Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Re: Family Cosigners

are the children admitting they have no ownership interest? What proof will be they do not?

Re: Family Cosigners

Your question leaves out key information that makes it impossible to answer with any certainty. However, I can give you some general principles you can use.

First, the missing but essential information is what the son and daughter cosigned. Did they cosign the loan documents so as to become guarantors or co-borrowers on a note secured by a deed of trust? This is what I think is most likely, and if this is ALL they signed and the ONLY kind of documents upon which their names appear, they are not co-owners of the duplex and have very little chance of getting instated as co-owners by any legal process.

If, however, the son and/or daughter was named on the deed along with the father as a co-grantee, or if some subsequent deed shows transfer of title or any part of title to one of the kids, that's another story.

Legal ownership to real property is based on deeds on record at the County Recorder's office. Legal ownership does not result from being a borrower or co-borrower on a loan.

So, what do you mean "sign off title?" Nothing in your facts says or suggests that they are "on title" in the first place. This is a puzzle you need to clear up.

Therefore, I see two very different scenarios, each supported by half of your facts and contradicted by the other half. One scenario is that father is shown on legal title down at the recorder's office as 100% owner, and there are a couple of guarantors on his loan. The other scenario is that record title will show two or three co-owners of this property, sharing legal title as tenants in common, or possibly joint tenants.

In the first scenario, father probably doesn't have to worry about anything; he is the sole owner.

In the second scenario, father shares legal ownership, but MIGHT be able to prevail over his co-owners in a suit claiming full beneficial ownership based on having made the entire down-payment. This would require (if negotiation gets nowhere) a lawsuit to quiet title in the father, based on an assertion of a so-called "purchase-money resulting trust" against the co-owners and invoking a theory that whoever puts up the down payment to buy property is the beneficial owner thereof, notwithstanding that someone else's name appears on title; the other person's apparent partial legal ownership is presumed to be unintended and that person is held to be an involuntary trustee for the payor of the down-payment, unless it can be shown that the payor intended to make a gift of part ownership to the non-paying record owner.

Please contact me directly with details if you would like further analysis, free of charge, of course.