transfer the house title to me or I'm leaving you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
OP, I’m a SAHM. I didn’t contribute any money towards my house. My husband paid for everything—and will continue to pay for everything. Both our names are on the deed of our house.

Your views are generally incompatible with marriage.

Madam, you are completely wrong, legally and morally. He bought the house before he got married. It's his house.

His wife sounds just like the wife, now ex-wife, of a friend. She was a pure gold-digger, looking to mine every penny from a hard-working man who saved and invested well.

No - she’s not wrong neither morally nor legally. First, she would be still eligible for some % of appreciation during marriage even not being on a title. Particularly if they had joint accounts, she has records of contributing her time and money into the house etc. It’s a very typical marital fraud to buy a house just before marriage, and then repay mortgages abs maintain it jointly. Then you just kick out your spouse of many years abs without her name on the deed she can’t request the property sold and claim a fair appreciation. The spouse who got kicked out would have a choice to eat bullet or spend money to claim equity in court.

My exH did this to me : after years of me taking primary care of our autistic child in divorce he screamed “you are nobody” “vacate premises” etc.
all his friends probably still think I was a golddigger trying to take him to cleaners. Nobody knows how much mortgage was repaid from my salary, my time spent on custom renovations, endless contractors etc. The most valuable thing is time in life - don’t waste it on generating someone’s wealth if that person is not willing to share !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Could you just rent out your premarital house and buy a new one with her? It is indeed humiliating to live and contribute into a home which is not joint, if you are married. My exH bought a house on his name just before marriage and had a massive mortgage. Insisted on living there - I insisted on buying a second home. We divorced in 15 years. He had major trust issues, not me.
Maybe she feels you are not able to commit.

This. If you expect your wife to live as your wife married in a shared home in which she contributes but has no equity or title, you are telling her she is a guest in your life and has no stake in the marriage. That is not a sustainable situation for anyone with a shred of self-respect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
OP, I’m a SAHM. I didn’t contribute any money towards my house. My husband paid for everything—and will continue to pay for everything. Both our names are on the deed of our house.

Your views are generally incompatible with marriage.

You must have bought that house together after marriage? OP owned his house before getting married. There is a difference.

There may be a difference but you still don’t put your wife in the position of not having any equity in the property ladder while she works to support a household in which her husband contributes his income to an asset she does not co-own.

[Anonymous]

Like the other PP, I sacrificed my career to benefit our family, and my name is on the title along with my husband's, even though I did not contribute financially to its purchase and do not contribute to the mortgage.

OP's situation is unclear, but if he and his wife could not come to some understanding, then it's best they part. OP, you have intrinsic worth! Also, please accept that your next wife will probably also rather jointly own the house you both live in, rather than not... so find a way to make it fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
OP, I’m a SAHM. I didn’t contribute any money towards my house. My husband paid for everything—and will continue to pay for everything. Both our names are on the deed of our house.

Your views are generally incompatible with marriage.

You must have bought that house together after marriage? OP owned his house before getting married. There is a difference.

There may be a difference but you still don’t put your wife in the position of not having any equity in the property ladder while she works to support a household in which her husband contributes his income to an asset she does not co-own.

Technically any mortgaged house is owned by the bank, not by Op. Even if it was fully paid off, there is still marital equity appreciation fr both contributing into upkeep, renovation etc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She did a psychological number on you. She sounds awful. Borderline personality.

Please get some therapy to help you see this.

He sounds like he’s the one who has borderline personality disorder.

My friends have all bought houses in the past 10 years snd we’ve all discussed a lot about mortgages and real estate. Everyone has both spouses on the deed of the shared marital home. This holds true when one person contributed the bulk of the equity through a down payment. It’s true if one person contributes the bulk of the mortgage payments because they have the higher paying job. OP’s attitude is the outlier. It’s bizarre enough that it sounds he was projecting some serious issues on his ex wife.

Hope you get help OP.

It sounds like his instincts not to trust her were correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She did a psychological number on you. She sounds awful. Borderline personality.

Please get some therapy to help you see this.

He sounds like he’s the one who has borderline personality disorder.

My friends have all bought houses in the past 10 years snd we’ve all discussed a lot about mortgages and real estate. Everyone has both spouses on the deed of the shared marital home. This holds true when one person contributed the bulk of the equity through a down payment. It’s true if one person contributes the bulk of the mortgage payments because they have the higher paying job. OP’s attitude is the outlier. It’s bizarre enough that it sounds he was projecting some serious issues on his ex wife.

Hope you get help OP.

It sounds like his instincts not to trust her were correct.

It actually looks more like he pushed her away until she left. The situation OP describes would be humiliating to most women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she actually want you to transfer it to her, or did she want to be added onto the deed? Big difference.

she wanted me to give her the house as in she would own it.

Your wording is still unclear.

Was she asking to add her name to deed along with yours? This is what most people mean when they say they want to own their house.

Or was she asking that you transfer the deed to her name and she would take out a mortgage in her name only for the remaining balance?

Yes, OP, please answer this. Was she asking for you to not be on the deed? You seem to be dodging this question.

She wanted me off the deed. She wanted 100% ownership. She wanted me to give her the house. She said she deserved it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she actually want you to transfer it to her, or did she want to be added onto the deed? Big difference.

she wanted me to give her the house as in she would own it.

Your wording is still unclear.

Was she asking to add her name to deed along with yours? This is what most people mean when they say they want to own their house.

Or was she asking that you transfer the deed to her name and she would take out a mortgage in her name only for the remaining balance?

