Finance Bros: Explain Deed In Husband's Name & Mortgage Under Both H & W
| garnet indirect expression | 01/01/26 | | grizzly balding state jap | 01/01/26 | | garnet indirect expression | 01/01/26 | | contagious indigo kitty cat toilet seat | 01/01/26 | | garnet indirect expression | 01/01/26 | | contagious indigo kitty cat toilet seat | 01/01/26 | | contagious indigo kitty cat toilet seat | 01/01/26 | | Lavender soul-stirring national | 01/01/26 | | garnet indirect expression | 01/01/26 | | Cheese-eating Purple Elastic Band Spot | 01/01/26 | | garnet indirect expression | 01/01/26 | | Big-titted ticket booth voyeur | 01/01/26 | | Glittery Hissy Fit Dysfunction | 01/01/26 | | Big-titted ticket booth voyeur | 01/02/26 | | Big-titted ticket booth voyeur | 01/01/26 | | sticky station mexican | 01/02/26 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: January 1st, 2026 1:29 PM Author: garnet indirect expression
jew couple i know what is recently married. looked at the pub records. they bought a house and the deed is in the husband's name only. but the mortgage is in both their names.
for better or worse, i assume the deed is in his name bc his parents helped him with the down payment.
why she be on the mortgage tho? is this something the lenders require for a married couple? is he fucking her over? why would the bank even allow a debtor to NOT be on the deed?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5816054&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310486#49554186) |
Date: January 1st, 2026 6:44 PM Author: Big-titted ticket booth voyeur
This can happen, but I'm guessing most banks would not go along with it. I suppose if you're a private banking client and they intend it to be a portfolio loan they might allow it. Husband owns the house and wife is in the position of being a co-signer on the note. She can be liable without having any ownership interest in the house. HOWEVER, in most states, whether community property or not, she, as spouse, will have a marital interest in the house. So unless it's a weird state, or she has signed a dower waiver or quit claimed it to the husband, or there is an enforceable pre-nup, she will own part of the house anyway. If I were a buyer I would not want to take title until I had her signature or otherwise got an iron clad assurance she didn't own part of it. Belt and suspenders requires a transfer document of whatever interest she may have, typically a quit claim at least. If she has already quit claimed it to husband or waived dower that is probably enough unless there is reason to suspect monkey business.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5816054&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310486#49555009) |
Date: January 2nd, 2026 12:59 AM Author: sticky station mexican
This makes perfect sense. It's possible the state lets the couple take title however they want - seems like they wanted just the husband on the deed.
But lender isn't going to fork over $500,000 or whatever to the husband, knowing that under certain laws, the wife probably has certain rights to the property. So they make the husband and wife both sign the mortgage stating they'll relinquish all their interests in the house if the loan is not paid.
I believe my wife is on our deed, but she is NOT on our note. The bank only underwrote me as the borrower, so I'm the only one who signed the note promissing to repay the loan (the note is what obligates you to repay the bank). My wife however did have to sign the mortgage (the mortgage gives the bank the right to foreclose on the property if you dont pay the note). It's a pretty good gig for her obviously - but that's just how the law works in my state.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5816054&forum_id=2\u0026mark_id=5310486#49555695) |
|
|