Deed vs Rights
What rights do I have if I have a deed with my name and the vaule of the property is $100,000. But the morgage loan does not have my name on the loan. The reason I ask this question becasue my mother signed the property (house) over to me and now there is a dispute because I invested over 30,000 and I would like to take a loan out on the home, but my mother says that I have no rights and she desires to remove my name.
First off, if your name is on the deed, it is indeed your proof of ownership. The only part I can't figure out is how did she get a mortgage loan on property you own. Is her name on the deed as well? If so, she would have to agree to an additional $30,000 loan against the house. She can't remove your name from the deed, without you signing your interest in the property over to her.
I agree, if she is on the note but not on the deed she does NOT control the property but has the financial obligation of the mortgage. If she signed it over, deed or quit claimed it..she cannot change her mind. As far as you mortgaging the property, unless she agrees to a refi or HELOC it probably won't happen. Also, who's income on the application would also possibly determine if you could get a loan depending on your FICO and Income. But, I suspect it would be uphill.
If the deed is in your name it's your house. Do whatever you like but remember there may be consequences. I assume you have recorded the deed. If so, your mother has no legal say in what you do with your house. Keep in mind that the reason she doesn't want you taking out a loan on the house may be valid. My Mom always said "Mothers are always right."
Hi,
Despite the lack of some specific information I will try to entertain this case taking some scenarios for discussion purposes.
It appears to me that at one time, before the mother deeded the property to the son, it would be one way to assume that the house was in the mother's name (the only name on the deed as an owner of the property).
At the same time, the mortgage that is attached to the property as a lien was also in the mother's name as it is in the present.
In effect, this means that the mother had the property in her name (deed recorded under her name) and the mortgage/financing was also under her name,simultaneously at one time in the past.
Having stablished that, and following that particular period of time, the mother decides to transfer the title from her name to the son without involving the transfer of lien (mortgage/ financing)....(She may have done SUB-TO EXISTING MORTGAGE).
In the mean time the son spends $30k of his personal money(could be mortgage payment
and/or keep up) on the property and after a while decides to cash out some of his equity from the property he has been investing in.
Having a signed deed showing the delivery of title from mother to him,the son may or may not have this transfer of ownership recorded in the county records.
If he did not have the transfer recorded the public record has no way of knowing their private transaction therefore as far as the public record is concerned the house is still owned by the mother.
Even though there is a mother to son of deed signing over.Therefore no right before record.
But, if he had it recorded he owns the house in the chain of ownership right after his mother as would be recorded.
Yet the mortgage is still in his mother's which means he can't sale it without the consent of the lien holder (the mortgage company), but
he can deed the title to another person just as
his mother deeded to him in the past.
This is in a nut shell what I think of this
Deed vs. Right case based on the conditiones
I framed.
I would love to see how the gurus would disect this!
ddawa
A squirrely partner & I each owned 1/2 interest in a SFR, and my partner thought she'd just quietly go borrow all the equity out without my knowledge.
And she almost got away with it and I came within 24 hours of her swindling me out of my free & clear 1/2!
Way it happened was I put up half the cash for purchase, but for a variety of reasons chose not to record my deed for my half interest at the time of acquisition.
Two or three years later I realized I'd never recorded and proceeded to do so...believe it or not, the NEXT DAY Annie was going to close her new blanket mortgaged loan, and was going to give a DT on this property, claiming she owned 100%!
But the last minute title sweep by the title company caught my deed recording the DAY BEFORE! so the lender let Annie just give them her DT on her 1/2!
So they had a DT on only half the property, and I've never found anybody who ever heard of such a thing before.
Well, Annie was a real wheeler-dealer and ended up losing all her property, including her half of this SFR. The lender actually foreclosed on her half and took it back.
Then the lender and I got toether long enough to agree on a sale so we could both get gone and do no more business together.
On your deal, if you got and recorded the deed with your name in it, your mother cannot just "delete" your name from it.
You may own just a Partial interest, as I did, but you'd have to sign any deed to a new buyer.