Yes, OP, please answer this. Was she asking for you to not be on the deed? You seem to be dodging this question.

She wanted me off the deed. She wanted 100% ownership. She wanted me to give her the house. She said she deserved it.

DP. To be frank, I do not believe you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she actually want you to transfer it to her, or did she want to be added onto the deed? Big difference.

she wanted me to give her the house as in she would own it.

Your wording is still unclear.

Was she asking to add her name to deed along with yours? This is what most people mean when they say they want to own their house.

Or was she asking that you transfer the deed to her name and she would take out a mortgage in her name only for the remaining balance?

Yes, OP, please answer this. Was she asking for you to not be on the deed? You seem to be dodging this question.

She wanted me off the deed. She wanted 100% ownership. She wanted me to give her the house. She said she deserved it.

This doesn’t seem like it would be legally possible in a community property state without serious tax ramifications at minimum.

It seems much more likely what she wanted was to be on the deed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she actually want you to transfer it to her, or did she want to be added onto the deed? Big difference.

she wanted me to give her the house as in she would own it.

Your wording is still unclear.

Was she asking to add her name to deed along with yours? This is what most people mean when they say they want to own their house.

Or was she asking that you transfer the deed to her name and she would take out a mortgage in her name only for the remaining balance?

Yes, OP, please answer this. Was she asking for you to not be on the deed? You seem to be dodging this question.

She wanted me off the deed. She wanted 100% ownership. She wanted me to give her the house. She said she deserved it.

This makes no sense, you should have both consulted with a good lawyer and came to a mutually agreeable solution.

[Anonymous]

OP here,

Everyone one here appears to be missing the point and simply focusing on why a wife should be on the deed, in part because its humiliating not to.

I didn't meet her until I was in my 40s and everything I had I earned on my own.
Had I met her when I was young and broke and we built everything together then she would have been on every title and deed.
Unfortunately; I understand divorce law and was/am rightfully concerned about losing everything in a no-fault divorce proceeding at an age where I simply can't rebuild.
If a woman doesn't comingle her assets its simply considered wise for her to protect herself. Apparently if a man protects himself he is unsuitable for marriage.

I didn't ask her to comingle any of her assets because I wasn't with her for her money.
She was the beneficiary of everything.

Here is the point:

If its humiliating for a woman not to be on the deed of a house that was purchased prior to marriage, isn't it just as humiliating (even more) for his wife to say I won't be your wife unless you give me hundreds of thousands of dollars?

In effect this means the woman isn't with the man for love. To her, his value isn't in his character, his ethic, its simply his ability to transfer assets to her and unless he can afford to risk large losses he isn't worth staying with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here,

Everyone one here appears to be missing the point and simply focusing on why a wife should be on the deed, in part because its humiliating not to.

I didn't meet her until I was in my 40s and everything I had I earned on my own.
Had I met her when I was young and broke and we built everything together then she would have been on every title and deed.
Unfortunately; I understand divorce law and was/am rightfully concerned about losing everything in a no-fault divorce proceeding at an age where I simply can't rebuild.
If a woman doesn't comingle her assets its simply considered wise for her to protect herself. Apparently if a man protects himself he is unsuitable for marriage.

I didn't ask her to comingle any of her assets because I wasn't with her for her money.
She was the beneficiary of everything.

Here is the point:

If its humiliating for a woman not to be on the deed of a house that was purchased prior to marriage, isn't it just as humiliating (even more) for his wife to say I won't be your wife unless you give me hundreds of thousands of dollars?

In effect this means the woman isn't with the man for love. To her, his value isn't in his character, his ethic, its simply his ability to transfer assets to her and unless he can afford to risk large losses he isn't worth staying with.

Establishing a home and a house that she co-owns with her husband is a very important thing for most women. Most women do not want to put time and effort into keeping and decorating in maintaining a house that is not theirs. This should not be that hard to understand. People want to feel like they own the house they live in.

[Anonymous]

I suspect the wife was a manipulator/borderline-type due to the wreckage she has left in her wake. He's questioning his entire worth and she played victim, hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did she actually want you to transfer it to her, or did she want to be added onto the deed? Big difference.

she wanted me to give her the house as in she would own it.

Your wording is still unclear.

Was she asking to add her name to deed along with yours? This is what most people mean when they say they want to own their house.

Or was she asking that you transfer the deed to her name and she would take out a mortgage in her name only for the remaining balance?

Yes, OP, please answer this. Was she asking for you to not be on the deed? You seem to be dodging this question.

She wanted me off the deed. She wanted 100% ownership. She wanted me to give her the house. She said she deserved it.

DP. To be frank, I do not believe you.

Agreed. This whole situation sounds bizarre and weird. First it’s downright weird that a married couple wouldn’t both be on the deed to the house they live in together. OP dug in pretty far in the beginning of the thread that it was HIS house because he paid for it and his wife shouldn’t have any claim to it. That’s a very aggressive stance to take. It’s basically flaunting your refusal to commit to the marriage.

That his wife would go from not being on the deed to demanding sole ownership of their house is equally strange. I don’t believe that she completely overlooked asking to be on the deed along with him like all normal married couples. If she did ask to own the house outright, there has to be a LOT of information OP is omitting.

Anyways, what’s done is done. OP you’re getting divorced, the marriage is over. If nothing else you should learn that your insistence that you own the marital home and exclude a future wife will cause problems. Almost every woman who responded to this thread said this would be a big issue. Now you know. Don’t date seriously or get engaged unless you think you can share your house with the woman you’re seeing.