Property Issues/non-marital

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by ScubaDoo
Here's How:
Currently, common law marriages are recognized by: Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah and Washington, D.C.
Generally, there are four requirements for a valid common law marriage. Just living together isn't enough to validate a common law marriage.
Requirement One: You must live together.
Requirement Two: You must present yourselves to others as a married couple. Some ways of doing this are by using the same last name, referring to one another as husband or wife, and filing a joint tax return.
Requirement Three: Although the time frame is not defined, you have to be together for a significant period of time.
Requirement Four: You must intend to be married.
In the U.S., every state is Constitutionally required to recognize as valid a common law marriage that was recognized in another state.
The short of it....
Thank ya.. I figured it would vary for each stated but didn't know how.

 

[poniegirl]

All of the input (as well as the calm presentation!) is fantastic. I agree completely with the legal concensus.
My point of view is quite mixed.
On the one hand, to have a shared interest in real property, one should also have some equal risk. On the same hand, if a person works their living in a way that furthers another person's interests without accumulating anything on paper themselves...well.
That book is a great idea in this day, ScubaDoo.

 

[sepulatian]

Originally Posted by PonieGirl
All of the input (as well as the calm presentation!) is fantastic. I agree completely with the legal concensus.
My point of view is quite mixed.
On the one hand, to have a shared interest in real property, one should also have some equal risk. On the same hand, if a person works their living in a way that furthers another person's interests without accumulating anything on paper themselves...well.
That book is a great idea in this day, ScubaDoo.
May I ask why you are asking? As everyone has said, Moraly things should be equal but realistically things are not. If you are looking to buy a house with someone that you are not married to then it is still important to know where you stand legally because morals often go out the window in a breakup.

 

[poniegirl]

I am facing the realistic view of the situation, at this point. I guess I am not interested in taking a legal route. We can probably let it go with the statement that I don't have a lot of faith in our justice system, though I should at least see what precedence is. Oregon is not a common law state.
I haven't given up on the relationship, but this is a huge point of contention. Not to bore you good folks with dribble..It is a 10 year relationship with a 2 year old

[hr]
. I'm not willing to pay more into the household without some security for myself. It's that simple. Sort of a catch 22.
I just needed a bit of unbiased opinion. It feels important to me to know that others have the same point of view without the personal interest and without knowing what I wanted to hear.

 

[captainemo]

You could refinance the house, both be put on the note ,

[hr]
and title. However, you could have big problems later should one or both of you chose to leave. Or, have your partner give you a

[hr]
.
You really need to talk to an attorney in your state and in your county.

 

[renogaw]

the other thing you should worry about is your credit:
if you're name is not on the

[hr]
, and most likely on none of the bills (since most utilities go with the homeowner), your credit is going to suffer unless you have credit cards. a

[hr]
or a car payment is a great credit booster. of course, if the

[hr]
goes sour your credit will go with it.

 

[scubadoo]

Originally Posted by PonieGirl
I am facing the realistic view of the situation, at this point. I guess I am not interested in taking a legal route. We can probably let it go with the statement that I don't have a lot of faith in our justice system, though I should at least see what precedence is. Oregon is not a common law state.
I haven't given up on the relationship, but this is a huge point of contention. Not to bore you good folks with dribble..It is a 10 year relationship with a 2 year old

[hr]
. I'm not willing to pay more into the household without some security for myself. It's that simple. Sort of a catch 22.
I just needed a bit of unbiased opinion. It feels important to me to know that others have the same point of view without the personal interest and without knowing what I wanted to hear.
My girlfriend and I have one joint real estate investment...a cabin up in the monthains of NM
We both are on the

[hr]
and share EQUALLY in all costs. We have also covered things should one of us die in both wills. We also have a written agreement that should one of us decide they want out of the investment they will give the other written notice. THe other then has a time period to either purchase the others interest or inform him/her of their desire not to do so. An appraisal will be done at that time and the other will be bought out with a new

[hr]
. If the person receiving written notice does not wish to purchase the others interest the property will be sold.
This agreement will cover both of us should there be a split up.....as it does not matter.
Both parties have their investment protected even after death. We have willed our interest in both wills to each other should one of us die.

 

[wright824]

i don't know if this helps or not but, my husband (before he was my husband) had live with a woman and HER two children. They bought a house but it was only in his name. She worked and paid bills and they lived as a married couple for 9 years. He raised HER kids as if they were his own. No one would have guess they were not married. Some of the household bills were in her name. They split, He left told her she could stay in the house until she found somewhere to live, meanwhile he moved out. She cleaned out the house of everything, even his personal belongings. He decided to sell the house and she tried to claim half.. if didn't hold up. She got nothing. she even tried to get "spousal support and child support" claiming that they lived together for 9 years and he had supported her and her children...that didn't hold up either. He didn't get a dime for any of the things she took. They were considered community property and who ever had pocession of them owned them.. even HIS clothes! He was told that when he left he should have taken everything he wanted or get nothing, which is what happened. Bottom line is .. if it is not in your name it is not yours. don't ever expect a split of two partners to be nice and fair. once the anger is entered in people will do things you would never expect them to.

