Home Ownership and I-134 AOS

[TeddyHoney 42]

I was divorced back in August 2010 and I get to keep the house. The decree says I need to refinance to get my ex's name off the mortgage within 18 months and to free her from responsibility. I'm a little upside down on the mortgage and house so refinancing would be difficult if not impossible right now. Anyway, I am well above 125% of the poverty line with my income alone and have been employed at the same company for over 14 years and also since my ex moved to California (I'm in Ohio) and got custody of our one child, I do not pay child support because I pay all travel expenses for my daughter to travel back here once a month for long weekend months and the standard visitation times (spring break, 6 weeks of summer, every other thanksgiving and half Christmas break). Do I even need to mention that I own a home as an asset on the I-134? Its not much of an asset right now anyway and my ex's name is still on it. Is my income and bank records and what's left of my 401k enough to satisfy?

[YuAndDan 153]

Nope, you need not list any assets if income is more than sufficient. I only used income on the I-134. Do not need to use 401K, bank accounts, home value etc.. Just income.

Here is what I followed for income evidence for the I-134:

[TeddyHoney 42]

Nope, you need not list any assets if income is more than sufficient. I only used income on the I-134. Do not need to use 401K, bank accounts, home value etc.. Just income.

Here is what I followed for income evidence for the I-134:

Thanks. I didn't think so but wasn't sure. That's exactly what I was looking for.

Thanks again!

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

As YuAndDan said, don't list assets if income alone is enough. Listing assets only complicates things. In your case, it would complicate things far too much. You'd need to provide evidence you owned the asset, which is difficult when the deed is currently also in your ex-wife's name. You'd also need a current appraisal from a licensed appraiser, and statements from the lien holders. The net result would show that your home is a liability rather than an asset, which makes it pointless to go through all that effort.

Just out of curiosity, how the heck did you agree to a stipulation that you refinance within 18 months when your mortgage is under water? Your ex-wife sure as heck would have insisted you buy her out if you'd had equity in the home. Why would you agree to allow her to walk away from a debt? In order to meet that stipulation you're probably going to have to pay down the principal enough to get an 80/20 loan/value ratio so you can refinance.

[YuAndDan 153]

Thanks. I didn't think so but wasn't sure. That's exactly what I was looking for.

Thanks again!

Note: You CAN use simple IRS transcripts in place of copies of full returns, transcripts are free from IRS, they will FAX or mail them to you.

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc156.html?portlet=1

Just call the 800 number.

[joyjohn 18]

As YuAndDan said, don't list assets if income alone is enough. Listing assets only complicates things. In your case, it would complicate things far too much. You'd need to provide evidence you owned the asset, which is difficult when the deed is currently also in your ex-wife's name. You'd also need a current appraisal from a licensed appraiser, and statements from the lien holders. The net result would show that your home is a liability rather than an asset, which makes it pointless to go through all that effort.

Just out of curiosity, how the heck did you agree to a stipulation that you refinance within 18 months when your mortgage is under water? Your ex-wife sure as heck would have insisted you buy her out if you'd had equity in the home. Why would you agree to allow her to walk away from a debt? In order to meet that stipulation you're probably going to have to pay down the principal enough to get an 80/20 loan/value ratio so you can refinance.

hummmmm!!! he sounds almost like mine, i was divorce in aug too, i also get to keep the house but under a different rule, the judge gave me the option either pay my ex-wife her portion of the equite, minus the 13,000.00 he awarded me or i can put the house on the market, upon selling said house minus what she owes me, but i do have a high equity base but her 13,000 kills her part...i had a appraiseal of 100,500.00 for the house ........its sets on the market for 105,000.00......depress market.no takers, no time limit to settle either, ahhhhhhhhhh shucks sorry ex.......i wont be listing my house as a asset either on my I-864...

[joyjohn 18]

hummmmm!!! he sounds almost like mine, i was divorce in aug too, i also get to keep the house but under a different rule, the judge gave me the option either pay my ex-wife her portion of the equite, minus the 13,000.00 he awarded me or i can put the house on the market, upon selling said house minus what she owes me, but i do have a high equity base but her 13,000 kills her part...i had a appraiseal of 100,500.00 for the house ........its sets on the market for 105,000.00......depress market.no takers, no time limit to settle either, ahhhhhhhhhh shucks sorry ex.......i wont be listing my house as a asset either on my I-864...

opps equity.typo # 1234 today

[TeddyHoney 42]

As YuAndDan said, don't list assets if income alone is enough. Listing assets only complicates things. In your case, it would complicate things far too much. You'd need to provide evidence you owned the asset, which is difficult when the deed is currently also in your ex-wife's name. You'd also need a current appraisal from a licensed appraiser, and statements from the lien holders. The net result would show that your home is a liability rather than an asset, which makes it pointless to go through all that effort.

Just out of curiosity, how the heck did you agree to a stipulation that you refinance within 18 months when your mortgage is under water? Your ex-wife sure as heck would have insisted you buy her out if you'd had equity in the home. Why would you agree to allow her to walk away from a debt? In order to meet that stipulation you're probably going to have to pay down the principal enough to get an 80/20 loan/value ratio so you can refinance.

It's harmless and won't stick. I had the house before we got married. She got on it on a refinance I we did after. She never paid thew mortgage. She's not going to care in 9 months, 18 months, 10 years! I needed to get rid of her so I could move on with my current fiancee.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

It's harmless and won't stick. I had the house before we got married. She got on it on a refinance I we did after. She never paid thew mortgage. She's not going to care in 9 months, 18 months, 10 years! I needed to get rid of her so I could move on with my current fiancee.

It actually doesn't matter whether she personally contributed income to the mortgage payments. Your income was a community asset while you were married, so she has a vested interest in the home. Like I said, if you had equity then she sure as heck would have fought for a piece of it during the property settlement. Since the home is a liability she successfully got you to assume full responsibility for it, even adding the requirement that you remove her from the mortgage within 18 months. Don't be surprised if this comes back to haunt you. If you end up walking away from the mortgage, for whatever reason, it will clobber her credit and she could sue you for not meeting your obligation.

I'm not lecturing you about this. I'm just really surprised your lawyer let her get away with this stipulation. She assumed responsibility for half the debt when she signed the loan agreement. You could probably have gotten the court to order that SHE pay YOU. Dunno what the laws are in your state, though.

[TeddyHoney 42]

It actually doesn't matter whether she personally contributed income to the mortgage payments. Your income was a community asset while you were married, so she has a vested interest in the home. Like I said, if you had equity then she sure as heck would have fought for a piece of it during the property settlement. Since the home is a liability she successfully got you to assume full responsibility for it, even adding the requirement that you remove her from the mortgage within 18 months. Don't be surprised if this comes back to haunt you. If you end up walking away from the mortgage, for whatever reason, it will clobber her credit and she could sue you for not meeting your obligation.

I'm not lecturing you about this. I'm just really surprised your lawyer let her get away with this stipulation. She assumed responsibility for half the debt when she signed the loan agreement. You could probably have gotten the court to order that SHE pay YOU. Dunno what the laws are in your state, though.

You know, right now, I'm trying to get my fiancee a K-1 VISA. I'll address this issue some other time. I have a year yet anyway and there were other considerations and agreements in that decree that are too complex and lengthy to discuss here. I just wanted to know if I needed to use the house as an asset if my income was sufficient and that question was answered. I probably shouldn't have put details of the decree in my post in the first place so that was my fault.

But thanks for your observations