She answered carefully.
“The transaction still would have required further verification and approvals. We can’t say it would have funded. But your return exposed the dispute before the loan closed.”
I nodded.
Then she continued.
“Natalie, the important thing is that you’ve acted quickly. We can address what actually happened without assuming the worst possible outcome was inevitable.”
I took a breath.
She was right.
I didn’t need to imagine losing the condo to understand the seriousness of what Adrian had done.
The facts were enough.
At the temporary court hearing, my attorney presented the deed, proof of my long-standing ownership, photographs of my belongings in the hallway, the messages concerning the lock change, and the disputed financing documents.
Adrian’s attorney argued that he had marital occupancy rights.
That the lock change occurred during a domestic disagreement.
And that the financing application represented a proposed family investment.
Monica responded that no valid authorization from me had been established.