 

[poniegirl]

Thanks, All.
I appreciate the backing, it does help quite a bit.

 

[dogstar]

Just some more detailed thoughts....
I would first say that if the other partner does not seem to want to be fair about this, then perhaps it might be time to rethink the relationship anyway...I know this is easier said then done...I know it can be difficult, and its a decision that you must make for whats best for you, but come on...wheres the love ??
Depending on the amount that each pays out each month and if its close to being equal, then there should be no problem with each agreeing to have equal ownership of the house....if theres even a big difference in the amounts or there was a down payment or taxes or insurance thats not being considered, then a ' fair ' percentage could be worked in....and there should be some kind of a contract or get both names on the morgage to give both peace of mind and also to re-establish a trust toward each other....
I dont see any difference than if the house was in both names and both were paying half the morgage and half of the liveing expenses...both are still putting out the same amout of money...
If the one does not see this or theres a fear or already an understanding that that one does not want to do it or talk about it, then as I said...might be time to get out of the relationship befor theres even more money going into supporting the relationship.
I dont know how deep the trust goes, or if the other does not see or seem to care how this is effecting you........then it could have been the plan all along........ I dont want to sound like Im saying you have been foolish to agree to this because I understand how loveing and trusting someone can cause people to not think about these things, But I guess Im saying that I hope you dont end up being foolish about it from here on out....Might just think about cutting your losses and get out of the relationship with this person......
Just some thoughts....

 

[renogaw]

btw, there is also an issue with residency. my former boss'es ex wife moved into his apartment for a "temporary" stay. after about 6 months and because she got mail there, she was considered a resident of the apartment. he could not kick her out withough going through an eviction process. instead of doing so, he left the apartment, cancelled his contract, and the landlord was able to kick her out cause her name wasn't there.
so, even if your name isnt there on the

[hr]
, get your mail delivered there

 

[beth]

You know, its just point of view. The person who is not on the

[hr]
, also has no ties or financial obligations. They may view the contributions as "cost of living". They would pay rent if they were on their own, and still have no equity on property. In a situation like this, I sure would not put down large sums, such as for a down payment. If, on the other hand, the person feels like they should be an equal homeowner, and the the

[hr]
holder disagrees. Then, its time to rethink the relationship.

 

[sepulatian]

Ponigirl, I think I understand where you are comming from. I recently left my husband. We owned two businesses, a music store and an LFS (guess which one I was mostly a part of

) they were in the same building. I ran both of them. We split. People were telling me to go for the gold and get the businesses and the house. I am not like that. I told him he can have the store and I would keep the house. I was with him for 10 years. I was full owner of my lfs and half owner of the music store. I could legally have done a number on him, I chose not to. It all goes back to trust. I never touched a dime of two accounts that were fully accessible to me. I found out today when I stopped to get my mail that my sales taxes were due. I stopped at the store to give it to him (I was out of there the last day of December) He informs me that he has been ringing EVERYTHING under the music store. Including the LFS sales (same register). Let's just say that I had to do a little(legal) threatening and he is going to calculate what is owed in taxes for my store. He was going to claim ZERO sales for the lfs and put it all under the music store. Meanwhile I have allowed him to use my EIN to purchase the fish and supplies. I don't know what you know about the IRS, but all things have to ballance. In his stupidity he almost cost me a severe audit. I left the accounts open because of trust and it could have gotten me severe fines if not jail time for claiming zero sales when "I" bought all of this stuff. Trust only goes so far!!! Do NOT put your self in a situation where you will end up paying the bills on something that would not end up being yours. I tend to be too nice. I almost got screwed. Now I have to be the mean person and close my accounts and he will have to open new ones. It sucks, but I have been the nice girl for 10 years, and he still almost screwed me over. Just PLEASE cover your back. I knew the time was going to come some day and I needed a back up plan. In NY women usually get the house anyway (to you men, I do NOT agree with this "rule" but it is a sad but true fact in NY) I am not the kind of person that can just take. I had to have a plan in mind should things fail, which I knew they would (long story that I am not going to get into) Just please cover your back. If things work out then GREAT, if they do not then have a plan in mind.

