be listed on a deed for the condo and that deed would have to be recorded in the county office.
2006-06-18 04:33:29 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What is the agreement? It should be legally binding but what is it that you signed? The most helpful document will be the title. Is your name on it? If it is do not quit claim it off! Please e-mail me w/ any questions I have been in the loan business for years. Other important docs will be the mortgage note on the property, the HUD from the closing and any proof of payment on the property that you have in your possession.
2006-06-18 03:08:25 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it is legally a document .... that has nothing to say, however, about the contents of it being legal and binding in any way. That would be up to a judge to decide if push came to shove.
2006-06-18 03:08:23 · answer #4 · answered by sam21462 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
not necessarily. if the deal has substantial value then i think it should be on a bond of certain value. not the expert here but the law would want the deal to have taken place in a legal environment (so to speak) which demands some more paperwork. Otherwise nations could have been sold in a coffee shop!!! :) Better get more experts on this please.
2006-06-18 03:09:38 · answer #5 · answered by Capndon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As long as all conditions stated in the contract are legal, then the contract is binding and legal.
2006-06-18 03:09:21 · answer #6 · answered by A R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes that is why it is signed and notarized.
2006-06-18 03:31:45 · answer #7 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes that is a leagally binding contract
2006-06-18 03:07:03 · answer #8 · answered by babyfeary 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes it is
2006-06-18 04:58:26 · answer #9 · answered by bnbnbnb123 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