LuAnn de Lesseps: No Longer a Countess, Still Never a Princess

[Taralightner]

Here’s the thing that I don’t think Lu can avoid. The property mentioned in the divorce was the original marital home. The kids were meant to have half of the value of that house, or be placed on the deed when they were old enough in a trust. She decided to sell that house. She got $8MM. 

At the moment of that sale, half of the total of that sale should have been put in a trust for the kids. Her lawyers will probably say that the number is less than $4MM for any number of reasons. The Count’s and kids lawyers will probably argue for exactly half of the sale price. 

The fact that she bought the Sag house for less than $4MM indicates that she understood the agreement. BUT, no trust is created. The Sag house isn’t really the issue here, it’s what happened at the minute of the sale of the marital home. 

I’m really afraid that she “played” with the other half of the money from the marital home thinking that she would “repay” the kids. It doesn’t matter that she might have used some to make the Sag house larger... that’s not pertinent. It doesn’t matter if she says that she used some to support the kids... this is about a specified property, not child support. I’m sure child support was taken care of in another portion of the divorce agreement. It doesn’t matter that she took a $3MM mortgage on any house- that was her decision on her half. The kids half has nothing to do with that. 

So, the question is, does she have, or can she come up with $4MM very fast? I hope so... but I’m worried. 

[HunterHunted]

She needs to set up the trust, put in a good faith amount (between $40,000 - $100,000)*, and communicate with Alex and the kids about her intentions to make the trust whole pending the sale of the Sag Harbor house.

*Between $200,000 - $400,000 (5% - 10%) would be ideal, but I don't know how liquid she is. Any amount to show that she's serious would help to alleviate the conflict. 

Edited July 14, 2018 by HunterHunted

[SuprSuprElevated]

I'm thinking that the Count & Kids are trying to ensure that their money doesn't evaporate, whether by Luann's actions, a potential suitor's/future husband's actions, or by the actions of another recession/housing crash, which could certainly happen, and make the $4 million original amount go *poof*.

If the charges in the lawsuit are true and legitimate, I don't blame them for acting now.  Perhaps they are taking her recent problems with alcohol more seriously than she is.

[Happy Camper]

Does anyone know if she is hosting any cabaret shows? If so, I wonder how those are going?

[HunterHunted]

1 minute ago, Happy Camper said:

Does anyone know if she is hosting any cabaret shows? If so, I wonder how those are going?

She is still doing her Countess and Friends cabaret. It's doing quite well.

https://www.countessluann.com/cabaret/

[applecrisp]

6 hours ago, Maharincess said:

I'm surprised to see so many people feeling bad for Luann and defending her, I'm even seeing comments blaming her kids and/or her ex husband.  From what I'm getting, this is Luann putting her wants ahead of everyone else. As usual.  She basically violated an order she agreed to and screwed over her kids. Again.   I don't mean here in particular, I'm talking in general. I don't do social media but I peeked at the Housewives Facebook and people are shocked and blaming everyone but her. 

I for one (and I think the only one) am not the least bit surprised by this.   She always seemed like a distant, uninvolved mom. I'll never forget her son begging her to stay home for taco Tuesday and she just laughed him off.  Then he said she's always leaving and never home.  I don't know how long she was with them but I think Rosie did most of the raising of the kids.  

I've never liked her.  I've always thought she was a snooty, snobby bitch.  I'll never forget her telling Bethenny to introduce her to people like the driver as Mrs. Delesseps, "you know like you do a child".  And now she's playing her "been to prison" card for all the attention she can get.  She spoke about being in prison, during an argument she commented that people in jail behave better than the ladies.  She was never in jail  and the closest she's been to prison is watching Shawshank Redemption. She was in a drunk tank for a few hours, slept it off, saw a judge and was released.  She's killing it and exaggerating this for all its worth. 

her cheating her kids doesn't surprise me at all. 

Glad Someone said this.  I even kind of like Lu Ann. I guess because she can be entertaining. Since they all seem selfish I am not surprised

I just really dislike the comments about her kids. They are entitled to the money left for them. It does not make them greedy. I know I would be upset if she spent all the money on what she wanted. I also don't blame the count if this was all agreed on. She messed up and should pay the consequences. 

It seems people are giving her a free ride on this, Yet when the arrest happened people were quite judgmental of her as they should be.

Maharincess you have a good memory, I recently watched some old episodes and she indeed was "going out" all the time the her husband was away on business.

And of course Mozelle.

Edited July 14, 2018 by applecrisp
forgot to acknowledge

[AnnA]

I can't deny that this is a juicy story but it's easily resolved.  Chances are LuAnn will set up the trust and explain away the  delay by saying the kids can't touch the money until 2026 and since she would likely administer the trust anyway it's not a big deal .  There was no rush - no harm no foul. 

The idea that this will cause LuAnn irreparable damage is nonsense.   She's a HW and a falling down drunk, sleeps around HW with an arrest record to boot.  

