[WSBARP] Today's King Co Recording Tale of Woe - help!

Thu May 18 12:26:32 PDT 2023

Craig,

When you say that the grantee has been and will be solely liable on the existing debt, do you mean that the grantee was the only party to the promissory note and the only one of them that was a party to the deed of trust?  Even if the grantee was the only one of the two that paid for any of the debt, DOR’s position is that the co-owner (grantor) is still liable for the underlying debt if they were a party to the promissory note or deed of trust.  

Sam

Samuel M. Meyler

Meyler Legal, PLLC 

1700 Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200

Seattle, Washington 98109

Tel:  206.876.7770

Fax:  206.876.7771

Email:   <mailto:samuel at meylerlegal.com> samuel at meylerlegal.com

NOTICE:

This electronic message contains information which may be Confidential or Privileged and constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited.  If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender and delete the copy you received together with any attachments.  Thank you.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Craig Blackmon
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2023 10:20 AM
To: WSBA Real Property List Serve <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: [WSBARP] Today's King Co Recording Tale of Woe - help!

Listmates, any insight you can provide as to a good path forward would be greatly appreciated. Here is my conundrum. 

Client (grantee) has been and will be solely liable on existing debt. Grantee paying co-owner (grantor) additional $20k. A gift of remaining equity.

The excise tax should be due on the $20k. It appears to me (and now apparently the Recorder's Office as well) that the Supplemental Statement does not offer this option. I have now been told in the rejection notice that tax is due on one half the debt as well.

The rejection notice includes a "call for assistance" [sic] phone number; call, put on hold for five minutes, told to call back. Ahhh, just keep breathing...

At this point it may be more cost effective to file a lawsuit. What do you think?

Craig

Craig Blackmon, Attorney at Law <https://www.mywsba.org/PersonifyEbusiness/LegalDirectory/LegalProfile.aspx?Usr_ID=000000029240> 

92 Lenora St. #103, Seattle WA  98121 

Office/Cell: (206) 369-5949   

On the blog: Changes to Title and the QCD <https://seattlepropertylawyer.com/blog/quitclaim-deed-explained> 

 <https://seattlepropertylawyer.com/>     <https://www.fsbolawyers.org/> 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is a private, confidential electronic communication encompassed by 18 USC 2510. It is for the sole use of the intended recipient and receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient does not constitute a loss of its confidential or privileged nature.  Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the sender and destroy all copies.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230518/55973c19/attachment.html>