Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

221 Cannon is Not For Sale

fredbenenson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 278 posts

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#21

Post by rwmj »

emptybits wrote: post #7

1. Author lost me at his first sentence: "Like most people, I’ve had my identity stolen once or twice in my life." I am careful and aware of this possibility, but AFAIK I have not experienced this, nor have "most people" I know. o_O Crazy times. 2. I don't even understand how a title transfer could happen without verifying ownership. Is the title system in the USA decentralized or that much different than elsewhere?…

I also wondered why someone would own an empty lot in another town for years on end and neither build on it nor sell it.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#22

Post by lateforwork »

maciekkmrk wrote: post #5

Is this something a title insurance could help with?

Title insurance protects the buyer. It doesn't protect the owner.

Also, as mentioned in another post, lobbying from title insurance companies is the reason the US doesn't have a central registry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title#United_States

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#23

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

maciekkmrk wrote: post #5

Is this something a title insurance could help with?

This is interesting! A fraudulent deed on your title doesn’t change rights, but it might require you to clarify them in court, which is costly and inconvenient. Traditional title insurance only covered addressing clouds on title that existed when you acquired, meaning post-acquisition clouds would be your problem, but supposedly there is an enhanced coverage that title insurance companies offer as well, and the decision to surface the difference (at least where I live) lands with the closing attorney… who isn’t actually required to do or say anything about this….

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#24

Post by IhateAI »

This doesn't make sense, earnest money would be in escrow until the title clears. The scammer would never have access to the earnest money, nor would it ever get transferred to them unless the buyer took too long to close, or didn't come up with funds?? Like the title company would almost have to be involved for this to work.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#25

Post by rationalist »

IhateAI wrote: post #24

This doesn't make sense, earnest money would be in escrow until the title clears. The scammer would never have access to the earnest money, nor would it ever get transferred to them unless the buyer took too long to close, or didn't come up with funds?? Like the title company would almost have to be involved for this to work.

The title is often actually transfered, and it is a mess to clean up.

You could walk into a court house and submit paperwork for filing, that transfers the title - all without any kind of sale or verification. It happens.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#26

Post by [deleted] »

rwmj wrote: post #21
emptybits wrote: post #7

1. Author lost me at his first sentence: "Like most people, I’ve had my identity stolen once or twice in my life." I am careful and aware of this possibility, but AFAIK I have not experienced this, nor have "most people" I know. o_O Crazy times. 2. I don't even understand how a title transfer could happen without verifying ownership. Is the title system in the USA decentralized or that much different than elsewhere?…

I also wondered why someone would own an empty lot in another town for years on end and neither build on it nor sell it.

[deleted]

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#27

Post by rationalist »

rwmj wrote: post #21
emptybits wrote: post #7

1. Author lost me at his first sentence: "Like most people, I’ve had my identity stolen once or twice in my life." I am careful and aware of this possibility, but AFAIK I have not experienced this, nor have "most people" I know. o_O Crazy times. 2. I don't even understand how a title transfer could happen without verifying ownership. Is the title system in the USA decentralized or that much different than elsewhere?…

I also wondered why someone would own an empty lot in another town for years on end and neither build on it nor sell it.

They inheritted it and have been lazy, they bought it for an investment, they bought it because they might want to build their retirement home on it, etc. Plenty of reasons why.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#28

Post by ElevenLathe »

Analemma_ wrote: post #19
teeray wrote: post #9

Periodic reminder that "identity theft" is the financial system gaslighting you into thinking their poor decisions are your fault.

This is a Mad Libs autopilot reply which has nothing to do with the article.

I wouldn't say it has nothing to do with the article. A real estate agent selling your land on behalf of someone that isn't you is roughly analogous to a bank giving credit in your name to someone who isn't you. Either way, someone who isn't you got scammed by someone else who also isn't you, but somehow this is your problem.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#29

Post by zamadatix »

teeray wrote: post #18
jgoldshlag wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that nearly all of the people doing this don't even live in the country where the land is being sold from. A simple sign would probably be quite effective

True, but you can still do a confused deputy attack. The fraudster hires a property manager, informs them that they would like to remove the sign because they wish the list the property for sale. Either that or they con a realtor they're working with into doing it. The unknowing realtor, eager for the commission, knows a guy who can take it down.

There's always something that can happen in any scenario. Social engineering, hiring locals, deeper forms of identity theft, or worse. The possibilities never hit 0, they just become a lot less profitable (and a lot riskier) a scam to try to run.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#30

Post by wrs »

nine_k wrote: post #17
jjmarr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike most common law jurisdictions, the United States doesn't have a central land registry due to lobbying from the title insurance industry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title#United_States

I wonder why a commercial entity that registers ownership / titles for free, and bills for checking, did not spring up. Clearly there is moneyed demand for certainty about title rights, and if you can provide certainty (because the last deal was registered with you), it may be a more desirable product than mere insurance.

It’s turtles all the way down, though — how do you know that last deal had clear title? At some point you’re going to want insurance anyway.

In any case, the US system is already that the government records ownership (not for free, but for a small recording fee) and the title company charges for checking, and for insurance in case they get it wrong.

As just one example of how it can go wrong, here in Seattle it’s common to find out your lot is nine inches smaller than you thought because surveying technology is a lot better now than it was when your deed was written in 1908.

Post reply on HN