[WSBAPT] Misgivings about JTWROS

Wed Apr 5 14:25:48 PDT 2017

Yes, exactly--I overstated my case. What I meant was, JTWROS status by itself has no effect on whether property can be SP or CP. JTWROS property could be either, though it's presumed to be CP when held by a married couple. So why would title be insisting that the conveyance to the Grantees must be "as JTWROS and not as TIC and not as CP"? The choice by a married couple to hold property as SP or CP is an estate planning question, not a title question.

This is one of those things that I think banks often do--they insist that a married couple who get a loan change the title to their house so that both names are on it, and do a REET Affidavit using the "create community property" exemption, even though that could play havoc with their estate planning. They conflate "having both spouse's names on title" with "making it community property" and those are emphatically NOT the same thing.

Similarly, I don't think a title company should be insisting that parties hold property as specifically separate or specifically community. So I'm wondering whether the title company gave Heather any reasoning.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen
SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
1417 31st Ave South
Seattle WA  98144-3909
phone 206-625-0092
fax 206-625-9040

Please Note that We Have Moved. We have moved our Seattle office to Mount Baker Ridge (a small commercial community just above the I-90 tunnel). Our new address is 1417 31st Avenue South, Seattle WA 98144. All other contact information remains the same.

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of John J. Sullivan
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 1:58 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Misgivings about JTWROS

Eric:

I'm not saying it is and I recognize the presumption of RCW 64.28.040. But there's no reason why they couldn't overcome that presumption.

Certainly there's no incompatibility. Maritally owned JTWROS property is going to receive the full step up if is CP.

John J. Sullivan

John Sullivan

Sent from my iPhone

On Apr 5, 2017, at 1:01 PM, Eric Nelsen <Eric at sayrelawoffices.com<mailto:Eric at sayrelawoffices.com>> wrote:
Huh--but JTWROS property held by husband and wife IS community property, isn't it? RCW 64.28.040<http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=64.28&full=true#64.28.040>. Regardless of the right of survivorship, the property is still presumed to be CP.

I do think there are some questions about whether ROS is effective if the Grantor is not also one of the Grantees. So "X conveys to X and Y as JTWROS and not as tenants in common" might work, but "X conveys to Y and Z as JTWROS and not as tenants in common" does not, without contemporaneous evidence that Y and Z intended to receive as ROS.

But I don't understand why JTWROS would be considered incompatible with also being CP.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen
SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
1417 31st Ave South
Seattle WA  98144-3909
phone 206-625-0092
fax 206-625-9040

Please Note that We Have Moved. We have moved our Seattle office to Mount Baker Ridge (a small commercial community just above the I-90 tunnel). Our new address is 1417 31st Avenue South, Seattle WA 98144. All other contact information remains the same.

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Heather deVrieze
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 12:23 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Misgivings about JTWROS

I have been told by a title examiner at one of our local title companies that they would not honor a JTWROS deed to a married couple unless it clearly stated “as Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship, and NOT as Tenants in Common, and NOT as Community Property”.

We argued about this a bit, but I believe in the end, and advise most of my clients that absent compelling reason to do otherwise, holding property as husband and wife (i.e. community property) is the best way to own property together. I sure wouldn’t want them to lose a step-up in basis because it is held JTWROS and not as CP, so no 100% step.

Heather

Heather S. de Vrieze
Attorney-at-Law
<image001.jpg>
3909 California Avenue SW
Seattle, WA 98116-3705
(206)938-5500
heatherd at westseattlelaw.com<mailto:heatherd at westseattlelaw.com>
www.westseattlelaw.com<http://www.westseattlelaw.com/>

Click here to connect with de Vrieze | Carney on Facebook:   <image002.png><https://www.facebook.com/DeVriezeCarney>

CONFIDENTIAL & PRIVILEGED. This e-mail message may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information.  If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this e-mail message and any attachment.

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> [mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Dave Culbertson
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 11:27 AM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>; wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBAPT] Misgivings about JTWROS

Hello, Listmates.

A client asked me if doing a QCD of their home to their wife, with JTWROS language, would cause any issues. Not my main field, so I don’t know, and I likely will advise them to go find out from a lawyer who spends more time on those issues. Something is nagging me about the combo of JWTROS and a QCD, but I may simply be mis-remembering something. Any thoughts?

Best Regards,

Dave Culbertson

The Law Office of Davisson Culbertson, PLLC
19909 Ballinger Way NE
Shoreline, WA 98155

Phone: (206) 478-8134
FAX: (866) 867-7796
dculbertson at culbertsonlawoffice.com<mailto:dculbertson at culbertsonlawoffice.com>

_______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com<mailto:WSBAPT at lists.wsbarppt.com>
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbapt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20170405/0b02781b/attachment.html>