Posted by Ted_MI on 2/11/05 9:43am
Msg #20210

Re: Interesting situation

I got a call late yesterday afternoon for a what I thought was a refinance (turned out to be a HELOC) for yesterday evening. Received the confirmation from the ss in due course. Noted on the confirmation that there was only one borrower, a guy. So called him up to confirm the appointment and since Michigan is a spousal state inquired whether he was married or not. He seemed a little put out by the question but did indicate that yes indeed he was married but his wife was out of the country. He also indicated that the property in question was not in Michigan (actually it was in Arizona). So I think to myself, hmmm OK Michigan is a spousal state, but the property is not in Michigan. Does the wife still have rights to such property? Have no idea whatsoever. So I call up the contact at the title company. She appears to think that it is an interesting question but really doesn't know. Inquires of the escrow officer. He responds that no, the wife does not need to sign. Ok I have an answer.

I guess what I am curious about is the following: is Arizona not a spousal state? Or if it is would that fact not apply to out of state property owners?

Any other thoughts or musings would be appreciated. TIA.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 2/11/05 10:16am
Msg #20214

Re: Interesting situation

There are so many different laws in play here, to determine whether or not a spouse has to sign any documents, is not within the NSA purview. It may be investment property, held only by the one borrower. It may be that the other spouse has been given full consideration and waived their rights. We just don't know the circumstances behind the reasoning, and, I for one, will not speculate on the reason.

Of course, had this been their residential, currently occupied property, I too would question the title company. But other than that, it's up to the title company and lender to sort it out if it is incorrect. NSA's typically just don't have the background information to make an informed decision.

Reply by janCA on 2/11/05 11:01am
Msg #20216

Sole and separate property

And many times, even though CA is a spousal state, the title is held as "the sole and separate property" of just one spouse, therefore, only that spouse signs.

Reply by HisHughness on 2/11/05 11:14am
Msg #20218

Re: Sole and separate property

Anytime, regardless of the nature of the transaction on its face, when I encounter a transaction in which only one spouse is identified as a signatory, I call the title company. It is the most prudent course.

Reply by Ted_MI on 2/11/05 2:11pm
Msg #20250

Re: Sole and separate property

Hugh,

I fully agree with you. And, as mentioned, that is exactly what I did.

Reply by BrendaTX on 2/11/05 1:04pm
Msg #20236

Re: Interesting situation

In Texas (community property state) if the property is not the homestead it is my understanding that both spouses do not *have* to sign.

Perhaps yours is a parallel situation.

Reply by shallena_MI on 2/11/05 4:48pm
Msg #20285

Re: Interesting situation

My understanding is that because they reside in Michigan that dower rights apply. One spouse can not sell or refinance a property without the other one knowing about it and acknowledging it. Even if the property is in another state. But if the title company says the spouse does not have to sign then I would make sure that you make a note in your journal that the title company said she did not have to sign.... that way you cover your behind. You would hate to be called into court in the middle of a divorce case or something. :o)