Edited July 14, 2018 by AnnA

[biakbiak]

9 minutes ago, AnnA said:

Chances are LuAnn will set up the trust and explain away the  delay by saying the kids can't touch the money until 2026 and since she would likely administer the trust anyway it's not a big deal .  There was no rush - no harm no foul. 

If that were the case she would most likely have done it before it reached the actual lawsuit phase.

[SuprSuprElevated]

I pretty much agree that this latest legal no-no will have little consequence to Luann.  That said, I have to believe that CVOM has been in her ear to fix it for a while, and only resorted to spending the money on a legal move as a last resort.  Shows some stubbornness that we don't often see from Luann.  Well, except for that caviar recording.  Maybe that is the real Lu, and she keeps it well hidden for the cameras.

[AnnA]

17 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

If that were the case she would most likely have done it before it reached the actual lawsuit phase.

She should have but I'm guessing she's so self-centered that her relationship with Tom and getting married consumed her for the last two years.

ETA:   Based on the timing, my guess is she was told about the pending lawsuit during the Fourth of July visit.

Edited July 14, 2018 by AnnA

[Mrs peel]

21 hours ago, smores said:

She was allowed to put the proceeds into a new home, which she did, but, she put the proceeds into a new, cheaper home, which meant that there's money unaccounted for.  Plus, it looks like she used the proceeds to pay back a mortgage she took on the original home, so, she pretty much was already in the hole to the kids.  The original home sold for 8M, which would mean 4M should have been put into the trust.  She had to pay off a 3M mortgage, though, when she sold that house, leaving 5M.  She then bought a house that was 1.3M, leaving 3.7, and she's already "underfunding" the trust. Or, would be if it existed.  Then, she went on to remodel the new house, at what cost?  Who knows, but, she wants to sell that home for 6.5M, so if she's successful, she'll only have 2.5M to purchase a new home, after she funds the trust.  

She seems to have gotten the mortgage for the new house (at almost 100% of the price) while she was selling the marital home, and the complaint indicates she paid off the loan once the house sold.  We don’t know whether there was a mortgage on the marital home, so we can’t know what the net proceeds were.  That’s why I wish we had that exhibit.  I don’t recall if we knew what they paid for the marital home, certainly they bought it years ago so there should have been an increase in the value.

But it’s certainly a good guess that she’s been living in part off the proceeds of the sale of the marital home (thus the expensive apt in the city, etc).  RH money won’t pay for that, as well as the taxes on the Sag Harbor home.

I’ve been a Luann defender, but if this is true, it’s way beyond the pale.

1 hour ago, AnnA said:

I can't deny that this is a juicy story but it's easily resolved.  Chances are LuAnn will set up the trust and explain away the  delay by saying the kids can't touch the money until 2026 and since she would likely administer the trust anyway it's not a big deal .  There was no rush - no harm no foul. 

The idea that this will cause LuAnn irreparable damage is nonsense.   She's a HW and a falling down drunk, sleeps around HW with an arrest record to boot.  

 

That assumes she still has the money.  And regardless of anything else she has done, it’s a really shitty thing to cheat your children.  Actually saying it’s “really shitty” doesn’t even begin to describe the horribleness.  Your children shouldn’t have to sue you (or threaten to sue)  to get you to do the right thing.

Edited July 14, 2018 by Mrs peel

[Rap541]

Yeah, I am willing to wait for more details but this is looking pretty shitty on Luann's part.

[Mrs peel]

3 hours ago, Taralightner said:

Here’s the thing that I don’t think Lu can avoid. The property mentioned in the divorce was the original marital home. The kids were meant to have half of the value of that house, or be placed on the deed when they were old enough in a trust. She decided to sell that house. She got $8MM. 

At the moment of that sale, half of the total of that sale should have been put in a trust for the kids. Her lawyers will probably say that the number is less than $4MM for any number of reasons. The Count’s and kids lawyers will probably argue for exactly half of the sale price. 

It’s probably not sales price, but the amount should be easy to determine, it’s the net proceeds to Luann, after the real estate fees, real estate taxes, mortgage, any other set-offs, etc.  it’s not that hard.  The only complication I can think of is if she would have had to pay taxes on the increase in value.  Most of us don’t ever have that issue, and I’m not even sure it still applies.  But you used to have to pay tax on the increase in value over $250,000 I think it was.  There may have been tax consequences to setting up the trust too(though of course that hasn’t happened) because it’s a gift to the children (I’m not a tax lawyer so don’t know specifically).

im still shocked that the divorce lawyers didn’t make these arrangements, I get it took a while to sell the house, but still.

[Taralightner]

@Mrs peel- based on what you’re seeing, do the kids have standing for half the sale price of marital home or half the proceeds of the sale? 

[Mrs peel]

Just now, Taralightner said:

@Mrs peel- based on what you’re seeing, do the kids have standing for half the sale price of marital home or half the proceeds of the sale? 

I would guess it’s the proceeds.  The idea seems to be that, instead of splitting the House 50-50, the Count would take his half and give it to the kids.  Maybe by doing it without ever touching the money himself he saved on taxes or something, I don’t know tax law.  

