Skip to main content
Law

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

12
  • 3
    This is just a recounting of what happened to you. Commented May 3, 2024 at 17:47
  • 1
    People often work out reasonable agreements with lawyers too. The unreasonable agreements that are reached are often the ones reached without lawyers. But settlement can be much cheaper and more satisfactory than "rolling the dice" and having a judge decide. Commented May 3, 2024 at 21:34
  • 1
    @Mimedfp Which makes a compelling legal argument that it is possible to do just that ;-). Commented May 6, 2024 at 12:12
  • 1
    @HelloDarkWorld I am sorry, I thought this would be obvious. If a home is liquidated the proceeds are reduced by encumbrances which would reduce proceeds to sellers. This might include commissions to real estate agents or local taxes commonly known as closing costs. So an argument could be made that the spouse that is moving out is due less money to account for closing costs (half) that would be incurred if the home was sold. Commented May 6, 2024 at 12:30
  • 1
    @HelloDarkWorld: I think Pete is just talking about oddities in how the money flowed. With the lien approach, the money flows from buyer to spouse 1 (owner/occupant), with spouse 1 ensuring that half the money is distributed to spouse 2. Legally distinct but easier to mentally model would be for the house to be owned/sold jointly, possibly depositing the money into an escrow account and then distributed to both parties. I suspect the lien approach is mechanically far simpler. In an especially acromonious divorce, it's possible that neither party wants the other party to handle the sale. Commented May 8, 2024 at 13:57