Posted by parkerc/ME on 4/3/09 7:09pm
Msg #283503

Spousal states determination

Time to get off the librium/lithium and out of the TN hills and on to more pertinent subjects. : )....I'm picking up a string which has gotten lost from a couple pages back. I stumbled upon this link, which includes a matrix of states and marital signature requirements (published by a broker agency). I can't attest to it's accuracy, not being a broker, lawyer, yada yada . . . . The doc was created in Jan '02 so perhaps changes since then, but a nice tool for determining spousal states if it is up to date. Comments??

http://www.nationstarbroker.com/documents/NSM_MaritalSignatoryTable.pdf

Reply by TNhills on 4/3/09 7:19pm
Msg #283504

Thanks great information. I will check with the attorney I work with and see if the info is correct.

Reply by Blueink_TN on 4/3/09 7:26pm
Msg #283505

I know! I know!

If you're in TN, both spouses must sign, if in CA, CALL YOUR ATTORNEY before doing anything, even if you're getting your pet neutered or spayed, or signing your child up for soccer, or becoming a tupperware rep. Sorry Parker, I may not be answering correctly, but heh, it's the weekend!!!

Reply by TNhills on 4/3/09 7:34pm
Msg #283506

Re: I know! I know!

I know TN is a spousal state. I want to ask my attorney I work with if all the info is up to date and correct. Since 2002 things change.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 4/4/09 4:47am
Msg #283556

"Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

I'm pretty sure all 50 states are "spousal" - they all recognize spousal unions, they all have a variety of laws pertaining to those unions and they all have laws specific to the effect of those unions on real property. This is just one of those terms that grates on my ears like chalk on a blackboard - eh, we all have our thing, right?!

The matrix is interesting, but I think far too much information in the hands of the WRONG people, especially such dated info. The 'spousal laws' of each state - being laws - require INTERPRETATION, which requires a law degree. They can be complicated, and they can be and frequently are misinterpreted (even by lawyers).

We all should know how the laws of our own state are CUSTOMARILY interpreted, so we can send out the head's-up call (as service providers) to the appropriate party (title agent) should we discover docs that are not drawn as is customary.

When we have a loan from another state, and we're not familiar with that state's customary interpretation - there is only ONE correct thing to do, and that is to ask the title agent. We shouldn't be up here on the forum asking, shouldn't be reading any matrices, etc. For the sake of interesting conversation, okay - but for making any decision or taking action on, never.

The REASON is - not all title agents, not all attorneys, not all people responsible for interpreting the spousal laws, even within each state, REACH THE SAME CONCLUSIONS. That's why we have attorneys to begin with ...

I might 'know', for example, that here in MI the spouse (either gender) customarily 'must' sign - but I can't count the times the title agent (usually from another state) says "Oh, no, they don't have to on this because ...[whatever]" Fine, I provide the head's up when needed (always just as a question of what they would like me to do), and that's the end of it.

This falls into one of those categories where "a little information can be a dangerous thing".

Reply by parkerc/ME on 4/4/09 7:58am
Msg #283560

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

You are definitely not ranting, Renee. You brought up good points, which is what my original post intended. I felt the stumbled-upon matrix, created by the brokerage listed in the URL address, would give a general idea of possible signatory requirements in various states, but even the number of footnotes on it indicates it shouldn't be relied on as set in stone (as well as being from 2002!). And of course, as SA's, it's not our job to interpret anything but to notify the TC or SS if we encounter a marital status that seems to conflict with what's reflected in the docs and get our marching orders from them. And I, too, agree that a little information can be dangerous; but then again a little information might be just enough to raise a red flag to us to go back to the TC or SS and say, hey, this is what I found out...is it going to be a problem? (And I'll take one of your 'rants' over 20 of some of the other posts here any day!!) :-)

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/4/09 8:58am
Msg #283567

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

Back in 2002 I checked with the Florida Counsel to the Florida bar on this.
I asked him whether asking the non-borrowing spouse to sign the "marital docs" when the spouse's name didn't appear on a signature line was OK. (Here in Florida the spouse usually signs the Mortgage, RTC etc). His response was that as they are legal papers it would be UPL for me to request the non-borrowing spouse sign anything where it wasn't indicated he/she should sign. The title company would have to direct me, so I could let the NBS know the title company wished him/her to sign. In absence of any instruction from the title company I could not request the NBS to sign.

So, when I had loan docs where there was a NBS who wasn't on the signature line I would call the title company and ask of they wanted the NBS to sign anything, and which docs they wanted signed by the NBS (some companies do want different ones signed by the NBS in addition to the "usual" ones). If I couldn't get a hold of the title company, then I did not ask the NBS to sign.
It isn't up to us to make the decision.

Reply by MW/VA on 4/4/09 9:30am
Msg #283581

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

I ran into this situation last night. Docs arrive, NBS name is not on anything, but tc emails to tell me she has to sign the customery docs. I'm confused, and call them to verify. Their explanation is that this particular lender doesn't type the non-borrowing parties name on anything--ok, go with it. Get to the borrower's home & mention that the wife does need to sign some docs as NBS. Borrower is confused as well, because LO told them that the wife was supposed to come off title (credit score issues or something like that) & told them to go to the courthouse to get it changed. VA is a spousal states, with regards to rights to marital assets. Why these LO take it upon themselves to remove someone from title is beyond me.
It's not up to us to make those decisions, of course, but we do need to be education & aware for situations like this.

Reply by BrendaTx on 4/4/09 9:34am
Msg #283583

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

*& told them to go to the courthouse to get it changed.*


Great. LOs giving quasi-legal advice. There's more to changing ownership of property than getting a name off and on a deed. Sending them to the courthouse as if it were like changing a car title is peculiar...maybe the LO didn't really understand the process him/herself?

Reply by MW/VA on 4/4/09 9:37am
Msg #283584

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

I've heard this same story many times before. Obviously the LO's don't know what they're talking about, and don't know that someone can be on title but not on the loan.

Reply by sue_pa on 4/5/09 8:20am
Msg #283644

Re: "Spousal States" - my early morning rant ...

Renee, you said this so much better than I have ... for years. I've never understood why in a community filled with so many people terrified of UPL they take this task upon themselves.

If you have a client you've worked for for years and done the same loan for them for years and you know what is required, make the determination yourself. Otherwise, ask in writing - especially if you get generic instructions - double especially - from a second party such as a signing service - rather than specfiic instructions for that particular loan.

Virtually every time I see "marital docs" listed I see the TIL included in the list. I know of two loan packages out there where the spouse does not sign the TIL. Right or wrong, certainly not my call to tell Chase and C-wide what to do - they have an entire compliance department filled with lawyers to tell them what to do - and when I began to see this I did ask and ask for 3 or 4 times.

Reply by dickb/wi on 4/5/09 1:44pm
Msg #283680

wisconsin is not a common law jurisdiction!!!!!....... n/m