But if, for example, the house had a $1M mortgage, and the closing costs, taxes, real estate fees, etc, were another $500,000 ( just spit balling here, no idea what they would be, but figure a 5-6% real estate broker fee to start), then the proceeds are $6.5M on the sale. Luann isn’t then getting half of the house if she must put $4M (half sales price) into the trust.

[Taralightner]

15 minutes ago, Mrs peel said:

It’s probably not sales price, but the amount should be easy to determine, it’s the net proceeds to Luann, after the real estate fees, real estate taxes, mortgage, any other set-offs, etc.  it’s not that hard.  The only complication I can think of is if she would have had to pay taxes on the increase in value.  Most of us don’t ever have that issue, and I’m not even sure it still applies.  But you used to have to pay tax on the increase in value over $250,000 I think it was.  There may have been tax consequences to setting up the trust too(though of course that hasn’t happened) because it’s a gift to the children (I’m not a tax lawyer so don’t know specifically).

im still shocked that the divorce lawyers didn’t make these arrangements, I get it took a while to sell the house, but still.

So, because she didn’t roll over all proceeds to a new house, yes, there are huge tax implications with the amount not rolled into new property. But will the kids’ lawyers be able to say that the capital gains issue was of LuAnn’s choosing? This is where the arguments get complicated. Again, I’m not a lawyer... it seems to me, the cap gains penalty could be called either way- LuAnn can argue she was forced into it because of the divorce settlement. They can argue that she CHOSE to sell the marital home without her putting all proceeds into a new property. 

Edited July 14, 2018 by Taralightner

[weaver]

Lu already reduced the price of the Sag home to 5.75 and this article claims she bought the new property already.  Gosh, Lu, get your affairs in order.  I was inclined to believe that the family might be concerned about her somewhat questionable behavior re the new boyfriend and became worried as to where all this was leading as far as the money goes.  Maybe she is drinking again; I hope not.    Lu does not seem to live lavishly.  She's worn the same clothes for 9 years on the show.  

https://www.newsday.com/classifieds/real-estate/luann-de-lesseps-sag-harbor-home-1.19287124

 

Victoria's art sells for a pretty penny but how much she sells is a question. 

http://nononoel.wixsite.com/victoriadelesseps/emotional

[Celia Rubenstein]

On 7/13/2018 at 3:50 PM, film noire said:

 I can't believe Count JewHater didn't understand that sliming Luann would also put his children in an ugly position (be a fucking man and sue on your children's behalf,  you pissant. Take all the heat yourself instead of shoving your kids between you and the bullet

 

I don't believe the Count has the legal ability to sue on the children's behalf under the circumstances.  They are over 18 and have the legal capacity to sue in their own right. That being said, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that Alex was totally involved with the filing of the suit and supports the kids 100% in taking legal action. It's just that his name doesn't have to be included which is probably why it isn't.  He's not doing it to hide behind his kids. 

Sorry, but I am not I am not going to cut Luann a bit of slack in this. No blaming Alex or side eyes thrown at the kids from me.  Alex owned half of house 1 and instead of forcing Luann to sell it, he basically gave his half to the kids.  It was his way of providing a home for his children until they were grown and a way to set something up for the children long-term.  It seems like a decent enough idea to me. He's their father, he's rich, he gave them something very valuable (which doesn't make them lazy or greedy in my book, just lucky) and Luann screwed them over.  Perhaps he could have structured things differently, but I'm guessing there was probably some kind of financial benefit to doing things the way he did. Alex comes from a long line of people with money and I suspect he has some idea how to manage it. And I presume he had the benefit of good legal and financial counsel throughout the process. What he didn't have, unfortunately, was a crystal ball that could have forewarned him that Luann would not honor the agreement they reached, that she would shaft her own children. 

SHE is the problem in all this, not Alex. Not the kids. Luann is to blame. I imagine her excuse will be that time was not of the essence, that she has some kind of financial plan that will make everything right. Hmph. As already pointed out, if Luann had the money to cobble together a respectable trust,  she likely would have already done so and not let it reach the point of her children actually suing her. How ugly.  And not just in terms of publicity, either.  How damaging to their relationships. But of course Luann showed early on she was a shitty mother who cares more about having a good time than she did about her children. I shouldn't be surprised.

Edited July 14, 2018 by Celia Rubenstein
clarification

[WireWrap]

8 minutes ago, weaver said:

Lu already reduced the price of the Sag home to 5.75 and this article claims she bought the new property already.  Gosh, Lu, get your affairs in order.  I was inclined to believe that the family might be concerned about her somewhat questionable behavior re the new boyfriend and became worried as to where all this was leading as far as the money goes.  Maybe she is drinking again; I hope not.    Lu does not seem to live lavishly.  She's worn the same clothes for 9 years on the show.  

https://www.newsday.com/classifieds/real-estate/luann-de-lesseps-sag-harbor-home-1.19287124

 

Victoria's art sells for a pretty penny but how much she sells is a question. 

http://nononoel.wixsite.com/victoriadelesseps/emotional

Lets hope that she intended to start the trust with the proceeds from the Sag Harbor sale (when it sells) from the get go and that is why she decided to sell it from the jump.