 

[poniegirl]

Originally Posted by Beth
You know, its just point of view. The person who is not on the

[hr]
, also has no ties or financial obligations. They may view the contributions as "cost of living". They would pay rent if they were on their own, and still have no equity on property. In a situation like this, I sure would not put down large sums, such as for a down payment. If, on the other hand, the person feels like they should be an equal homeowner, and the the

[hr]
holder disagrees. Then, its time to rethink the relationship.
I quote this, Beth, because I think you truly hit it on the nose(s). Point of view and "risk" factors.
The fact is, I moved out of the house in question on January 14, just passed. With that fact in mind, I have explained my position to him (not giving up hope quite yet) and have been labeled greedy. At that point, I needed to know what someone thought who had no ties to the issue. You all are the only logical group of folks!
So, currently I am renting a 1/2 acre, old home where I can see and breathe. No equity here either.
I was there (paying my share for 8 years) before the house was purchased. He changed the oil, I did the tax returns. He has more expendable money, I have children, one in college.
It was not a home I could see spending my life in. Center of town, NO room. I did not think ahead to what it all would mean. But I can't see myself helping pay for a house that somewhere down the road, goes to his brother?
Greedy? Perhaps.
Not to gloat, but he is a bit concerned about keeping that boat afloat on his own.

 

[skipperdz]

however with civil cases nowadays the "non deed holder" could more than likely still get some sort of payout since they did pay utilities...at least get their portion back

 

[maxalmon]

I've seen several situations such as this over the years, Either one person has the financial means to put the money down on the property and feels somewhat "better than" the long therm partner or there are underlying trust issues, why else would a couple who have been together for many years not trust each other with having the name on the deed?
Perhaps one person has credit issues and the other does not, so it's a simple issue of interest rate to make the loan afforadable, if so then once the home closes then put the other persons name on the "Quit Claim Deed"

 

[scgator]

Poniegirl,
Is your name on ANY legal contract that mentions the property. A lot of people forget that things like insurance policies, utility agreements, homeowner's association membership agreements, etc. are legal contracts. My understanding is that these can be used to back a claim for joint ownership. I think your partner is projecting a bit. He may be the one with the greed issue and is projecting it on you so he doesn't feel as bad.
I feel for you. My personal opinion is the he's the greedy one. Very sorry for you and will pray for you.
Chris

 

[poniegirl]

Well, there are of course issues on both sides of the story that lead to this crossroad. None that can't be handled and none that would bring down a house of cards (no pun intended). Except for this issue, which is pretty big in my opinion.
And none of those issues change the bottom line. Which is that I have paid into the household without reserve. We have done some minor improvements and routine upkeep, no different than any other couple.
Our incomes are fairly equal. I earn a bit more, but there are more demands (kids) on my money. During the 8 years before the house purchase, he was able to save back enough for the down...always calling it "our" money. And, of course, treating our relationship like a marriage, that was right, I thought. We could not have set that much aside without my income..as he is now proving.
He had rented this house from the previous owner before we were together..no "option to buy", no % of rent toward purchase..nothing like that. Just the verbal that we would have first opp. to buy, when they decided to sell.
He was advised that as a non-married couple, me with children and he without, it would be safer to buy it in his name and add me down the road after an assumed marriage (marriage was not something we were in a rush for) happened. That way, if something happened to me or mine, the property would be safe from attachment. I think his fear was that my children or ex-H would (could) come after it if something happened to me and that he would have to pay them out for my share. I think he has been proven right, because now the house is safe from everyone including me. I don't like to think that was part of the plan, in the first place.

 

[tangman99]

I am not a lawyer and I'm not 100% sure of what I'm about to say, so if anything is of interest, please verify.
When we are talking about enforcement of the law, we are not talking about morality or even what's right. Law's are supposed to be enforced across the board the same to everyone without exception or prejudice. With that said I don't think you would have a leg to stand. Good intentions, what you discussed and what most people would consider to be common sense to not come into play in a court of law even though most laws are based on morality and the benefit and opinions of the common people.
Refinancing is probably going to be an expense based on points. When my ex-wife and I divorced, we decided not to refinance our home in her name alone due to the cost. That one came back to bite me in the behind later.
Even if you put money with his for the downpayment, unless your name is on the

[hr]
it won't matter.
At the least, here is my advice as to what I would do. I would demand that you both go to an attorney and have wills drawn up that if something happens to him that the house goes to you. If you don't, someone in his family in probate can claim it as the next of kin and you would probably lose.
Next, I would calculate reasonably what it would cost you rent a house like you are in with a roomate and limit my monthly expenses to less than that amount. That way you are in no worse shape than if you had to move out and get a room mate.
Last, if it's been eight years, there is a good chance you could refinance now for a lower interest that would offset the cost of refinancing. If you two are really serious as a couple, I would request you refinance the house and have it put in both of your names. Again a good will lawyer can write you up iron clad wills that will protect you both from each others familys. Children have special rights in probate as to inheritance, but (and doublecheck me on this and your state) if you specifically exclude them by name in a will, then they have no right to contest the property.
I hope this helps. I know if I had been with you that long I would not have any problems doing any of this.

 

[poniegirl]

Thank you TangMan99..I follow you and concur 100%, until we get to the exclusion of children in the will. If I am going to invest in real property, my children will benefit from that investment. While it is not his responsibility to provide an inheritance for my children, I won't be excluding them. I can't even fathom that.
That is a valid consideration on his part, though.
It just makes me very sad for today and the future that things are so complicated.