Would you require a non-applicant spouse to sign a security agreement for a non-purchase, non-real estate mobile home loan in Wisconsin when the dwelling is the homestead?

It's clearly not covered by the homestead signature requirement in Stats. 706.02(1)(f) since it is not real estate.

But it is still a homestead under Stats. 815.20 and exempt from execution. Do judges allow repossession on without a spouse's signature to relinquish homestead rights, since it is not real estate?

Any help is appreciated.

Homestead and marital property would seem to indicate, yes, the spouse must sign. But the non-real estate part of your question is not something I've come across before. I'd suggest you contact your FI's attorney to get a definitive answer.

Just my opinion - I would require them to sign. It can't hurt - and if it is their home, regardless of dirt, you would be hard pressed to take posession without that signature in Wisconsin. If they don't want to sign I am with Truffle - call your attorney.

Thank you both. It's tempting to require a signature just to be safe but then Reg. B seems to prohibit requiring a signature even on collateral documents if it is not necessary.


§1002.7 Rules concerning extensions of credit.
*****
(d) Signature of spouse or other person—
*****
(4) Secured credit. If an applicant requests secured credit, a creditor may require the signature of the applicant's spouse or other person on any instrument necessary, or reasonably believed by the creditor to be necessary, under applicable state law to make the property being offered as security available to satisfy the debt in the event of default, for example, an instrument to create a valid lien, pass clear title, waive inchoate rights, or assign earnings.

Now I see that the Commentary virtually requires a legal opinion to back up your "reasonable belief" that the signature is necessary:

Paragraph 7(d)(4).

1. Creation of enforceable lien. Some state laws require that both spouses join in executing any instrument by which real property is encumbered. If an applicant offers such property as security for credit, a creditor may require the applicant's spouse to sign the instruments necessary to create a valid security interest in the property. The creditor may not require the spouse to sign the note evidencing the credit obligation if signing only the mortgage or other security agreement is sufficient to make the property available to satisfy the debt in the event of default. However, if under state law both spouses must sign the note to create an enforceable lien, the creditor may require the signatures.

2. Need for signature—reasonable belief. Generally, a signature to make the secured property available will only be needed on a security agreement. A creditor's reasonable belief that, to ensure access to the property, the spouse's signature is needed on an instrument that imposes personal liability should be supported by a thorough review of pertinent statutory and decisional law or an opinion of the state attorney general.

You are misreading the commentary. That portion of the commentary is referring to having the spouse sign something that imposes personal liability. Signing a security agreement (deed or mortgage) does not impose personal liability so you do not need any sort of legal opinion.

I see what you mean. Thank you very much, all of you!