Is refinancing the best answer?

Here's the story: Me and my fiance cosigned a house for my mom and a house for my uncle. Mom's house is $700,000 and uncle's is $800,000 for a combined total of $1.5 million in real estate under our names.

We did a credit report check recently and found out mom hasn't made a house payment in 6 months and uncle pays but is late.

My FICO score went from 689 to 551 and fiance's went from 660 to 503. Yes, it's THAT bad. So bad in fact that we were turned down from buying timeshare and trying to get a condo. We have to move in 3 months and no one will take us due to our scores. We even tried renting a room and got turned down due to score.

I know refinancing is the best way to be permanently removed as opposed to quit claim.

Should we hire a lawyer? Would that do any good?

Also, are we entitled to half of the equity on both houses since we are primary?

We were planning on getting married next year and getting a place of our own but now it's not going to happen.
Additional Details
We would like to know how to be permanently removed from both parties so we can start to rebuild our credit.

Thank you to all who respond!

It sounds as if you need Quit Claim Deeds on both properties. Get your names off of those titles and loans ASAP. The damage has already been done and now you need to rebuild your own credit scores. Talk to a mortgage broker or a Real Estate attorney for more information about how to get started.

Here's a link to more information on Quit Claim Deeds: http://homebuying.about.com/cs/realestateglossary/g/quitclaim_deed.htm

Good luck!

I'm no expert but I know one thing: You need to talk to a lawyer!!! Make it an attorney that specializes in Real Estate. You need to dissociate yourselves from these two houses as soon as you can.

Wow, serious issues. I would DEFINATELY invest in an Attorney before looking into refinancing. I know its family, but you may have to persure legal action to force payment or sale of the properties in order to free yourselves of this debt.

This is what you do! List both homes since you are on the Title. So when you parents and uncle walk out they see a for sale sign. Call you cursing and you state you messed up my credit and future life. How does it feel not to know this was going to happen. Ok so that is what I would do. Here the deal. Even with those low of scores you can still own a home bad is you will hate the interest rates. I would state you refinance both and get the equity out. Half to the wedding and half to a new home. Since its in San Diego you will need at least 120K am sure to find a decent property as a down payment. If your mom has not paid in 6 months than I am sure Foreclosure status may of started. Unclse maybe talked to him and find out the deal. If you need me to do a market anaylisis on your property I can do it for FREE since all that information is FREE to me. Lets discuss this and get you two out of trouble.

Contact a credit couselor:

Credit Counseling Programs
http://www.complete-debt-info.com/category/Credit-Counseling-Programs.html

You'll have to refinance the mortgage to have your names removed. I'm amazed that you could get that size of a mortgage to begin with, because 60 credit scores aren't that great. If you gave any money toward the down payment, then you would be entitled to some of the equity if the house was sold. Otherwise, it's up to your mom and uncle if they want to share. You could press this issue in court, but then you'd be destroying a family relationship. good luck

It will be very difficult to refinance with your credit scores being so low. I would suggest you sale both homes, as quickly as possible.

bostonianinmo's answer is the only intelligent one here!

You can not get your name off the loan without the bank's permission, and that is not likely.

Your mom/uncle will not be able to refinance in their name unless they can pass the credit check. Since their credit has been hurt as bad as yours then that's not likely either.

So you have two options. Kick out mom/uncle and sell the home, or figure out how you can refinance under your name.

But the damage has now been done to your credit, and I don't see any way to quickly restore it.

Holy cow! Well, I hope this was a lesson for both of you. Go see legal advice immediately! A lawyer will be able to tell both of your options. The hardest way out of it would be bankruptcy, but that will demolish both credit ratings for 7 - 10 years! Since you're young, figure in 10 years.

my advice would be to go to the lender and explain the situation. Tell them you want a refi and ask NICELY for them to remove the negative info from your credit report.

They might not, but asking is free.

Well, since your mom hasn't made a payment in 6 months there's no re-fi in her future. Foreclosure and eviction are more like it.

Unfortunately you can't just get yourselves removed from the loans; it doesn't work that way. I'm quite surprised that your mother's lender hasn't come after you yet for the arrearages.

If you're on the deed as owners probably the only thing you can do is sue for partition and buy out her equity. Once you deduct the outstanding payments there probably won't be much to pay her anyway. You'll be held liable for the debt as a co-signor so you might as well get her off the deed. Whether you evict her is up to you. If you're not on the deed, you're pretty much screwed.

Not a lot you can do in your uncle's case since he is paying.

