[WSBARP] encumbering a partial interest.

[Kelby Derenick]

I believe that if the deed language is silent on the character then it is a
TIC by default split equally between the individuals on the deed.  So it
would be 25% each and each owner would have had to sign the deed of
trust/note to encumber that owner's respective interest.

Kelby J. Derenick
Attorney

*9414 State Ave., Suite E*

*Marysville, WA 98270Ph: (206) 659-5061*


*14 E. Main Street, Suite 207*
*Walla Walla, WA 99362*
*Ph: (509) 676-9805*

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This electronic mail message contains information
that (a) is or may be legally privileged, confidential, proprietary in
nature, or otherwise protected by law from disclosure, and (b) is intended
only for the use of the Addressee(s) named herein. If you are not the
intended recipient, an addressee, or the person responsible for delivering
this to an addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, using, copying,
or distributing any part of this message is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this electronic mail message in error, please contact me
immediately and take the steps necessary to delete the message completely
from your computer system.  Thank you.



On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 1:04 PM Eric Nelsen <eric at sayrelawoffices.com> wrote:

> You are correct: Chucklehead only burdened his own interest in the
> property. If all four names are on title, I don’t see any viable theory
> that would allow C’s signature on a deed of trust to also encumber the
> other three owners’ interests.
>
>
>
> 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:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Craig Gourley
> *Sent:* Friday, July 7, 2023 12:50 PM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] encumbering a partial interest.
>
>
>
> Listmates,  I think I know the common sense answer to this question but I
> have little faith that common sense applies to most legal matters.
> Facts-  4 people own a home together.  Their names are all on the title
> with no indication of percentage or characterization ( JT or TIC or ?).
> One chucklehead goes and gets a loan without the knowledge or consent of
> the other 3 and gives a DOT against the property.   Chucklehead then dies
> and loan goes into default.  Lender is now foreclosing.  The question is
> this.  Did Chucklehead only encumber an undivided 25% intertest or is there
> some legal theory that he was able to unilaterally grant a security
> interest in the entire property to the lender?  Thanks much to anyone still
> in the office on a sunny Friday.
>
>
>
> *GOURLEY LAW GROUP*
>
> *THE EXCHANGE CONNECTION*
>
> *SNOHOMISH ESCROW *
>
> P.O. Box 1091
>
> Snohomish, WA 98291
>
> PH:  (360) 568-5065 (800) 291-8401
>
> Fax: (360) 568-8092
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission may contain
> legally privileged, confidential information belonging to the sender. The
> information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named
> above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action based on the
> contents of this electronic mail is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this electronic mail in error, please contact sender and delete
> all copies.
>
>
>
>
> ***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.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230707/4dc023bc/attachment.html>