My ex-husband got our house in the divorce. He allowed me to live there with our daughter until she was done with the school year for approximatley 10 months. While living there, I was supposed to be paying the home equity loan on the property - I sent the checks every month, but my checks were never cashed because he had fell behind on the payments prior to me having to make them. The bank simply wouldn't accept the amount I was sending they wanted the full amount.
Fast forward to when I moved out of the home he now says I owe him $xxxx (amount of sum of said payments). I said no, I owed them to bank but bank would not accept them so I am not just handing you over the money now so you can pocket it (he hasn't made a payment on the loan in over 2 years and house is going through a short sale right now). I filed a motion explaining this and asking for all of the money he owes me - he has refused to pay me any child support or daycare costs because he says I owe him this money.
He filed a cross motion saying I owe him the money for the equity loan.
Judge made his tentative ruling and we can now request oral argument if we don't agree. The judge agreed I owed him the money BUT also ordered that he must provide me with proof of standing of the status of the home equity account including what is needed to bring it current and how he intends to do this. He didn't say my owing him the money is contingent upon this proof though. The judge also agreed he owed me all of the money I requested and we can offset the payments (so I owe him a little more at this point).
I feel like we can go to oral argument and argue that he will be unjustly enriched by pocketing this money and not using it to pay the loan, while not paying child support or ANY expenses for our daughter he is supposed to be paying.
My lawyer seems to think it's too much of a "grey area" to risk it. Why would he order him to show me proof on the loan then?
Any opinions would be very appreciated.