[biakbiak]

14 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

learn that Alex was totally involved with the filing of the suit and supports the kids 100% in taking legal action, it's just that his name isn't going to appear as a plaintiff because ... he's not a plaintiff.  He's not hiding behind his kids. It's not his case. It's technically Victoria's and Noel's case.  

He is listed as one of the three plaintiffs in the suit on the court documents but the kids would have to agree. 

 

[WireWrap]

5 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

I don't believe the Count has the legal ability to sue on the children's behalf under the circumstances.  They are over 18 and the legal wrong Luann is accused of committing is against them, so it's up to them to pursue a remedy.  That being said, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that Alex was totally involved with the filing of the suit and supports the kids 100% in taking legal action, it's just that his name isn't going to appear as a plaintiff because ... he's not a plaintiff.  He's not hiding behind his kids. It's not his case. It's technically Victoria's and Noel's case.  

Sorry, but I am not I am not going to cut Luann a bit of slack in this. No blaming Alex or side eyes thrown at the kids from me.  Alex owned half of house 1 and instead of forcing Luann to sell it, he basically gave his half to the kids.  It was his way of providing a home for his children until they were grown and a way to set something up for the children long-term.  It seems like a decent enough idea to me. He's their father, he's rich, he gave them something very valuable (which doesn't make them lazy or greedy in my book, just lucky) and Luann screwed them over.  Perhaps he could have structured things differently, but I'm guessing there was probably some kind of financial benefit to doing things the way he did. Alex comes from a long line of people with money and I suspect he has some idea how to manage it. And I presume he had the benefit of good legal and financial counsel throughout the process. What he didn't have, unfortunately, was a crystal ball that could have forewarned him that Luann would not honor the agreement they reached, that she would shaft her own children. 

SHE is the problem in all this, not Alex. Not the kids. Luann is to blame. I imagine her excuse will be that time was not of the essence, that she has some kind of financial plan that will make everything right. Hmph. As already pointed out, if Luann had the money to cobble together a respectable trust,  she likely would have already done so and not let it reach the point of her children actually suing her. How ugly.  And not just in terms of publicity, either.  How damaging to their relationships. But of course Luann showed early on she was a shitty mother who cares more about having a good time than she did about her children. I shouldn't be surprised.

Yes and No. Alex could have made it so that when the kids are legal age that she had to sell the house and then he could have set up the trust when he got his money. Instead he made it so that Luann could sell that house at any time and use the proceeds to buy a new house with the stipulation she put the kids names on the deed/title of the new house. It is possible that she was not able to do that for Noel because he was under age when she bought the Sag Harbor house and only putting Victoria no the deed would have cause more issues than not so she waited, She was an idiot and very wrong to wait to put their names on after it Noel turned 18, she should have done it then or just used 1/2 of the initial house sale money to start that trust up front. Alex may be wealthy and may know how to pass on his money for his kids but that doesn't mean he (or his lawyer) understand US/Conn. real estate law. But, that said, Luann should have just sold the marital house and set the trust up with 1/2 the sale money minus all extra costs like takes. insurance, ect that she incurred both before and after the sale.

Oh, and Alex is listed along side the kids as a plaintiffs. https://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/rhony-luann-de-lesseps-sued-husband-breach-trust-divorce-alexandre-kids-docs-02.pdf

[breezy424]

I was finally able to get into the property records.  Unfortunately, it doesn't show mortgages  But I did find out that the Count bought the house in 2003 and it was only in his name.  The purchase price was not listed. When they divorced he signed the house over to Lu.  It was in her name only. 

She purchased the Sag Harbor house in her name only.

[film noire]

1 hour ago, WireWrap said:

Oh, and Alex is listed along side the kids as a plaintiffs. https://radaronline.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/rhony-luann-de-lesseps-sued-husband-breach-trust-divorce-alexandre-kids-docs-02.pdf

Right, from what I've been reading, it's a breach of the divorce settlement (which is why Count JewHater should have sued Luann himself, leaving the kids free and clear of the whole sticky mess -- make it an issue of Luann reneging/cheating on the terms of the divorce, not the kids suing their own mother -- he's made the whole clan look like a pack of grifters.)

eta:

Quote

Luann should have just sold the marital house and set the trust up with 1/2 the sale money minus all extra costs like takes. insurance, ect that she incurred both before and after the sale.

That would have been the right (and smart) thing to do --  kicking it down the road through multiple properties was (essentially) gambling with money not her own.

Edited July 14, 2018 by film noire
breaches!

[nexxie]

oops, wrong thread

Edited July 14, 2018 by nexxie

[snarts]

42 minutes ago, breezy424 said:

I was finally able to get into the property records.  Unfortunately, it doesn't show mortgages  But I did find out that the Count bought the house in 2003 and it was only in his name.  The purchase price was not listed. When they divorced he signed the house over to Lu.  It was in her name only. 

She purchased the Sag Harbor house in her name only.