Yeah, a lawyer sounds like a good idea!

please my friends watch this movie called "The Secret", it is not a direct answer to your technical questions here but , a direct answer for your future as a whole.....Good luck!

http://www.thesecret.tv/home.html

PEACE__________NEVER FINANCE WITH MONEY ON WHICH YOU HAVE TO PAY INTEREST

######################################...
in the name of allah

TEXTBOOK MODE

hypothetically,
>>>>>>>borrower borrows money with no interest condition, this amount

withdrawn from buying commodities and turned into produced goods which

can be disposed by means of the lenders spending the money returned.

if the lenders have lended on condition that interest be paid, then to

pay this the concern decreases employee pay, or extract more labour

from them to produce more, or decrease equipment maintainanance or

extract more labour from them. if the lenders spend all of the

interest amount on the concern's commodities(after spending their

returned money on the concern's commodities excluding interest) then

all commodities would be sold, the lenders getting more commodities,

while employees getting lesser commodities(after spending all their

wages and salaries) or having exerted more labour, or equipment

maintainance decreased or having exerted more. if any of the employees

hold from spending money except interest money that they may have,

this will result in so much of goods being unsold, which will either

perish or be sold at a decreased price(if it dosent decrease then

there will be no money except the withheld amount to purchase them),

thereby in the next work session: resulting in the decrease of their

pay, or extraction of greater labour, or decrease in equipment

maintainance, or extraction of more labour from equipment. if the

lenders withhold interest money from spending(after spending their

returned principal on commodities) then goods worth that money will

remain unsold resulting in perish and price decrease(if it dosent

decrease then there will be no money except interest to purchase

them). after this if they spend it(after the spending of amount gotten

after the withholding, even by those who have not withheld), then all

goods would be sold and so much it being unspent in the hands of

employees, not perishable and used by rise in prices(if used).

after introduction of interest based funds in a country, jobs may be

created(after buisness proliferation) and the lender takes interest

from the other factors of production, with them toiling so much extra

or gaining so much less. meanwhile perished unsold goods head the firm

toward bankruptcy(as for unspent money, them being entirely being

spent by increase in prices). as perished goods leave, remuneration

and work and consumption and production fall. it can also be discerned

that this depression caused here does not turn into boom on its own

(though the 'boom' does.)

NOTE: higher extraction of labour and higher qualification demands for

employees and employee dumping or switching : they may be taken

together.
lower equipment expenditure and higher advertising cost and

bankruptcy : they may be taken to gether.
money being unspent and formation of luxury industries : they

may be taken together <<<<<<<

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&...

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&...

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&...
STORY MODE

there is a worker who produces his goods with his own machine. buying

all his goods with all his money. he uses the purchase money to buy

raw material and repeats. a person comes and it is agreed that he

gives the first money, to return a greater amount after sale. the

labourer buys more of raw material, and works harder, produces more

goods and cannot buy all his goods because he has to give some of the

money to the lender. some of those goods perish and he manages to

consume the rest by decresing its price,stuffing himself. the interest

is given and the principal to be paid later. the worker is unable to

buy the same amount of raw material as after the loan, managing to

buying lesser than that. he then produces goods, working hard but less

harder than after the loan taking, and produces lesser goods than

after the loan taking, but cannot buy all his goods because he has to

give money to the lender which he does and he is left with a lesser

amount to purchase raw material with. the goods he cannot buy have the

same fate, and the labourer stuffs himself but eats lesser than the

previous stuffing. whenever the lender spent the interest of a

production session on the goods of the session, then all the session's

goods were sold and the worker had te same previous consumption amount

and was left with the amount of money he had in the beginning of the

session to purchase raw material with. whenever the lender bought more

than a session's interest, the worker couldnt spend all the money(on

his goods), so he spent it all by increasing the price.(and money

dosent perish). and his consumption was lesser than the previous

session and he was left with more amount than what he had at the

beginning of the session. time passed, the worker toiling to produce

more goods, the price falling and goods dying when the lender witheld

interest from spending, the price staying same and all session goods

sold and when the lender spent the session interest, surplus money and

price rising when the lender spent more than the session's interest(on

the session's goods). whenever goods died the worker could not recover

its price. in this way, over time the volume of goods fell until the

worker did not have any sale money left after paying interest so he

could not eat, did not have work(which like his eating, eventually

decreased to zero). he then couldnt give the lender his interest after

the next empty session who then asks for the principal which he fails

to give.

the lender confiscates him and his machine.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment:

Archive: Forum -Forum -Finance - Links - 1 - 2 - RSS - All RSS Feeds
The Causes and the Results. 0.014
Copyright (c) 2011 Financial Crisis Sunday, May 27, 2012 - Terms of use - Privacy Policy