Quote Quoting bjornenolejonet
View Post
My question involves a marriage in the state of: NY
My ex and I co-own the marital property, we are both on the mortgage, but as per the divorce degree I am solely responsible for all payments of loan and taxes of the property since 2016, and have exclusive rights to the house. Recently I grieved the property taxes and was able to get them lowered. The taxes are paid through the mortgage and every year the bank does an analysis of the escrow account for the taxes tied to the mortgage. This year as the taxes went down there was an overage in the account and a check was sent out with the overage amount. Since my ex is on the top line in the mortgage (the check that was in both our names) was sent to him, and he cashed in it and neglected to hand the money over to me. The amount is slightly over $1,000. The bank sent out the check on 4/12, and ex cashed it in on 4/22. I wrote him an email yesterday asking him to reimburse me the full amount within 24 hours or I would file a police report. Is there any other actions I can take? Does he have a right to this money? Thanks!
Let me ask you: Are we given to understand that the divorce decree: (1) Granted you exclusive possessory rights to the home; (2) Ordered you to individually assume all future accruing costs of ownership - YET (3) left the ownership of the home unaltered leaving recorded title to the home remaining in your joint names? If not, then what are we to make of this statement: "My ex and I co-own the marital property"?!

If so, then you've got bigger concerns than quarreling over this lousy rebate check. Also, if so you must have been represented in court by a diseased squirrel. Because if so, you cannot dispose of the home nor refinance the mortgage loan without your ex husband's cooperation. And if he should die, then you'd dealing with his estate and/or heirs.

Are you aware that if so, that you two now hold title to the former love nest as cotenants the worst possible way to own real property. And although his ability to sell his one half undivided interest might be curtailed by the language in the decree, that his attaching and levying creditors would be under no such restriction?