Love and Real Estate: I am in a divorce with my spouse, but I don’t want to sell our house yet because I am worried about the impact selling will have on our kids. What can I do?

By Shawn Weber, CLS-F*

It is possible to get what is called a “deferred sale of home order”. California Family Code section 3800(b) provides for this option as follows:

‘Deferred sale of home order’ means an order that temporarily delays the sale and awards the temporary exclusive use and possession of the family home to a custodial parent of a minor child or child for whom support is authorized under Sections 3900 and 3901 or under Section 3910, whether or not the custodial parent has sole or joint custody, in order to minimize the adverse impact of dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties on the welfare of the child.

Section 3800 and related sections basically codify the holding of In re Marriage of Duke (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 152, 161 Cal.Rptr. 444. The Court in Duke wrote:

Where adverse economic, emotional and social impacts on minor children and the custodial parent, which would result from an immediate loss of a long established family home are not outweighed by economic detriment to the noncustodial party, the court shall, upon request, reserve jurisdiction and defer sale on appropriate conditions.

[Duke at page 155.]

In essence, the intent of the statute is to minimize the impact on the children by awarding temporary use and possession of the family residence to the custodial parent. (A “custodial parent” is the party awarded either sole or joint physical custody of a child. [See Cal. Fam. Code 3801 (a).]) This house is then sold at some future time.

Before the Court will make a deferred sale of home order, the court must first determine “whether it is economically feasible to maintain the payments of any note secured by a deed of trust, property taxes, insurance for the home during the period the sale of the home is deferred, and the condition of the home comparable to that at the time of trial.” [Cal. Fam. Code 3801.]

In making this determination, the Court has to consider each of the following factors:

(1) The resident parent’s income.

(2) The availability of spousal support, child support, or both spousal and child support.

(3) Any other sources of funds available to make those payments.

[Cal. Fam. Code 3801(b).]

The Family Code specifically describes the legislature’s intent regarding the economic feasibility test to accomplish all of the following:

(1) Avoid the likelihood of possible defaults on the payments of notes and resulting foreclosures.

(2) Avoid inadequate insurance coverage.

(3) Prevent deterioration of the condition of the family home.

(4) Prevent any other circumstance which would jeopardize both parents’ equity in the home.

[Cal. Fam. Code 3801(c).]

If the Court is satisfied that the deferred sale is economically feasible, then it has to ask the following questions:

(1) How long has the child lived in the home?

(2) What is the child’s grade in school?

(3) How close is the residence to the child’s school or daycare?

(4) Was the house modified to accommodate a disabled child or a disabled custodial parent?

(5) What emotional detriment would there be to the child if he/she changed residences?

(6) How close is the house to the custodial parent’s work?

(7) How financially able are the parents to obtain suitable housing?

(8) What tax consequences would be experienced by each party as a result of the deferred sale?

(9) What other “just and equitable” factors are there for the court to consider regarding a potential deferred sale.

[Cal. Fam. Code 3802.]

Once the Court has considered all of the required factors, then it can make its order. The order has to spell out the duration of the deferral and what each party has to do to maintain the residence. Usually, the “in-spouse” has to pay the costs of living in the residence to include the mortgage, property taxes, HOA, etc.

Now, the parties can always agree to a deferred sale without the Court ordering it if they so choose. They would just want to also carefully consider the factors described above as well. It would not due for a party to insist on a deferred sale of home order that simply was impossible financially.

One important point to consider: In my experience, the children are far less emotionally impacted by a move than the parents realize. It is important when considering a deferred sale of home order, to ask whether the deferred sale is desired because the kids need it or because a parent is having a hard time letting go of the house. Often it is better to just sell the house as soon as possible (you can visit https://www.housebuyersofamerica.com/sell-my-house-home to learn about a possible way of doing this). It is common for people ton entangle their emotions with things. Perhaps we will make seriously flawed financial decisions in order to hold onto a thing like a house. Remember to really think about the decision of a deferred home sale. If it doesn’t make sense financially-then it won’t help the kids either. In fact, an economically imprudent deferred home sale can hurt the kids a lot more than it will help.