So why wasnt the trust established so that the house could be signed over to both it & Luann ar the time of the divorce? 

[WireWrap]

6 minutes ago, snarts said:

So why wasnt the trust established so that the house could be signed over to both it & Luann ar the time of the divorce? 

Good point! He had to sign it over to Luann, so why not put the kids names on the deed/title then? Unless of course Conn. real estate prohibits it (minors) and then that put Luann in a bad position if she could only list Victoria on the Sag Harbor house because Noel was still a minor when she bought that house. And it would cost a pretty penny to add them to it after he did turn 18 while she was still living in the house. The only time it makes sense to do that is when she sells the SG house, which she is now trying to do. LOL

[Celia Rubenstein]

1 hour ago, biakbiak said:

He is listed as one of the three plaintiffs in the suit on the court documents but the kids would have to agree. 

 

Thanks for posting that. I took Film Noire's post calling him a pissant hiding behind his kids to mean he was not listed at all, but it makes sense given the fact that the dispute stems from his divorce agreement with Luann.  He is not actually seeking personal relief in the sense of a traditional plaintiff, however, and I don't think he is a necessary party to the lawsuit. Which is why I wouldn't judge him harshly for not including himself in the case if he had opted out. 

 

47 minutes ago, film noire said:

Right, from what I've been reading, it's a breech of the divorce settlement (which is why Count JewHater should have sued Luann himself, leaving the kids free and clear of the whole mess - make it an issue of Luann reneging/cheating on the terms of the divorce, not the kids suing their own mother 

It's simply smart to list everyone entitled to relief in the filings ... suppose the kids were not included and then for some reason Alex was judged not entitled to relief. The case could be thrown out and Victoria and Noel would have to start over from scratch.  It's expensive to litigate cases like this. It's just a wise move.  

I should also point out that if Luann didn't want her kids to have to suffer the indignity of suing their mother, perhaps she should have honored the agreement she made to set up the trust instead of screwing her kids over.  Sorry, but this all boils down to her choices ... no amount of pretzel logic can make her out to be a victim or make Alex the bad guy in all this as far as I am concerned. 

 

49 minutes ago, film noire said:

he's made the whole clan look like a pack of grifters).

I'm not sure how Alex or Victoria or Noel could be viewed as "grifters" for merely pursuing their right to the money Luann promised to set aside for the children.  Hell, it was Alex's money she cheated the kids out of.  It's not like she was having to dig into her own bank account ... The money from the sale of the house was simply never hers. Far from them looking like grifters, it is Luann who is looking like a thief.

[biakbiak]

It’s probably as simple as the Count never thought Lu would screw over the children and since she was going to be the trustee he thought she would handle it.

Edited July 14, 2018 by biakbiak

[Celia Rubenstein]

1 minute ago, biakbiak said:

It’s probably as simply as the count never thought Lu would screw over the children and since she was going to be the trustee he thought she would handle it.

Yep.  

[Maharincess]

15 hours ago, applecrisp said:

Glad Someone said this.  I even kind of like Lu Ann. I guess because she can be entertaining. Since they all seem selfish I am not surprised

I just really dislike the comments about her kids. They are entitled to the money left for them. It does not make them greedy. I know I would be upset if she spent all the money on what she wanted. I also don't blame the count if this was all agreed on. She messed up and should pay the consequences. 

It seems people are giving her a free ride on this, Yet when the arrest happened people were quite judgmental of her as they should be.

Maharincess you have a good memory, I recently watched some old episodes and she indeed was "going out" all the time the her husband was away on business.

And of course Mozelle.

 

The comment about the kids that bothered me the most was saying Noel is involved in the lawsuit because he'd rather have a house on the beach instead of a house in the mountains.  I don't see how anyone can blame anybody but Luann.  She's the one who didn't do what she said she'd do and cheated her kids in the process. I don't see how it is anybody's fault but Luann.  I would imagine they spoke to her about it before the suit was filed and she probably didn't care so they proceeded with it. 

Edited July 15, 2018 by Maharincess

[smores]

I think the kids have to be party to the suit at this point, as they are the ones who would be losing the money now if Luann sells and hasn't added them to the deed/put the house into a trust.  Things get weird sometimes with who has to be on a lawsuit.  Yes, it's violating the divorce agreement she had with the Count, but, in this case, he's not the one who would be losing the money, the kids are, and now that they are over 18, they can legally sue to exercise their rights.  

Years ago I had a friend who had divorced parents and it was part of their divorce agreement that the parents would split college bills equally.  Every semester, mom would pay her half, but dad would refuse.  So, every semester, the friend had to take BOTH parents to court in order to get the bills paid.  Mom would go in and show that she had paid her portion and Dad wouldn't be able to produce evidence that he'd done his part.  He'd be ordered to pay his part or be in contempt and only then would he pay up.  Next semester, same situation.  

[Taralightner]

@smores- the Count also has standing as the divorce agreement was between Lu and  him. If she has violated that contract, he is a party. I’m not a lawyer, but I’m almost 100% certain. @Mrs peel- sorry to ask again, but am I correct? 

