Anyone know much about quit claim deeds?

My gf very stupidly signed a quit claim on the deed to a property just to get her loser ex-boyfriend off her ass. The amount of consideration was $20, the property is worth about $100,000. She owned the place outright then got a home equity loan on it, still in her name.

I know she really screwed up by signing this over. I am wondering if the claim is an illegal contract, because for one she still has equity (and a loan on the place, which he is paying) and two because the amount of consideration is ridiculous, $20.

She no longer has rights to the property. Due to the Due On Sale clause in the loan, the lender will soon come after her to pay off the loan in full. Her ex-boyfriend is not going to be able to sell the property as it may soon be the subject of a foreclosure.

It's not quite as simple as it may seem. She can sign away her rights, but I believe the HELOC is still valid and in her name. That wouldn't have transferred with her quitclaim.

In that case, the boyfriend can't sell the property until the HELOC is paid back.

You *cannot* form a common law marriage in Virginia (although VA will recognize them if they are formed in another state), so it's not like she didn't have any options here, and they weren't married (from what you wrote).

In any event. She really did screw up. If you aren't married to someone, who gives a fuck what they want. If he kept harassing her, she should have filed for a restraining order and had him removed from her property.

He is usually up to date on loan payments, but he has been late and she gets called about it from the lender. I don't think their was a due on sale, I think the deed quit was a transfer, but I can't see how it is legal if she is still responsible for a loan on the place and the amount of consideration is so small as to be a joke.

It seems hard to undo. She was really frustrated,impulsive and stupid to sign the quit claim, now she has regrets. I am trying to pursuade her to try to have the claim invalidated if it all possible and pursue him for an interest in the property.

It seems like a case of misguided charity that she would sign such a thing with a home equity loan on the place. I am not sure how she could sign something ass large as that over without full ownership.

I can't remind her enough about how dumb it was in the first place, but that is no good.

I am hoping their is some avenue in civil court where the she could force his hand on the issue, to at a minimun get her % of the place back. I don't know what sort of leverage she has with the loan if any. The guy is a real asshole on top of that.

boredom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's not quite as simple as it may seem. She can
> sign away her rights, but I believe the HELOC is
> still valid and in her name. That wouldn't have
> transferred with her quitclaim.
>
> In that case, the boyfriend can't sell the
> property until the HELOC is paid back.
>
> You *cannot* form a common law marriage in
> Virginia (although VA will recognize them if they
> are formed in another state), so it's not like she
> didn't have any options here, and they weren't
> married (from what you wrote).
>
> In any event. She really did screw up. If you
> aren't married to someone, who gives a fuck what
> they want. If he kept harassing her, she should
> have filed for a restraining order and had him
> removed from her property.

Due On Sale clause will be in the loan agreement, not the deed.

She's renting out the property to her ex and he's supposed to be paying the note per the informal lease arrangement. I expect that she probably didn't have any substantial equity in the property. $100,000 is merely what she thinks is it might sell for.

The house was paid for in the early 1990's and refinanced to do improvements. It has appreciated greatly, but it's a dump.

I don't understand how she was allowed to quit the deed if it is really not hers, but the banks in ownership. Wouldn't the recorders office due a title search and establish there is a lien or loan on the property? I guess they do not care as long as the paperwork is filed correctly.

I can't tell you how frustrated I am with her for doing such a thing, OTOH it just seems very slimy that her credit is at the mercy of this ex she did a "favor" for.

I'm not sure, but if she sold it to him for $20 and it is worth $100,000 he should have a *MASSIVE* tax bill when the property does sell. Perhaps she can try and scare him into nullifying the quitclaim if she approaches it from that angle.

He may not even have to sell it for the tax payment to be required. If you've ever followed those radio station contests where they're like, "Win a brand new mercedes!", the ugly truth is that they rarely give away any of those massive prizes. The taxes must be paid on the prize and on something $50,000 or more, the taxes are huge.

