iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Henry Gornbein

GET UPDATES FROM Henry Gornbein
 

To Move or Not to Move; That Is the Question

Posted: 08/30/2011 1:59 am

Dealing with the marital home is complicated in our tough economic times. Ten or fifteen years ago when I was doing divorce settlements, one of the most valuable assets was the marital home. Almost every home had equity, along with pensions and 401(k)s. In many cases, especially if primary custody of the children was with the wife, there would be a settlement reached which would include a provision regarding the marital home. Often the wife and children could remain there as long as there was no remarriage or until the youngest child reached the age of 18, or some other key age. If the wife was paying the mortgage payments, she would get credit for reduction in principal on the mortgage, and at the time of sale or a buyout, after payment of closing costs, real estate commissions, and any other expenses for repairs necessary for sale, the net proceeds would be equally divided.

What about now? I rarely see a home with equity. Most homes are upside-down, often having a first mortgage and a second mortgage or a home equity loan with the value of the house being much less than what is owed. What do we do in this situation? I have told clients in the past and I emphasize this again and again, even if the house does have some equity, it is important not to become emotionally attached to a house. People don't want to move or be uprooted, but if there is a divorce, often it makes sense to move on. Can either party afford to continue the payments? If the house has a negative equity, in Michigan where I practice often that is not considered though there are some recent cases considering that, and often it will be part of the equation in adding up assets and liabilities in a property settlement.

What are the options? The first option is to sell the house and take a loss, which means often coming up with money from savings or 401(k)s which have been sadly diminished in our economy as well. A second option is if the parties can afford it, for one to stay there and in some cases, both parties where there is not enough money, and hope for the market to come back. In this day and age, that is usually totally unrealistic. A third option, if either party can afford to keep the house, is for that one party to do so, and make the payments going forward.

A fourth option is a short sale. In a short sale, if the bank or mortgage company will allow it, the parties can sell the house for less than the equity without having to pay the shortfall. This takes difficult negotiations, and I have had many cases where attempts at short sales have failed. It can also impact negatively on your credit.

I have more and more cases where the houses are allowed to go into foreclosure because one or the other party does not have enough money to keep the mortgage current. In that situation, one or both spouses can remain in the house. They will stop making payments for months and even years, until the house is finally sold by the bank or mortgage company, or they are evicted. Is this a good solution? In some cases it works, but the reality is that everyone's credit will be badly damaged. Sometimes in our economy it is a necessity.

I have other divorces where there is some equity, or there is not a large deficiency on the mortgage. In these cases sometimes it is possible to refinance, though that can be difficult as well. Credit is extremely tight and it is very hard to do a refinance or new mortgage.

In summary, it is important to be creative with regard to your home in a divorce. Don't be emotionally tied to your home. Sometimes it is important to start fresh and make it an adventure so that you and your children are starting out not only with a new life, but a new house or apartment. In Michigan, and many other markets throughout the country, real estate prices are still tumbling. These are difficult questions that call for creative solutions. What has happened to you with your house during your divorce? Let me know.

 

Follow Henry Gornbein on Twitter: www.twitter.com/.

FOLLOW DIVORCE
 
 
  • Comments
  • 23
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:40 AM on 09/06/2011
Unfortunately it is the house itself that contributed to the demise of my marriage. I wanted to move for my kid's schooling (from a prior marriage) husband went along with it....kicking and screaming. Now I have a house in the neighborhood I wanted and will be filing for divorce shortly and having to move again anyways. Would've been easier to just find a smaller place for just us to begin with. I doubt he'll want it since he didn't want to move. Only good thing is we bought low, I don't think it's worth any less, so we may at least get a few grand to start our new lives with. Makes me one of the lucky ones...
Morrisfactor
Just a little bent
01:50 PM on 09/02/2011
My unscientific observations of 25 middle class divorces over the past 17 years in the Seattle area is that the family home IS a liability.

In all cases but one, the women (with kids) got the family home. In two instances the homes were 100% paid off - these women did not have a house payment.

Things changed quickly for the divorced wives. Not used to receiving 100% of their ex-husband's paychecks, the women were unable to adjust their spending habits accordingly (and yes, ALL received child support/alimony - no deadbeats in any of these break-ups) and rather quickly began taking out home equity mortgages. Much of the secondary mortgage money was spent on a flashier life-style - ie: new cars, travel, etc.

Within five years, ALL got behind in the mortgage payments and had to sell - even the two homes that were 100% owned at the end of the divorce! Most women bought smaller homes in poorer areas, some moved to apartments.

The only home to still be in possession of a divorced partner is the one man, whose wife left him with the kids.

Moral of the story. It is very, very hard for anyone to keep a family home with only ONE income, even if that one income is supplemented with alimony/child support. Once you take out a second mortgage, you are doomed to lose the house eventually.