[smores]

Right, but I think the kids have to be part of it too.  I don't think he can just file and sue for the sale to be stopped on their behalf now that they are over 18, as they are technically the "injured" parties, since they wouldn't get the money.  She violated the agreement with him, but they actually are the losers.  I think it has to be the 3 of them.

[AnnA]

3 minutes ago, smores said:

Right, but I think the kids have to be part of it too.  I don't think he can just file and sue for the sale to be stopped on their behalf now that they are over 18, as they are technically the "injured" parties, since they wouldn't get the money.  She violated the agreement with him, but they actually are the losers.  I think it has to be the 3 of them.

What good does it do to stop the sale?  I understand that LuAnn violated the agreement but the dollar amount of the trust will be calculated on the net proceeds of the original home not the Sag Harbor house. 

[smores]

Well, if she hasn't sold the house, then they have the ability to be a party to the sale.  If they're supposed to be a 1/3 owner, then they'd get 1/3 of the purchase price, and it would be on Luann to satisfy whatever debt there is for the house (if any), since she couldn't mortgage their portion.  So, if she owes more than 1/2 the cost of the house on a mortgage (I'm speculating with this, I don't know), that's her problem to figure out, as the kids are entitled to their 1/2 of the proceeds.  Without them being on the title at this point, they could get a judgement after the sale, but if she's already spent the money, then they have to wait until she gets around to paying it back.  And, technically, she could default on it if she wanted (I'm not saying she would).  They actually have the asset right now, so it's a stronger position.

[Jel]

wow, I don't realize what a talented artist Victoria is.

[film noire]

21 hours ago, smores said:

 I don't think he can just file and sue for the sale to be stopped on their behalf now that they are over 18, as they are technically the "injured" parties, since they wouldn't get the money.  She violated the agreement with him, but they actually are the losers.  I think it has to be the 3 of them.

Isn't Count de Leslops the injured party, since Luann reneged on the divorce agreement? His interest in that house was taken by Luann (and then not given to his children). And  -- paging @Mrs peel! -  I'm sure a clever lawyer could protect the interests of his children, without forcing them to directly participate in suing their mother. One thing to splash Luann with this shit (she seems to have earned it) but their kids should be kept away from all this crap, imo. Let the two people who fucked up the marriage and divorce settlement duke it out.

eta:

Quote

No, he set it up so that Luann could use the money she got from the sale of that home to use for the purchase of a new family home, which she did. 

But @WireWrap, wasn't that the money she was supposed to put in a trust? (As in, he signed over his right to half the house -- and any sale of the house -- to the kids, to be put in trust?) 

Edited July 15, 2018 by film noire

[WireWrap]

56 minutes ago, smores said:

Well, if she hasn't sold the house, then they have the ability to be a party to the sale.  If they're supposed to be a 1/3 owner, then they'd get 1/3 of the purchase price, and it would be on Luann to satisfy whatever debt there is for the house (if any), since she couldn't mortgage their portion.  So, if she owes more than 1/2 the cost of the house on a mortgage (I'm speculating with this, I don't know), that's her problem to figure out, as the kids are entitled to their 1/2 of the proceeds.  Without them being on the title at this point, they could get a judgement after the sale, but if she's already spent the money, then they have to wait until she gets around to paying it back.  And, technically, she could default on it if she wanted (I'm not saying she would).  They actually have the asset right now, so it's a stronger position.

I can see them suing her when she sells the house for their 1/2 but not before. Each of the kids were to receive 1/4 (for a combined total of 1/2) of the sale price of the marital house OR put on the deed/title to any house Luann bought after selling the marital home. Again, if she was not legally allowed to put Noels name on the Sag Harbor home what was she supposed to do, just put Victoria's name on it and then take the risk that if anything happened to her that Victoria would give him his promised portion then split the rest? And, he would incur inheritance taxes because he wasn't a part owner because he was a minor when she bough it. IMO, the Count should have just taken his 1/2 of the marital home sale and placed it in a trust instead of this confusing thing HE came up with. And since he did it that way, Luann should have just set the trust up after she sold the martial home/before she bought the Sag Harbor home. IMO, BOTH the Count and Luann are idiots and to blame for this mess. 

17 minutes ago, film noire said:

But isn't Count de Leslops the primary injured party, since Luann reneged on the divorce agreement? His interest in that house was taken by Luann, not given to his children, so he's the original injured party. 

And (paging @Mrs peel!) I'm pretty sure a clever lawyer could protect the interests of his children, without forcing them to directly participate in suing their mother. One thing to splash Luann with this shit (she earned it) but their kids should be kept away from all this crap, imo. Let the two people who fucked up the marriage and divorce settlement duke it out.

No, he set it up so that Luann could use the money she got from the sale of that home to use for the purchase of a new family home, which she did. Where it all goes wrong is putting a minors name on the title/deed to a home and I don't think they could, which is why Alex didn't do that right out of the gate and Luann couldn't with Noel after she bought the Sag Harbor home. This is all just to weird, they (mainly Alex) made it far more complicated than it had to be IMO. 

