I'm doing BK, should I remove me from mortgage to wife

[professorkev]

I' wondering that if I do a bk should I take my name off the mortgage? we have a valued 225K home, owe 180K. Wife is the breadwinner and has basically been paying the mortgage anyways. SHe could qualify to have it in her name alone. Should protect ourselves (and her) and see about getting my name off the mortgage? If things don't get better for me, I
m going to have to declarer BK on my 150K of CC debt. Not saying it's going to happen, but I'm losing a vast majority of my income and if things don't change by years end I'm looking at a 2011 bk

[frogger]

Are you on just the mortgage, or are you on the deed also?

[professorkev]

Mortgage and deed. We bought the house together and when we did I remember seeing some paper work of the banks and they just used my wifes income to approve it, although they ran me too. My income was only 9K (subbing) and herswas 65K with NO DEBT. and she still carrys no debt.

[OHBOY]

I don't see that any bank would just 'take off ' your name as a co signer.
So, it would be quite an expensive procedure to undertake to get a new mortgage in just your wife's name.
Of course the other problem would also be the fact that it would be viewed as a fraudulant transfer...(that's just what I think, and remember I am not an attorney...)

[professorkev]

well the equity is exempt anyways if I did a bk. nothing fraud about it though, she can easily prove she paid the mortgage for the last 3.5 years. IT's more of a protective move in case creditors tried to come after the property. I inderstand your point, but if I were the wage earner then I can understand it, but she is and she's paid it (I paid the property taxes and other bills)

[SMinGA]

That is what makes it potentially a fraudulent transfer. It does not matter who has paid the mortgage up til now or who pays it later. What matters is you would be taking something you own and transferring that ownership to someone else. In most districts trustees look back 1-2 years for things like this. In some cases, even longer.

If you can exempt the equity, best to leave it as is and not create problems where they don't exist.

IT's more of a protective move in case creditors tried to come after the property.

[OHBOY]

Quote: 'most districts trustees look back 1-2 years for things like this. In some cases, even longer.'


How true...Last attorney I consulted with was a former trustee and asked about any transfers going back TEN years...

[frogger]

Fraudulent or not, if you do this, you are going to be giving the appearance of trying to hide assets with this transfer.

You say that you can exempt it, so exempt it. What you're thinking of doing is going to open up a can of worms.....

Consult a bk attorney before you do anything like what you're contemplating.

[professorkev]

Sounds good, best to leave it alone, just wanted some extra protection!

[newbie2]

Sounds good, best to leave it alone, just wanted some extra protection!

You won't need extra protection. The BK court provides more than enough.