In this case, paying $20 for a property worth $100,000 is not fair market value, so he should owe some kind of income tax as a result. She may be able to claim a massive loss on her taxes as well, so it may not be a total loss in her case.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/31/2010 06:43PM by boredom.

Here's a nasty idea- do you think she could refinance the existing loan to a higher rate and a lower period, say 15 years to raise the amount of the mortgage payment the ex pays?

She would have to personally guarantee it or use her other home to back it, but if the payment the ex has to make every month suddenly doubles, it may creat hardship so bad that he would be forced into negotiations with her.

Quit Claim Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's a nasty idea- do you think she could
> refinance the existing loan to a higher rate and a
> lower period, say 15 years to raise the amount of
> the mortgage payment the ex pays?
>
> She would have to personally guarantee it or use
> her other home to back it, but if the payment the
> ex has to make every month suddenly doubles, it
> may creat hardship so bad that he would be forced
> into negotiations with her.

Not possible. If the loan is in her name, she is responsible. If the loan is in his name, she can't renegotiate the terms.

I don't understand how this is possible, but her name is on the second mortgage and the home is collateral for the loan. How the recorders office would allow a transfer with a lien or loan on it is beyond me.

A Quit Claim is just that, saying "I have no further claims on the property". You don't even actually have to have an interest in the first place. Once she quit claims her interest, the next in line is the first mortgage holder, then the second and so on. It is not up to the registrar of deeds to research whether or not the quit claim is valid. The bank, however, will not allow a transfer to a third party without its consent. You may very well have a situation where the quit claim has no validity, as the bank was not on board.

thank you everyone who answered.

Quit Claim Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here's a nasty idea- do you think she could
> refinance the existing loan to a higher rate and a
> lower period, say 15 years to raise the amount of
> the mortgage payment the ex pays?

I would think she would just want to get out of the note obligation. This sounds like throwing good money after bad. First let me say she is not the first person to do this, it happens everyday, when couples split up and one is keeping the house. Recommended, No but not unusual. Not as "stupid" as you think. Second the $20 means nothing. In order for a contract to be a contract, there are certain boiler plate items that must be in the contract and one is "consideration". Often times the consideration is $1. Not that the money even exchanges hands, it's just part of the process. It has no weight. One of the few ways that people get out of contracts are if they can prove they signed under duress.

She needs to notify the condo association, the property insurer, utilities, etc. of the change in ownership. Unless she can get him to QC the property back to her, she needs to get out of all obligations related to the property as possible.

Quit Claim Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't understand how this is possible, but her
> name is on the second mortgage and the home is
> collateral for the loan. How the recorders office
> would allow a transfer with a lien or loan on it
> is beyond me.

I'll bet it was never recorded, which at this time means it doesn't exist. Easy to check online (for free) if it's Fairfax or most of the surrounding areas. I've checked properties in most of the North East states and the computer systems are pretty good.

You have to go into the courthouse and check the land records on fiche organized by grantor (her) or by grantee (him). She probably has a notarized copy in her possession.

What? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quit Claim Question Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Here's a nasty idea- do you think she could
> > refinance the existing loan to a higher rate and
> a
> > lower period, say 15 years to raise the amount
> of
> > the mortgage payment the ex pays?
>
> I would think she would just want to get out of
> the note obligation. This sounds like throwing
> good money after bad. First let me say she is not
> the first person to do this, it happens everyday,
> when couples split up and one is keeping the
> house. Recommended, No but not unusual. Not as
> "stupid" as you think. Second the $20 means
> nothing. In order for a contract to be a contract,
> there are certain boiler plate items that must be
> in the contract and one is "consideration". Often
> times the consideration is $1. Not that the money
> even exchanges hands, it's just part of the
> process. It has no weight. One of the few ways
> that people get out of contracts are if they can
> prove they signed under duress.