[biakbiak]

5 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

I can see them suing her when she sells the house for their 1/2 but not before.

The articles stated that the reason they were filing now is that they were worried she would take whatever offer because she wanted a quick sale, by doing it now they would ensure they were party to the sale and have the ability to protect their interests.

Edited July 15, 2018 by biakbiak

[WireWrap]

Just now, biakbiak said:

The articles stated that the reason they were filing now is that they were worried she would take whatever offer because she wanted a quick sale, by doing it now they would ensure they were party to the sale and have the ability to protest their interests.

True, but they can't dictate how much someone is willing to pay for the house, it will sell for what it sells for. And, if Luann needs to move out of the area for her own health, then they need to allow that and go after any money they are due then. 

[Mrs peel]

5 hours ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

I don't believe the Count has the legal ability to sue on the children's behalf under the circumstances.  They are over 18 and have the legal capacity to sue in their own right. That being said, I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that Alex was totally involved with the filing of the suit and supports the kids 100% in taking legal action. It's just that his name doesn't have to be included which is probably why it isn't.  He's not doing it to hide behind his kids. 

Sorry, but I am not I am not going to cut Luann a bit of slack in this. No blaming Alex or side eyes thrown at the kids from me.  Alex owned half of house 1 and instead of forcing Luann to sell it, he basically gave his half to the kids.  It was his way of providing a home for his children until they were grown and a way to set something up for the children long-term.  It seems like a decent enough idea to me. He's their father, he's rich, he gave them something very valuable (which doesn't make them lazy or greedy in my book, just lucky) and Luann screwed them over.  Perhaps he could have structured things differently, but I'm guessing there was probably some kind of financial benefit to doing things the way he did. Alex comes from a long line of people with money and I suspect he has some idea how to manage it. And I presume he had the benefit of good legal and financial counsel throughout the process. What he didn't have, unfortunately, was a crystal ball that could have forewarned him that Luann would not honor the agreement they reached, that she would shaft her own children. 

SHE is the problem in all this, not Alex. Not the kids. Luann is to blame. I imagine her excuse will be that time was not of the essence, that she has some kind of financial plan that will make everything right. Hmph. As already pointed out, if Luann had the money to cobble together a respectable trust,  she likely would have already done so and not let it reach the point of her children actually suing her. How ugly.  And not just in terms of publicity, either.  How damaging to their relationships. But of course Luann showed early on she was a shitty mother who cares more about having a good time than she did about her children. I shouldn't be surprised.

Exactly.  The kids are third party beneficiaries of the agreement and can sue.  Alex can sue because, if indeed she didn’t create the trust, she’s in violation of their agreement.

[smores]

If she had done things the way she was supposed to (going by what we know), and Victoria was over 18 but Noel was not, then she would need to create a trust and put their portion of the house in it.  If you can't leave things to someone directly, you put them in a trust until they are able to own them, or you do it if you want to control what they are able to do with the money, like college funds, etc. 

[Mrs peel]

51 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

I can see them suing her when she sells the house for their 1/2 but not before. Each of the kids were to receive 1/4 (for a combined total of 1/2) of the sale price of the marital house OR put on the deed/title to any house Luann bought after selling the marital home. Again, if she was not legally allowed to put Noels name on the Sag Harbor home what was she supposed to do, just put Victoria's name on it and then take the risk that if anything happened to her that Victoria would give him his promised portion then split the rest? And, he would incur inheritance taxes because he wasn't a part owner because he was a minor when she bough it. IMO, the Count should have just taken his 1/2 of the marital home sale and placed it in a trust instead of this confusing thing HE came up with. And since he did it that way, Luann should have just set the trust up after she sold the martial home/before she bought the Sag Harbor home. IMO, BOTH the Count and Luann are idiots and to blame for this mess. 

No, he set it up so that Luann could use the money she got from the sale of that home to use for the purchase of a new family home, which she did. Where it all goes wrong is putting a minors name on the title/deed to a home and I don't think they could, which is why Alex didn't do that right out of the gate and Luann couldn't with Noel after she bought the Sag Harbor home. This is all just to weird, they (mainly Alex) made it far more complicated than it had to be IMO. 

Not being able to put the home in a minors name may be why the trust was to be established (I took property law decades ago so I don’t know this stuff).  They can sue at any time if she never established the trust. 

I agree with others that they seem to have made this far more complicated than needed, though perhaps there are reasons to have done it that way.  The mystery is why the trust wasn’t set up as part of the divorce.

[Mrs peel]

6 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

I am pissed because I specifically remember making sure there would be NO math and real estate law involved before I got hooked on this damn show and now, here we are, four pages of math and real estate law.

Haha, I just can't figure out which side to pick, Luann's or the trio.

I went to law school because I was told there would be no math.  There’s tons of math!???

