No-fault divorce and property settlement questions

My husband and I were in complete agreement when he filed for a no-fault divorce in February, 2010.  He decided to hire an attorney.  I chose not to.  I was led to believe that once the Affidavit of Divorce was signed in May, the divorce would be final 6 to 7 weeks thereafter.  However, shortly after it was signed, my husband's lawyer decided a property agreement was necessary.  Up to this point, my husband and I agreed that since the property in question, our house, was part of a class-action lawsuit due to builder's issues, we would handle the house as an issue separate from the divorce.  However, my husband is easily intimidated by his lawyer and now it seems that the property settlement is holding the divorce itself hostage.

My husband has expressed an interest in keeping the house.  I am in total agreement with that option, but only if he were to refinance, either alone or with someone other than me.  I am asking nothing as part of that option.  I want only to be able to leave the house with my name removed from the mortgage.

I recently received a property settlement agreement from my husband's lawyer which states that as part of the agreement I am to vacate the house by the end of the year at which time my name will be removed from the title but not from the mortgage.  It says that my husband would take over the mortgage, but would be "excused" from payment if he became financially unable.  I cannot accept this agreement.  It would tie me to the house for the next 25 years.  There is nothing in the agreement that protects my interests at all.  However, it states that if I do not accept the agreement, my husband is ready to proceed with a Master's hearing.

My questions:

1)  Can the property settlement be a separate issue from the divorce?

2)  Since it is obvious that the settlement agreement, as presented, does not protect me, what can I expect to happen at the Master's hearing?

Of course HIS lawyer didn't put anything in the proposal to protect YOUR interest.

Simply counter the offer with what you believe is equitable.  If the offer is rejected, then take it to court.  Based on your post, you are not seeking anything unreasonable and the court would probably agree with you.

The divorce and property matters can be separated.

If you do not agree to his terms you need to sit down with your own lawyer.

girlwithquestions:

Can the property settlement be a separate issue from the divorce?

Yes.

If you let it.

girlwithquestions:

Since it is obvious that the settlement agreement, as presented, does not protect me, what can I expect to happen at the Master's hearing?

You'll get a royal screwing.

I suggest you hire yourself a lawyer ASAP to protect your interests.

Don't be one of those women who end up with nothing and whine "I just wanted to get it over with so I didn't fight for anything."

1.  No- you must resolve the property issues before a divorce will be granted.

2.  The Masters hearing:  all your assets and debts will be reviewed and the master will make a recommendation;   if the house is the only issue- you will present what it is you want;  while I agree with you that the terms of the current proposed psa are not reasonable- it may not be ordered that he refinance if he is not able to;  but there should be language that he is responsible for mortgage and holds you harmless ( the part about unless he becomes financially unable is ridiculous). 

Is hiring an attorney the only way I can protect myself?  I agreed to a no-fault divorce.  Can't I just have that?  I can respond on my own to his attorney, telling him that his agreement does not work for me.  Why must I have a lawyer to do that?

That deal is set up head he wins tails you lose and it allows for him to invent inability to pay and you get royally hosed. And you moved out as well.  Its darn dumb deal and unsafe as well. It stinks.

You are free to reject his offer. I think you are patently unwise to accept it as written. Its your right to accept a dumb deal however.

But I think you are patently unwise to do actual battle with his attorney unless you use one of your own.

And I think you most unwise to move out if you are now in home--you lose major elements of leverage!

Both my husband and I were living in the house untill he very recently decided to move out.  He still pays half the mortgage and I pay everything else.  This is an okay arrangement for now, but obviously not for long-term. 

On flip side--lets say value of property has gone up and your net equity has gone up a bit and the overall net is about 50K.

50/50 is reasonable --so an offer to deliver a quit claim to him upon sumultaneous being removed from loan via formal recorded satisfaction and $25,000 cash to you  or known good funds  you also agree to vacate within 2 hours after completion of all of above.  See how Hubby reacts to same?

(Use more care to carefully word it but you get my drift?)

I do get your drift, but...

The value of the house is questionable at this time.  It was found to have been built on contaminated land, thus the class-action lawsuit. The DEP will be cleaning up the land sometime in the near (I hope) future, at which point I hope the value will be retained and it will become marketable.  If my husband were to take over the mortgage before that happened, he could benefit from that.  And that would be fine with me.  As I stated before, I want nothing from the house except to be able to leave it free and clear.

FINE: but say an offer along these lines

Upon payment of $1  and confirmation of recorded on publicly  recorded release /satisfaction of  loan as to my name in all regards by lender (XYZ or any successor)  I shall at same time and place deliver a quit claim  deed as to home at TT from X to Y and vacate home withing 2 hours of completion of all said  prior steps but not before .

Again you use more careful words.

If you are NOT safely off the note in its entirely you are NOT safely off --I don't care if the Pope promises to make good on the deal.

And again- while that may be fine with you- it may not be a possibility if there is no equity in the house and he is unable to refinance.  The courts will not order him to refinance if not possible- so you need to look at other alternatives.

You mean he can buy out my interest in the house for $1?

But that does not take my name off the mortgage.  What am I missing?

I know he can't be forced into refinancing.  He has expressed interest in possibly doing so.  I'm not sure that he can afford to, or if he has someone who could take over my part of the mortgage.  That is just one option.  Another option would be to put the house up for sale once the DEP has cleared the property.  

The problems with the house can be dealt with as things progress both with the clean-up and the lawsuit.  I just wish this would not stall the divorce.

That would be a terrible idea - all of the downside and none of the up.