[imelkai]

My uncle and his wife are separating. Does anyone know who get's the house? They are both on the loan, but he is primary. She is demanding the house. Does the court automatically give it to her. We live in Texas. They do have three kids. Does anyone know what rights he has, if there was suspision of her cheating?:mad:

[Fr_Chuck]

Nothing is automatic.

But whoever does not get the house, they need to be sure they get the court to force them to get a new mortgage, if they don't they have have seroius issues latter.

[ScottGem]

Distrubtion of joint property in a divorce is a matter of negotiation not law. It depends on who wants the house or who wants it more as well as other factors.

[s_cianci]

If they are both on the deed, then it's unlikely that she'd get it if he objects. They'd have to sell the house and split the profits 50-50. Are there any kids involved? That could tip the scales as the court will try to preserve intact their pre-divorce home. In that case the spouse who gets primary custody of the kids could also get the house and would have to buy out the other spouse.

[calawmom]

I think all the above answers have something to offer to this question. There was, however, one part no one addressed. The question asked about the relevance of "a suspicion of her cheating." This is a question of whether the court would care. That question turns on whether this is a no-fault state. I don't know for sure, but Texas probably is. In "no-fault" states, no one has to prove adultery in order to get divorced, and the courts rarely consider it when dividing property. That said, it makes a huge difference in negotiations between the parties because of the hurt and betrayal involved. As a mediator, I find it much harder to work with couples where the trust is completely gone. I hope that is not the case here, for the sake of the children.

[andrewcocke]

In most contested cases all assetts are split 50/50, in the case of the house, it is sold, the mortgage and all leins on the house paid off, and the remaining balance split between them.

Cheating doesn't mean anything. She could flat out be a whore, the only thing that might hinder would be her winning custody of the kids. Laws aren't based on morality, they are based on money.

[dbrown572003]

I think if she has the childdren and her name is on the deed she should get the house no questions about it.

[ScottGem]

i think if she has the childdren and her name is on the deed she should get the house no questions about it.

I'm sorry but what you think should happen is immaterially. How assets are divided is a subject of negotiation to determine the distribution of assets. There is not a hard and fast set of rules to govern who gets what.

[petra 17]

Maybe They Should Sell The House And Each Person Get Half The Profit That Is What My Parents Did