My real introduction to Title Insurance came not when I purchased my first house, but as I sold it. The buyer was an experienced builder who was buying the house (in a fairly desirable area of the city where property was appreciating quickly) in order to add upgrades and flip it. When his agent asked why he had crossed out the line for title insurance, he retorted, "that property's been sold three times in 10 years.…
Working Title (Insurance)
41–50 of 99 posts
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#42Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#43You are paying for title insurance mostly to buy the expertise of a local title agent who knows how to look up things locally.
There is no national database that is up to date and trustworthy for this. To be even close to accurate, you need to check the source of truth for property deeds, transactions, liens.
You need to check various level of governments if taxes are up to date. If they are not, there may be an implied lien.
You need to check for financial judgements against the seller, which again may form an implied lien.
Divorces and similar issues mentioned in the article.
I am involved in an in-laws estate where a mom died without a will, a daughter was living in the house for free, and she and her husband had substantial judgements against them (hundreds of thousands of dollars). Resolution has involved the horrors of the surrogate’s court, multiple real estate lawyers, bankruptcy of the daughter, financial negotiations with her creditors and bankruptcy manager, surrogate administrator bonds, and repeated discussions with a bank holding a second mortgage against the property.
This has been ongoing for six years and is finally now almost resolved.
Most transactions will not have any of these problems. But you get title insurance - or run the check locally yourself, at least - because you have no idea who the seller really is and what they may have gotten into.
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#44A surprising law foundation in the US is that if you live somewhere long enough as if you were the owner, then it becomes yours. Sometimes known as "squatters rights". This feels a bit unfair at first. However, this "if you think you own it, you probably do own it" has turned out fairly well. At least in most places in the US, unlike England, you don't have to trace all property transfers back to Norman Conquest in 1…
https://england.shelter.org.uk/professional_resources/legal/...
(I'm glad you said "England", because the Scottish system is different, and the Register of Sasines https://www.ros.gov.uk/our-registers/general-register-of-sas... got replaced with a modern database round about the millenium)
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#45I'm inclined to disagree with this. One of those "not everyone doing it is up to no good, but everyone who is up to no good is definitely doing it" things. Obscuring ownership makes it a lot easier to evade the state in other matters.
The UK (and EU countries etc) has a register of "beneficial ownership" which attempts to untangle all such legal obfuscation efforts. https://www.ocorian.com/insights/understanding-uk-beneficial...
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#46I disagree with the author a bit here. You are paying for title insurance mostly to buy the expertise of a local title agent who knows how to look up things locally. There is no national database that is up to date and trustworthy for this. To be even close to accurate, you need to check the source of truth for property deeds, transactions, liens. You need to check various level of governments if taxes are up to date…
The author's point about real estate being one-shot for the buyer and seller is spot-on.
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#47I disagree with the author a bit here. You are paying for title insurance mostly to buy the expertise of a local title agent who knows how to look up things locally. There is no national database that is up to date and trustworthy for this. To be even close to accurate, you need to check the source of truth for property deeds, transactions, liens. You need to check various level of governments if taxes are up to date…
The nature of the scam is not from title insurance being unnecessary, but title insurance not being purchased on an open market like other insurance products. It's added in to the contract, with financial benefit to the real estate agent, and not discussed. The author's point about real estate being one-shot for the buyer and seller is spot-on.
The rules in Hunterdon County, NJ are completely different from Detroit, MI and are different from Ossining, NY.
If you paid a guy in CA to run a title search in Hunterdon County, you’d be in a world of hurt. Because most of our records are at various Hall of Records. Even when computerized they are not on the Internet.
Even big places like Suffolk County, NY require a physical trip.
This is why the title agent gets nearly all the money. It is much more about the search than the actual insurance. As the author indicates, it is very rare for anyone to have to pay on a title insurance claim.
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#48> Many people, when they learn about land trusts, immediately assume that something extremely hinky is going on. Not so much; this is an extremely common way for savvy people to own property. It is in no way a loophole. I'm inclined to disagree with this. One of those "not everyone doing it is up to no good, but everyone who is up to no good is definitely doing it" things. Obscuring ownership makes it a lot easier to…
You cannot get much information on land ownership from public registers in the UK other than the name and address of the owner, and the name and address of any mortgage holder so the problem this solves does not exist in the UK either. There is a requirement that overseas entities owning UK property register their ownership, but that is all I know of.
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#49My real introduction to Title Insurance came not when I purchased my first house, but as I sold it. The buyer was an experienced builder who was buying the house (in a fairly desirable area of the city where property was appreciating quickly) in order to add upgrades and flip it. When his agent asked why he had crossed out the line for title insurance, he retorted, "that property's been sold three times in 10 years.…
I do not buy title insurance on investment properties if the last owner had a mortgage. If the title commitment was good enough for the bank, it’s good enough for me. I build the potential clouded or impaired title into my risk model. (I’ve also filed public comments with the CFPB on title insurance being junk fees [1], full disclosure) [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40524304
Or if they are beyond on their property taxes? Or going through a messy divorce? Or get an unexpected large medical bill that finalizes as a financial judgement against them?
Clean title from other owners tells you only a limited story. The current owners can completely trash the title but still have an existing mortgage.
Re: Working Title (Insurance)
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
The nature of the scam is not from title insurance being unnecessary, but title insurance not being purchased on an open market like other insurance products. It's added in to the contract, with financial benefit to the real estate agent, and not discussed. The author's point about real estate being one-shot for the buyer and seller is spot-on.
I disagree. Title insurance requires highly localized specialty agents from the municipality up to the county to the State to Federal. The rules in Hunterdon County, NJ are completely different from Detroit, MI and are different from Ossining, NY. If you paid a guy in CA to run a title search in Hunterdon County, you’d be in a world of hurt. Because most of our records are at various Hall of Records. Even when comput…
The government passed a law giving anyone with such a claim 10 years to record it in the title registry, and after the deadline any unregistered claims were extinguished. And the title registry is digital and (basically) authoritative.
Of course, that doesn't stop the people doing house sales paperwork from trying to charge you £50 for insurance that literally does nothing....