If you want an attorney to do research and provide you a written opinion, then hire one. You are missing the point of Avvo. No one is going to assume that risk without compensation. It is the equivalent of issuing an insurance policy without charging a premium. And it seems to me that someone living in San Clemente can afford a lawyer.
Disclaimer: I am licensed in California only and my answers on Avvo assume California law. Answers provided by me are for general information only. They are not legal advice, as competent advice requires an attorney's personal review of facts and documents that govern this situation and that are not provided as part of this AVVO service. Accordingly, you can only rely on counsel who has undertaken a full review of the applicable documents and facts. This forum does not allow for that level of due diligence. I provide legal advice during the course of an attorney-client relationship only. The exchange of information through this forum does not establish such a relationship. That relationship is established only by personal and direct consultation with me followed by the execution of a written attorney-client agreement signed by each of us. The communications on this website are not privileged or confidential and I assume no duty to anyone by my participation on Avvo or because I have answered or commented on a question. All legal proceedings involve deadlines and time limiting statutes. So that legal rights are not lost for failure to timely take appropriate action and because I do not provide legal advice in answer to any question, if you are an interested party you should promptly and personally consult with an attorney for legal advice. Also, see Avvo's terms and conditions of use, specifically item 9, incorporated by this reference
Section 3439.07 of the California Civil Code (California's verision of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act) allows a creditor to bring an action to avoid the fraudulent transfer. A fraudulent transfer exists when either: (1) a debtor makes a transfer or incurs an obligation with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud any creditor, or (2) debtor receives less than reasonably equivalent value for the transfer or obligation and debtor is insolvent or is reasonably expected to become insolvent.
This situation requires far more information and extensive legal research. It is not possible to provide case law and legal opinion without the underlying facts. Generally speaking, a transfer for zero consideration would not constitute a bona fide transaction.
Frank W. Chen has been licensed to practice law in California since 1988. The information presented here is general in nature and is not intended, nor should be construed, as legal advice for a particular case. This Avvo.com posting does not create any attorney-client relationship with the author. For specific advice about your particular situation, please consult with your own attorney.
A "bona fide purchaser" is only "bona fide" if she pays fair market value for the property. A transfer for $0 would not be a bona fide transfer.
If this answer was helpful, please mark it as helpful or as a best answer. This answer is for general education purposes only. It neither creates an attorney-client relationship nor provides legal guidance or advice. The answer is based on the limited information provided and the answer might be different had additional information been provided. You should consult an attorney.