Might be better to sell the family home during the divorce and downsize right from the beginning.
06:39 PM on 08/31/2011
Our house isn't "under water" but if we tried to sell it, we might barely break even (after closing costs, real estate commission). My soon to be ex-husband really wants to keep it, and offered to give me $1000 a year for 7 years, if I just move out. We both have put thousands of dollars into updating the house. It's hard to just walk away while he gets the benefit of our mutual investment, but I don't know what would be a fair agreement. I don't want to fight over it, but I don't like feeling a bit cheated either.
10:48 AM on 08/31/2011
Perhaps the biggest blessing to come out of my divorce was the timing of it - my ex-wife divorced me in 2006, the very summer that the housing market began to go bust. Even then, it took nearly a year to sell, and I finally had to lower the price by 60K, walking away with just 3K in equity at closing. In the end, I realized that I could have sold it for 40K more if I just knocked off 20K right off the bat, but I hired the slickest realtor in town, and he was full of bad advice. He kept assuring me that the worst case scenario, to save me from the prospect of foreclosure, was a short sale. He couldn't be bothered with explaining the process for going through a short sale, however, and I learned almost too late that my credit union - the holder of the second mortgage on my property - would never negotiate or accept a short sale. In short, it couldn't happen. Thank God I was able to sell, but that only happened after I fired that jerk and got a different realtor who was actually willing to work at selling my house, rather than just putting it up on the MLS.
07:44 PM on 08/30/2011
c'mon now - a $3k/month alimony payments, assuming you have a quarter century of life expenctancy or are less than 60 years old, is worth $1 million dollars. A $5K/month alimony payment is worth $2 million dollars. Lifetime/long-term alimony is the real jackpot in divorce. Forget the house and the retirement plans. Just visit the on-line lottery payout calculators.
photo
Roommate
Compounding Money, Cause Seed > Effect Tree
02:32 PM on 08/30/2011
Never marry because over half end in divorce so you lose half your house, bank account etc. Marriage cause kids which cost like a thousand dollars per decade
01:53 AM on 08/31/2011
You do not lose half your house etc. You get to keep your half, and your ex keeps his/her half. It was never all yours.
09:24 AM on 08/31/2011
It was yours if you were the one paying for it. Why do you think marriage is an insurance policy? If one spouse never contributed in any way why should they share the equity of the home? If they contributed by raising children, etc. then that's different. Now, once shared equity is split the lower income person gets alimony. This alimony now effectively cancels the equity that was split.
02:23 PM on 08/30/2011
Often the biggest asset isn't even savings, home equity or other. It's alimony or spousal support. When one partner has to pay spousal support to another it can effectively wipe out any splitting of assets that the payor should be entittled to.
11:33 AM on 08/30/2011
Ah yes, very realistic options… assuming that the spouses do not suffer from mental illness, because if one of them has a mental disorder, the law will support and encourage the vengeful spouse. The simple fact is that disposal of the marital home is completely under the control of the woman, especially if there are children of the marriage. If she insists on staying in the house, the law will give her what she wants until both party's are bankrupt.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greg Albright
12:13 PM on 08/30/2011
My ex is doing exactly that right now. What are the chances that there are only two of us experienci­ng this right now?

BTW, I don't think my ex is vengeful, she is just a flake and would be homeless if I let the mortgage default.

Oh, and I have full custody, so this isn't about the kids.
05:02 PM on 08/30/2011
Don't let the mortgage default. You will be painted as a scoundrel by her lawyer. The point of painting you badly is, of course, to force you to pay retribution.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Henry Gornbein
08:40 AM on 09/06/2011
Hi Greg Albright,

Thank you for your comments. Have a nice day,

Henry Gornbein
09:42 AM on 08/30/2011
We sold the house. It only made sense. I was going to keep it, but he insisted that I buy him out since we owned the home outright. The appraisal was higher than what we sold the house for, so he would have made about $20 grand PLUS he wouldn't have had to eat any of the closing costs. And not to mention I would have been stuck in the middle of suburban NOWHERE with a large yard and no skills/desire to maintain it.

Nope, I sold. Now I have a very nice apartment with reasonable utility costs and no yard maintenance. When something breaks, I call up the owner. And I have a nice nest egg to boot. I may buy a home one day but I have no reason to. I enjoy my freedom. Want your kids in a different school? Move to a different apartment complex. Who cares about the property taxes. Got a different job and don't feel like the commute from suburbia anymore? Move.

Mabye one day I'll buy a home. But right now, I have no reason or desire to. And if Congress does away with the mortgage interest deduction, I doubt I ever will.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Greg Albright
12:08 PM on 08/30/2011
The mortgage interest deduction is a horrible reason to buy a house... If you qualify for it, it means you are fully leveraged in your home loan, which is what caused the current economic problems.
12:59 PM on 08/30/2011
It wouldn't be the ONLY reason, not even close. But since I like living like I am, money is pretty much my only motivator.
01:14 PM on 08/30/2011
But I will say this, my ex and I bought three homes over the course of our marriage. We always put >20% down and always qualified for that mortgage interest deduction. I'm will not pretend that I know everything about mortgage lending, but what took down the economy was banks lending to people who couldn't afford it. And then letting them take out second mortgages essentially gambling that the value of their home would continue to rise astronomically.

And I don't fall into that category.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Indie Mom
independent does not mean lonely
09:22 PM on 08/31/2011
I got the house and have to pay him his 4% annum on the equity each year I stay in it until my youngest turns 18. I'm staying one more year til my oldest go to college and then I'll get an apartment or rent. After I pay closing costs and him off for his 50% of the equity + his 4% annum, and all my bills .. plus maintenance of the home the next year .. I'll be lucky to walk away with anything.

My biggest problem, like someone mentioned above, is that I became emotionally attached to the home. Worked like a dog making it beautiful. Lovingly took care of the yards. Entertained, etc. I truly love my home. It makes me sad and sick to have to leave it behind, yet economically I won't be able to survive as a single woman on a limited income.

Agree with this article. Home ownership is an albatross for most.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Henry Gornbein
08:44 AM on 09/06/2011
Hi Indie Mom,

Thank you for your comments. Too often the home is an albatross and not worth the effort to keep it. You have raised some good points. The best of luck to you.

Henry Gornbein