Hi
I signed a contract to purchase a house with my then boyfriend in June 2004, 2 months later we got married and two months later we closed the deal as a married couple. When all the paperwork was done, my husband was the sole owner of the property. I quit claim deed was recorded to show my name on the title. 6 months ago refinanced, the bank told me that the quit claim deed would not be affected by the refinance transaction. Can any one explain this?

The refinance should have generated a new deed, making all others obsolete.

Sold property to buyer with a quit claim deed. buyer did not pay monthly agreement for purchase of the property. quit claim deed recorded. Buyer left due to lack of payment on property. I have warranty deed previously and thought would transfer back to me, all tax records in my name, appraisal office records etc. but this quit claim deed clouds the clear title. How do I get clear title back on the property?

Start a new thread, moron.

I know she really screwed up by signing this over. I am wondering if the claim is an illegal contract, because for one she still has equity (and a loan on the place, which he is paying) and two because the amount of consideration is ridiculous, $20.

a court of equity would consider it an illegal contract

a contract no reasonable person is ALLOWED to sign, because of the terms

the answer is yes, it's clearly an illegal contract

"a willing buyer, a willing seller"

commercial law has always followed the "good faith principal"

both parties in a contract must do their part in a contract

equity law demands wheight and measures. a party that doesn't measure up is at fault. $20 is not equivocal to $100,000.

while people ARE allowed to sign disadvantageous contracts and be held to them: the law still DOES hold that unreasonable contracts are illegal.

i would find the mother fucker and sue his pants off, or worse, that tries to gain $100,000 for $20

the woman on the other hand trying to be vicious or "get rid of a person" for $20 was trying to do what she should not have been doing, esp. for $20: but being a woman isn't illegal

she obviously owes the $20 + interest come hell or high water

she obviously owes the ex any incovenience suffered over her $20 overthrow of him, which apparently she didn't have any right to do

on the other hand i smell a fishy story front to back. she may say she owns the place outright. but is she shifting debt between creditors (illegal if done habitually) and is short $20 to make the next shift?

Les Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She no longer has rights to the property. Due to
> the Due On Sale clause in the loan, the lender
> will soon come after her to pay off the loan in
> full. Her ex-boyfriend is not going to be able to
> sell the property as it may soon be the subject of
> a foreclosure.


^^ is an asshole trying to make you beleive in loan sharking

loansharking is illegal in the USA

fuck off

in the USA the courts don't aid loan sharkers to take homes for $20

in the USA we jail mother fuckers for it

and jail (or execute) judges who would help a loan sharker do such a thing

(1st 50 years roman law, that was the law)

There is a lot of bad information on this thread. OP your gf should make an appointment to talk with her attorney about her situation.

There's no sale in a QC. The title has been transfered to her boyfriend.

It's five years later. What you are still doing here? Shoooooo....

So how is it a woman can't pay $20?

what a total bullshit troll posting

Quit Claim Question Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Anyone know much about quit claim deeds?
>
> My gf very stupidly signed a quit claim on the
> deed to a property just to get her loser
> ex-boyfriend off her ass. The amount of
> consideration was $20, the property is worth about
> $100,000. She owned the place outright then got a
> home equity loan on it, still in her name.
>
> I know she really screwed up by signing this over.
> I am wondering if the claim is an illegal
> contract, because for one she still has equity
> (and a loan on the place, which he is paying) and
> two because the amount of consideration is
> ridiculous, $20.

What was the value of the property when she signed it over? What was the amount of the outstanding 2nd mortgage at that time? The fact that she owned it outright once makes no difference - she signed it over encumbered with a mortgage. And the fact that it may have appreciated since also does not matter. In fact, if the ex has been paying the mortgage, he is very rightly entitled to that appreciation. My bet is it was underwater or nearly so when it was signed over - the $20 may have been more than fair if the property was underwater.

What, am I a potted plant?

You want legal advice from the biggest pool of morons, the Fairfax Underground?

-Lawyer