Other resources regarding deferred home sales:

In re Marriage of Braud (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 797, 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 179.

In re Marriage of Boseman (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 372, 107 Cal.Rptr. 232.

In re Marriage of Herrmann (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 361, 148 Cal.Rptr. 550.

In re Marriage of Stallworth (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 742, 237 Cal.Rptr. 829.

For more information regarding a deferred home sale, contact attorney Shawn Weber at 858-345-1616 or visit our website at www.bravewebermack.com .

*Certified Specialist – Family Law

The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Love and Real Estate: If I bought a house a week or two before we were legally divorced does she still get half?

Shawn Weber, Attorney at Law

www.bravewebermack.com

Love and Real EstateIn California, the question that should be asked is not when the divorce is legally finalized, but when you were separated. California law defines your date of separation as that day on which it was clear to both parties that the marriage was irretrievable. That could be the date a spouse moved to a separate residence or the date a Petition for Dissolution of Marriage was filed at court. If the house was acquired after the date of separation, it will be considered separate property. (Beware: if you use community property funds to purchase the house or to make a down payment, you run the risk of giving your ex-spouse an interest in the property or – at the very least – a right to reimbursement.)

BE CAREFUL! Adding a spouses name to the title for a piece of separate real property (i.e., a deed) will turn the property into a community asset. However, a right to reimbursement of the separate property investment will still stand.

Love and Real Estate: In the State of California, if I own the property before we get married does she still get it if we break up?

By Shawn Weber, Attorney at Law

No. In California divorce law, it is important to distinguish “community property” from “separate property”. §761 of the California Family Code provides that “except as otherwise provided by statute, all property, real or personal, wherever situated, acquired by a married person during the marriage while domiciled in this state is community property.” But, §770 of the California Family Code provides that separate property of a married person includes the following: (1) all property owned prior to the marriage; (2) all property acquired after the marriage by gift or inheritance; and (3) all rents, issues and profits of any separate property asset.

When a couple divorces in California, the court will divide all of the community property in half and award 100% of the separate property to its respective owner.  This means that if you own property prior to getting married it remains your separate property even after you break up. However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, if you commingle your assets you can make an asset community property. Also, if you make a down payment on a piece of real estate with separate property funds prior to the marriage, but throughout your marriage you make mortgage payments from your community wages, your spouse will have a community interest in that property known as a Moore-Marsden interest, which is calculated with a formula based upon the amount of loan principal paid from community funds. However, you will get your separate property down payment back.

For a free consultation about your property and family law, call San Diego Attorney Shawn Weber at 858-410-0144.

Love and Real Estate: Radio Appearance

Last Thursday, November  8, 2012, I was very pleased to appear on the local radio show, Real Estate Radio, on San Diego AM 1700 ESPN Radio. The topic was “Love and Real Estate.” I enjoyed the opportunity to have a conversation about how California Family Law can affect relationships as it relates to questions of real estate.

Listen to to the podcast here: http://nxtgrp.com/podcast/realestateradio/?p=episode&name=2012-11-10_rer-ep121108.mp3

I was also very pleased to have a chance to spread the word about Collaborative Divorce as an alternative to litigation at court.

Thanks to Real Estate Radio for having me on!

Beth Shak Sued For Shoe Collection By Ex-Husband


This article on Huffington Post about Beth Shak’s $1 million shoe collection is quite illustrative.

A person who spends that kind of money on shoes should not at all be surprised that it comes up in the divorce. The reality is that it is an asset with value. That it is some woman’s shoe collection is not the point. If they have value, they need to be divided. In fact, in some states including California, spending that kind of money during the marriage no matter what the asset could be a breach of fiduciary duty. You’re not allowed to have “secret rooms” full of cash without sharing it with the ex… so why a shoe collection?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost