[WSBAPT] Separate debt - community property question

Thu Jan 30 11:03:35 PST 2020

I am handling an estate with W as survivor.  She didn’t know anything about a Cabela’s credit card with $2000+. If they file a creditor’s claim, I am thinking about rejecting it as not enforceable against community assets.  Presumably sporting goods bought by a H (without W’s knowledge) is not a community benefit??

Joshua F. Grant

P. O. Box 619
Wilbur, WA 99185
509 647 5578

From: Ron Housh 
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 9:09 AM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' 
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Separate debt - community property question

Thanks to all that have chimed in – very helpful.

Obviously the safest approach is to have both spouses sign.

But it seems if there is community benefit then one spouse can bind the community even without the knowledge of the other spouse.

Seems the community – H or W – would have a hard time later arguing that there is no community benefit where the project is a high end residential home for H and W notwithstanding the fact title is in an LLC in which H may own the LLC as his separate property??

Ron

I AM TYPICALLY IN THE SEATTLE OFFICE ON TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AND IN THE MOUNT VERNON OFFICE ON MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY 

Ronald G. Housh, P.S.

Attorney at Law

Seattle Office:

1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3000

Seattle, WA 98101-2393

Phone:   206-381-1341

Fax:        206-464-0461

Email:    ron at housh.org

Mount Vernon Office:

21411 Bluejay Place

Mount Vernon, WA 98274

Phone:  206-235-2459

Email:   ron at housh.org

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Martin
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 4:47 PM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Separate debt - community property question

The almost certainty of creating community debts is particularly lethal with IRS and DOR debts for trust fund taxes, assessed against a spouse that operates a business and liened in the name of the managing spouse and the other spouse without respect to whether or not the non managing spouse had any idea the other was racking up big debts.  The theory is community benefit.  T

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com On Behalf Of Eric Nelsen
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 2:38 PM
To: WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Separate debt - community property question

Yes, you are definitely right to be concerned.

>From WSBA Community Property Deskbook Ch. 6.2:

The power to create a community obligation also does not require knowledge on the part of the other spouse. Capital Nat’l Bank v. Johns, 170 Wash. 250, 16 P.2d 452 (1932); Gould v. Culver, 148 Wash. 689, 270 P. 93 (1928). The obligation must not be a gift. It must be created with the expectation to produce a “community benefit.” Beyers v. Moore, 45 Wn.2d 68, 272 P.2d 626 (1954); Sun Life Assurance Co. v. Outler, 172 Wash. 540, 20 P.2d 1110 (1933). The community obligation exists even if the anticipated benefit is not realized. Beyers, 45 Wn.2d 68; Way v. Lyric Theater Co., 79 Wash. 275, 140 P. 320 (1914). Although the presumption of community obligation is rebuttable, it is becoming increasingly difficult to rebut it, as discussions of particular types of obligations will indicate.

BUT from Ch. 6.2(2)(c):

In the absence of a community benefit, guarantees, accommodation endorsements, and suretyship contracts are ineffective to create community liability. Potlatch Fed. Credit Union v. Kennedy, 76 Wn.2d 806, 459 P.2d 32 (1969). Even a holder in due course may not recover against community property. Peterson v. Zimmerman, 142 Wash. 385, 253 P. 642 (1927); Gund v. Parke, 15 Wash. 393, 46 P. 408 (1896). Absent community benefit, an accommodation endorsement by one spouse constitutes an attempt to give community credit—an act ineffective without the consent of both spouses. RCW 26.16.030(2); Nichols Hills Bank v. McCool, 104 Wn.2d 78, 701 P.2d 1114 (1985). In Nichols Hills Bank, the court also refused to allow the beneficiary of a unilateral spousal guarantee to reach the obligated spouse’s half interest in the couple’s community property.

I think, representing the contractor, I would advise the client to require that both spouses sign the personal guarantee jointly and severally. That would potentially subject all community and both spouse's separate property. Or, at the very least have the husband sign as separately liable and the wife sign to confirm community liability (but not her separate liability). You would want the community liable as a whole, not just 50%, I would think. It gets very messy trying to figure out what "50% community liability" even means in reference to a specific asset to be attached/garnished/foreclosed.

As a matter of security for the contractor, it makes no sense to give the community any defense based on the separate/community distinction.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen

Sayre Law Offices, PLLC

1417 31st Ave South

Seattle WA 98144-3909

206-625-0092

eric at sayrelawoffices.com

From: wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Ron Housh
Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 12:40 PM
To: 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBAPT] Separate debt - community property question

LLC owns real estate and has contracted to build a home.

Contractor wants husband to sign a personal guaranty guarantying payment owed to contractor.

Husband wants to sign “John Doe – In His Individual Capacity on behalf of his Separate Property”

I represent contractor.  I had asked that he sign “John Doe – In His Individual Capacity on behalf of his Separate Property and his 50% interest in community property.”

My concern is that Husband John Doe may not have any liquid separate property.  

Am I correct in being concerned that if Husband signs “John Doe – In His Individual Capacity on behalf of his Separate Property” and the LLC defaults on payments and John Doe has no liquid separate property, Contractor may not be able to recover against John Doe – Husband’s interest in community property??

Bar exam type question???

Thanks,

Ron

I AM TYPICALLY IN THE SEATTLE OFFICE ON TUESDAY AND THURSDAY AND IN THE MOUNT VERNON OFFICE ON MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY 

Ronald G. Housh, P.S.

Attorney at Law

Seattle Office:

1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3000

Seattle, WA 98101-2393

Phone:   206-381-1341

Fax:        206-464-0461

Email:    ron at housh.org

Mount Vernon Office:

21411 Bluejay Place

Mount Vernon, WA 98274

Phone:  206-235-2459

Email:   ron at housh.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
_______________________________________________
WSBAPT mailing list
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/20200130/70a3464d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: advocates[3].png
Type: image/png
Size: 7674 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20200130/70a3464d/advocates3.png>