Getting a house threw a divorice And the wife dose not want to sign off WHat should i do?

Question

Hey how are you let me start off
My Name is matthew i saw that you answered a question for someone in yahoo about his landlord selling a house and i felt that your were very smart in that Area.

This is my Probleam
ME and my wife went to look at a house liked it the "for sell by owner" The seller was needing to get rid of the house b/f forcloser
We talked about a price and agreed on one and i asked what was the reason need to sell he said he had gotten a devorice and was stated that he sold an paid off the loan of the house. So we drew up a contract on the house and got a loan and set the closing come to find out he was not totaly devoriced yet and the the wife does not want to sign a waver to sell the house Just to be Mean and we have already Canceled a lease and got it all change over to the new adress As my Agent told us that it is at 100% on the house that we can go ahead and do this stuff. ANd my Agent told us that mybe we can Call her and talk to her But i was very confussed why we have to. My question being if this does not go threw b/c the wife does not want to Sign the waver can i sue her for all my lost cost?

I do thank you for your time in reading my letter and wish you a good weekend once agian thank you.

Matthew Garofalo

Answer 1

If you live in a 'community property' state regardless if she is on the deed or not she has property rights and must waive them before the property can be sold.

Wife has done noting except exercise her right.

Answer 2

I have to admit I am a bit confused about a few things. You indicated you found this house as a For Sale By Owner (FSBO) Now why do you have an agent involved?

Who is paying the agent you or the seller? I would think the seller is not because he was selling the property himself.

Now if you are paying the agent this is his/her job to smooth these legal things out and make this transaction close in a timely manner.

I am willing to bet you signed a contract with this agent, and he is now throwing his hands up saying there is nothing he can do. I am further willing to bet that when and if this trnasaction close he will want to and press for his commission. Your agent told you to call the women to try and get her to sign the sales contract.

Your agent should have found out if there was a legal signed sales contract before you took any action toward down payment or even making an offer on the property. You should fire this agent immediately for failure to perform a basic requirement of the sale.

The seller going through a divorce should have spelled out in his divorce decree that he is entitled to the property and under what circumstances he will have title to the property. So this is an issue he must take up with his attorney that assisted in his divorce.

The wife should not be asked to sign a waiver of the property she should be signing a deed.

Under no circumstances should you involve yourself in his divorce problems.

Basically you have no contract at all. I think you may sue the husband and real estate agent for non-performance since it is he that signed your contract and knew that his ex wife would need to sign the contract.

You should also check with a real estate attorney for advice. A consultant should not cost anything.

I hope that this has been of some use to you, good luck.

"FIGHT ON"

Answer 3

|The reason you must negotiate with the wife is because she is on the title and only a court order can force a sell if she refuses

you really have no case against the wife if she was never a party to the negotiations, which she should have been some what since it was clear she was on the title,

why did you agent draw up a contract when they knew full well at the point of the draft two people where on the title not matter what future promises where made

to find liability against the wife you would have to prove in a court that she intentionally is acting in bad faith to ruin a deal, versus she fells the selling price is low

may have a case against your agent at best

Answer 4

No, you can't sue her, as she did not sign the original contract, and therefore is not a party to the contract. You can sue the husband, though, since he did sign off on a fraudulent contract. I wouldn't recommend either, though.

I would have your Realtor try to talk to the wife, as it's partly his job and partly his fault that you're in this predicament. If he had looked at the ownership records, he would have known that she was still on the ownership of the home.

If she is not one of the owners of the home, then have an attorney speak to her (though she should not have to sign anything if she's not an owner of the home). If there is an agreement, signed off through the courts, where she is to sign off on the sale of the home, then you need to talk to the husbands attorney or the judge in the case and have one of them put the squeeze on her to sign the papers.

Answer 5

I wish I COULD tell you that. However, it would not be the truth. If the ex-wife-to-be's name is on the title, she will have to sign for you to take title. You can't sue HER, since she did nothing wrong, but you CAN sue the husband because the dimwit signed a contract of purchase which he is not able to fulfill. It was HIS job to insure that he was signing an appropriate contract.

Were I you, I would not contact the wife, since she is obviously hostile to this situation. However, you CAN advise the husband that you intend to sue for breach of contract if he cannot convince her to move forward. That might put a little bit more pressure on hubby to convince his wife.

Answer 6

Talk to your agent about this, he/she should have a lawyer that they work all legal issues with. This is what your agent should be doing to earn their commission--YOU ARE PAYING THEM! If the wife has not signed any contract, then, she is not held responsible for anything. It's the husband that you will have to go after. In any case, talk to your agent!

Answer 7

It makes no distinction in any admire if her call isn't on the deed. If she contributed funds in direction of the non-public loan, she's entitled to fairness in the homestead. you assert you acquire the homestead in 1996 yet have been purely married in 2004. which potential she's purely entitled to 0.5 of the fairness in the homestead from 2004 in the previous (or the date you separated if she stopped paying on the non-public loan at that factor). She's not entitled to fairness in the homestead pre-2004. Ohio is a separate assets state, yet you need to instruct evidence for all separate assets claims. Six years of fairness (and undergo in suggestions, she's purely entitled to *0.5* of those six years' well worth of fairness, by way of fact marital sources are 50/50) on a house won't be very lots funds, fairly conversing. in many cases in divorces, the place one party has to purchase the different out or pay out a bite of money in fairness, we try to tug it from yet another asset. the reason? maximum people have not got extremely a lot of money mendacity around. So we offset it from retirement money owed, etc. yet another selection is making funds each and each month. you will possibly be fantastically inventive in a separation settlement. And that is actual a good ingredient her call isn't on the non-public loan. It saves you the subject of attempting to get the homestead refinanced or attempting to artwork out an assumption mortgage inclusive of your lender. in case you have not have been given an lawyer stunning now, get one. those issues are only approximately consistently negotiated between the criminal experts.