On 7/13/2018 at 8:11 PM, Taralightner said:

The other thing is- I seriously doubt that this is the only money in a trust for the kids. The Count clearly has more than half a house to offer. It seems to me, he didn’t want to hand over straight cash to Lu, but agreed to give her HALF of his share of the house he bought. The other half he donated to the kids in another trust. LuAnn, maybe, played loose with the rules thinking she’d eventually put 4 mil in a trust for them, but didn’t do it BEFORE she married carelessly and now is selling another house and moving to a place where real estate won’t increase in value as fast as it does out east on the island. Just something I’ve been thinking about. Whatever is the truth, Lu- fix it fast! 

The House was bought during the marriage, splitting it 50-50 is pretty typical.  So he didn’t “give” half to Luann, she was entitled to half.  But he did give up his half to the children.

[WireWrap]

18 minutes ago, Mrs peel said:

Not being able to put the home in a minors name may be why the trust was to be established (I took property law decades ago so I don’t know this stuff).  They can sue at any time if she never established the trust. 

I agree with others that they seem to have made this far more complicated than needed, though perhaps there are reasons to have done it that way.  The mystery is why the trust wasn’t set up as part of the divorce.

He could have sold the property, only his name was on it. Given her 1/2 because it was bought during the marriage and then put his half into a trust for the kids right away. Instead, he comes up with allowing her to sell the house and use 100% of the proceeds to buy a new family home, which caused this mess. Don't get me wrong, Luann should have just placed 1/2 of the sale money (minus 1/2 of all the cost to ready it for sale/upkeep/taxes/insurance) into a trust and only use her 1/2 (minus all the incidentals like the kids) to buy the new family house. This is a mess because neither adult thought beyond the immediate. 

[biakbiak]

1 hour ago, WireWrap said:

True, but they can't dictate how much someone is willing to pay for the house, it will sell for what it sells for. And, if Luann needs to move out of the area for her own health, then they need to allow that and go after any money they are due then. 

But they can nix in an offer if they don’t believe it’s a fair price or don’t like the terms, they currently have no standing.

[Celia Rubenstein]

12 minutes ago, WireWrap said:

He could have sold the property, only his name was on it. Given her 1/2 because it was bought during the marriage and then put his half into a trust for the kids right away. Instead, he comes up with allowing her to sell the house and use 100% of the proceeds to buy a new family home, which caused this mess. 

I think Alex was trying to keep his kids in the house they thought of as "home."  The divorce was destabilizing enough, and he could have sold the house out from under everyone but he didn't. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Alex fan. But it's far from the cruelest thing I've ever heard of being done during a divorce. Maybe not the smartest thing, tho, that's for sure. 

29 minutes ago, Mrs peel said:

The mystery is why the trust wasn’t set up as part of the divorce.

Why on earth didn't they take care of it then??? Just ... geterrdone.  Even if Alex trusted Luann, why not wrap up all the business at once so nobody has to think about it anymore? Makes me wonder if Luann maybe made some excuses/reasons for not doing it then because she had a little plan up her sleeve. I mean, she did this after all, didn't she? Kept all the money. Who's to say she didn't intend to all along.

[WireWrap]

4 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

But they can nix in an offer if they don’t believe it’s a fair price or don’t like the terms, they currently have no standing.

Well, yes, they can try to stop any sale, if they are successful in their lawsuit, if they think it is to low but that doesn't mean it will ever sell at the price they want either. Real Estate is tricky and fickle. LOL

[WireWrap]

2 minutes ago, Celia Rubenstein said:

I think Alex was trying to keep his kids in the house they thought of as "home."  The divorce was destabilizing enough, and he could have sold the house out from under everyone but he didn't. Don't get me wrong, I'm no Alex fan. But it's far from the cruelest thing I've ever heard of being done during a divorce. Maybe not the smartest thing, tho, that's for sure. 

Why on earth didn't they take care of it then??? Just ... geterrdone.  Even if Alex trusted Luann, why not wrap up all the business at once so nobody has to think about it anymore? Makes me wonder if Luann maybe made some excuses/reasons for not doing it then because she had a little plan up her sleeve. I mean, she did this after all, didn't she? Kept all the money. Who's to say she didn't intend to all along.

If he was trying to keep them in that home then he wouldn't have put in the clause that Luann could sell it and use the proceeds to buy a new family home. I think he knew she could not afford the upkeep on that house on her own, which meant that he should have just sold the house there and then and given her half to start her new life without him and the place the rest into a trust for the kids. I suspect that he didn't want the responsibility to sell the house or actually set up the trust himself. I see Alex as the type of man that prefers everyone else do the work while he takes credit for it. LOL

[smores]

If she sells and they don't get put on the house prior to the sale, then they have no claim to that money.  Or, they would, but they'd have to go through the courts to get a judgement and then rely on Luann to pay them.  Given that she hasn't followed through on adding them to the deed/putting the house into the trust as she agreed to years ago, that's a bit of a tricky proposition, and you'd then have to fight to get her to pay up after getting the judgement.  If she filed for bankruptcy, it could potentially be discharged, etc.

If they get things settled prior to the house being sold, then they are party to the actual deal and they have something that has a value.  They don't have to rely on Luann paying them, they OWN the asset.