Using real estate as assets - proof of no mortgage?

[noront 6]

32 minutes ago, Jorgedig said:

OP, the reason USCIS is unlikely to accept your joint sponsor's primary residence in lieu of income is because it would be a hardship (and very unlikely) to expect someone to sell their home, thus becoming homeless, to support an immigrant.

 

But, go for it and see what they say.  No need to dump on the 'unhelpful' folks here who have been on VJ for years and seen this exact scenario.

My reference to the responses being unhelpful was that the poster would not initially explain. Just "unlikely to be accepted" and then: read bottom of page 12. Maybe a couple more sentences would have been helpful? We got to it on the third reply though, so I'm appreciative of that.
 
A search of Visajourney found plenty of mixed results on this issue. Lots of questions and some references to the fact that the rules have changed and you can now use your primary residence, but maybe the IO won't accept it, depending on your situation.

 

Can you point me to a (fairly recent, post-rule change) post on Visajourney where someone was denied by using their primary residence as assets or the home of a joint sponsor? I've searched and not yet found one. If so, I will show it to my lawyer.

 

If it becomes an issue, we can show proof that they own another home that's less than an hour away from where they live now and therefore selling this one will not cause undue hardship. My inlaws aren't terribly financially sophisticated or technologically literate, but they have real estate assets coming out of their eyeballs. They were just most comfortable using the primary residence for the joint sponsorship and I wasn't going to push them to do otherwise. If need be, I think they will be willing to offer up the title of one of their other properties as proof that they have somewhere else to live and will not become homeless. Couldn't one also argue that you can get a home equity line of credit, particularly if you have no other outstanding debts against your home? 
 

[SalishSea 18,102]

2 minutes ago, noront said:

Can you point me to a (fairly recent, post-rule change) post on Visajourney where someone was denied by using their primary residence as assets or the home of a joint sponsor? I've searched and not yet found one. If so, I will show it to my lawyer.

No, I'm not going to do that.  My search would not yield different results than yours.  And by all means, if what you're finding points to no problem with attempting to qualify the sponsorship of an immigrant exclusively via the value of a primary residence, go for it.

 

Just please come back and let us know the result of that.

[noront 6]

1 minute ago, Jorgedig said:

No, I'm not going to do that.  My search would not yield different results than yours.  And by all means, if what you're finding points to no problem with attempting to qualify the sponsorship of an immigrant exclusively via the value of a primary residence, go for it.

 

Just please come back and let us know the result of that.

For sure, I will! It seems to be a confusing issue and there is really no good info on the internet about it. So I will update either way.

 

If it's that contentious then I suppose I'll have to wait for the RFIE and then go get the title for the property showing no mortgages or liens. (Or some other request.)

 

I was pretty unhappy about sending in an application without it, but the lawyer did not seem worried and my husband was very reluctant to ask his parents to go back to the courthouse again after they sent us the wrong thing twice. At least we got the paperwork in before the public charge rule is re-implemented and before the fees increase in October. That seemed to be the lawyer's main concern.

[JeanneAdil 6,610]

3 hours ago, noront said:

Sorry -- the bank reference was because an earlier poster had suggested it. 

 

One question about the insurance policy is, how would it prove that you did not take out an insurance policy and then subsequently place a new mortgage or lien on the home? It's definitely worth checking into though. My in-laws are friends with their insurance adjuster, so he could probably help them out.

insurance underwriter's verify lienholder's (part of public records) and would demand that the insured put all lienholder's names and addresses on the policy

along with the fact that if you have a mortgage or home equity or any other loan using house assets,  the company wants proof that they are listed on the insurance policy 

and a mortgage company insists on home owner's insurance or they initiate a policy and add the cost to the monthly premium

 

these companies are going to protect their interests

[noront 6]

3 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

insurance underwriter's verify lienholder's (part of public records) and would demand that the insured put all lienholder's names and addresses on the policy

along with the fact that if you have a mortgage or home equity or any other loan using house assets,  the company wants proof that they are listed on the insurance policy 

and a mortgage company insists on home owner's insurance or they initiate a policy and add the cost to the monthly premium

 

these companies are going to protect their interests

Helpful, thanks! Do you know if that information is satisfactory to an immigration officer as proof of no debts?  Especially because in this case, it should not list any lienholders, so you''re in essence trying to prove the absence of something. This would be fantastic if it works, as I'd rather not shell out more money to hire a title search company. The appraisal alone was many hundreds of dollars and weeks of waiting.