On 08/21/2014 8:17 PM, amdx wrote:
....

The dilemma is, she wants to stay in the house because it is cheaper
than any apartment. She has a negative net worth. I want my name off the
title. I don't want to give her any more of my hard earned saving. I
want to get my equity out of the property.
I would like to see her keep the house, I think it is in her best
interest to keep the house, she could end up homeless if she doesn't.
She has looked into subsidized housing for the elderly, I don't know
what she found.

As far as fair, I think she finds the existing arrangement works very
well for her.

Dan's point is essentially the same one I made earlier that "perceived
value for services rendered" isn't necessarily at all equivalent to any
rational basis. Hence, if may well seem entirely fair to her (and
probably does). Unfortunately, changing such a self-perception is about
as easy as winning a flame-war argument on a usenet group.

That she's been enabled by a combination of events for years to get away
with being irresponsible without dire consequences to date doesn't help.

Again, about the only practical solution I'd see would be the financing
of the place for her temporarily while she gets her financials in order.
Under the big if of is she were to do that and follow thru on payments
to you on that private mortgage and also clean up whatever issues there
are on credit rating and have a stead income in some number of years it
could possibly be transitioned to a regular mortgage.

That she would follow through would seem a major risk, however, which is
again why I'd never suggest you even consider the co-signer or other
guarantor route for anything--it's too risky and likely to encumber you
personally, and thereby the business as well if you're running it as dba
or llc or the like without full corporate wrappings.

--