united-states real-estate new-jersey
Unilaterally changing house from &quot;joint tenants&quot; to &quot;tenants in common&quot;
<p>I need to unilaterally change a house's ownership from "joint tenants" to "tenants in common" without the involvement of the other owners. I don't trust the other owners anymore! (In New Jersey, if it matters.)</p>

<p>From my research, I believe I should write a deed to transfer my share to myself. But I'm reading some contradictory info:</p>

<p><strong>Question #1</strong>: Some sites say I can definitely do this "unilaterally and without the knowledge or consent of the co-tenant(s)" (<a href="http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/terminating-a-joint-tenancy.html" rel="nofollow">link</a>), but others say "all current owners should sign the deed" (<a href="https://www.nolo.com/products/new-jersey-quitclaim-deed-pr319.html" rel="nofollow">link</a> -- click on question mark next to "Choose one"). Which is it?</p>

<p><strong>Question #2</strong>: Some say "use a quitclaim deed to...change the way owners hold title to the property" (<a href="https://www.nolo.com/products/new-jersey-quitclaim-deed-pr319.html" rel="nofollow">link</a>), but others either say don't use quit claim deeds (<a href="http://www.docprepper.com/top-3-reasons-why-you-shouldnt-use-a-quitclaim-deed/" rel="nofollow">link</a>, <a href="http://www.docprepper.com/when-you-should-use-quitclaim-deeds/" rel="nofollow">link</a>) or say "we generally recommend the Warranty Deed when transferring property to yourself, your trust, or your own company; because we want to make sure that the Title Policy and all of its benefits transfer to the Grantee of your deed" (<a href="http://sdirahandbook.com/warranty-deed-grant-deed-quit-claim-deed-what-to-use/" rel="nofollow">link</a>).</p>

<p><strong>Question #3</strong>: If I should never use the "Nolo" link 2 to do this change, then is there any do-it-yourself form/method that I can use? (I cannot afford a lawyer for this task.)</p>

<p><strong>UPDATE: Note to respondents that attempt to claim this isn't legal in the USA:</strong>
It's definitely legal in New York at least. See <a href="http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/RPP/8/240-c" rel="nofollow">NY Code - Section 240-C: Joint tenancy severance</a>: "1. In addition to any other means by which a joint tenancy with right of survivorship may be severed, a joint tenant may <strong>unilaterally</strong> sever a joint tenancy in real property without consent of any non-severing joint tenant or tenants by: ... (b) Execution of a written instrument that evidences the intent to sever the joint tenancy, including a deed that names the severing tenant as the direct grantee of the severing tenant's interest."</p>

<p>Thus, if you claim this isn't allowed in the USA, then you are incorrect. If you claim this isn't allowed in New Jersey specifically, then please provide some evidence if you have it (e.g. court cases deciding against this type of action), instead of making an unsupported claim. Thanks.</p>

<p>Joint tenant (with rights of survivorship) is a HIGHER level of ownership than "tenants in common."</p>

<p>A Tenant in Common's survivor rights in a property flow to her heirs, not the co-owner.  A Joint Tenant's survivor rights flow to the joint owner/tenant.  </p>

<p>In the past, a joint tenancy was severable only by a court, or by explicit agreement of all joint tenants, because is a diminishing of the other tenant's rights, and thus wasn't able to be done unilaterally.  Today, however, this is no longer the case, and in virtually all US jurisdictions a Joint Tenancy with Rights of Survivorship can be severed by means of a sale by one of the tenants to a third party straw-man, who then typically turns around and re-deeds the property back to the severing tenant.  </p>

<p>In some jurisdictions, they've dispensed with the necessity for a straw-man and allow a tenant to unilaterally (i.e. without consent of the other joint tenants) "sell their share back to themselves."  In most cases that deed conveying the sale must be recorded, whether direct or third-party.  Also in some jurisdictions, there does still exist a "tenency in the entirety" a deed type that is a bit of an anachronism, which prevents unilaterally severing the joint tenancy.</p>
