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

91–100 of 278 posts

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#91

Post by WillPostForFood »

IhateAI wrote: post #31
rationalist wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Hmm, I guess you technically just need to convince a notary that you're the seller and with virtual closings/ mobile notaries I guess that's probably pretty easy. But still the scammer would never see the earnest money, unless the buyer backed out outside of an option period for whatever reason. Presumably they wouldn't if the land is cheap, and they've agreed to pay cash and put earnest money down.

The scammer isn't trying to get the earnest money, they are trying to get the full sale price.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#92

Post by sidewndr46 »

semiquaver wrote: post #73
parsimo2010 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how is ownership established if there is no single source of truth? Oh, boy, let me tell you it is very disconcerting to pay a title company to do a search of legal records on a property, and the only guarantee they offer in some states is that "we didn't find anything suspicious but there is no guarantee that someone from the past won't pop up with a better claim to ownership. You can't hold it against us if that…

> You can't hold it against us if that happens No, what you describe is the entire purpose of owners title insurance. The idea that it “only covers previous owner” is false, it covers a wide variety of title defects.

I've read the terms of title insurance and no, you can't hold them liable if it turns out you don't get the property as intended. It's basically useless.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#93

Post by kstrauser »

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?…

In the dark old days before Apple Pay, where it was common in America to hand your credit/debit card to some rando at a restaurant and have them disappear with it for a few minutes, about once a year my bank would call me to ask if I'd been using my card in some far-off locale:

"Hi! Are you in Tijuana?"

"Not since 1993. Why? What's up?"

"So you didn't just try to buy gasoline at a PEMEX there?"

"Nope, I'm in San Francisco as speak."

"OK, thanks! We'll get a new card out in the mail to you."

That's a pretty low bar for identity theft, but I think it's defensible.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#94

Post by sidewndr46 »

skissane wrote: post #68
pdonis wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how is ownership established if there is no single source of truth? There is: the county clerk in the county where the land is located.

No, the county clerk records aren’t a “single source of truth”. In the US system, it is possible to convince a court the county records are wrong, and order them overridden-which makes them not the single source of truth. By contrast, in the Torrens system, whatever the government records say are final. If you are the innocent victim of a mistake by the government (or a fraud against it), the government has to compen…

It's also entirely possible for a judge to just change the records because they don't like them. It's pretty common in Texas to see deed restrictions removed if the local government doesn't want them on there for example.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#95

Post by toast0 »

rendx wrote: post #79
pdonis wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in the Torrens system, whatever the government records say are final First, it doesn't seem like that's always the case, based on another post upthread talking about a land ownership case that went to the high court because of an error in the government's records. Second, since there is no single government for the entire world, any government trying to implement a Torrens system is still going to face the problem…

> is still going to face the problem of events happening outside its jurisdiction that its records do not and cannot contain Excuse my German ignorance, but my understanding of how it works here is that unless the transfer is notarized, logged and recorded with the local authority, there has not been a legal transfer. So, by that definition of land ownership, no "events outside of its jurisdiction" can take place. An…

In the three states where I've been involved in or observed real estate transactions, the system is similar in that a real estate transaction must be recorded with the county clerk to become effective. Generally documents are notarized to validate the identity of the signatories, and a notary is expected to confirm that the signatories understand what they are signing.

However, afaik, county clerks do not validate deeds; they will dutifully record any submitted deed if it follows the proper forms. If there is doubt about the validity of a conveyance, the whole history of recorded deeds for a property can be examined and potentially set aside if found to be fraudulent. Adverse possession laws can moot disputes about old conveyances though: after some time, someone who has "color of title", actual possession, and pays property taxes will gain actual title to the property, even if their original deed was deficient.

In a land registry system, the keeper of the registry generally validates that conveyances are approved by the current owner; this doesn't happen in a system of registered deeds. Deeds I've seen don't truly identify the grantors or grantees either. Typically just the first and last names. There are many people with my name, but if you have a deed for my house signed by the Pulitzer Prize winning author who shares my name, you can record it even though it's not actually valid.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#96

Post by sidewndr46 »

bluGill wrote: post #51
wrs wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 com…

That depends on the state. I live in Iowa where the state records the transaction and verifies everyone's identity. Almost nobody has title insurance because there is nothing to insure. Every other state I've lived in though isn't as good about checking ID and you need title insurance (who is very good about checking id)

But how do they verify your identity? Most places I've lived used nearly useless forms of identity verification

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#97

Post by recursive »

kstrauser wrote: post #93
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?…

In the dark old days before Apple Pay, where it was common in America to hand your credit/debit card to some rando at a restaurant and have them disappear with it for a few minutes, about once a year my bank would call me to ask if I'd been using my card in some far-off locale: "Hi! Are you in Tijuana?" "Not since 1993. Why? What's up?" "So you didn't just try to buy gasoline at a PEMEX there?" "Nope, I'm in San Fran…

You must have been going to some very shady restaurants. I still hand off my credit card to a rando. I did it today. I did it last weekend. I've never had this problem.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#98

Post by pdonis »

rcxdude wrote: post #78
pdonis wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> in the Torrens system, whatever the government records say are final First, it doesn't seem like that's always the case, based on another post upthread talking about a land ownership case that went to the high court because of an error in the government's records. Second, since there is no single government for the entire world, any government trying to implement a Torrens system is still going to face the problem…

In the Torrens system, if you do not register the transfer of property with the government, then the transfer hasn't happened . So whatever else happens in the rest of the world doesn't matter (at least, unless the land itself is annexed by another government). (And, from similar cases in the UK which has this system, if the land registry fucks up the transfer is still final and this has been upheld by the court, the…

> In the Torrens system, if you do not register the transfer of property with the government, then the transfer hasn't happened.

This is also true of county clerks in the US: any transfer of property in the county has to be recorded on a deed that is submitted to the county clerk and kept on file by them. Otherwise it hasn't happened.

> if the land registry fucks up the transfer is still final

This is the part that might not be the same in all US jurisdictions (though it appears it is the same in some, someone posted upthread about Iowa having a system like this).

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#99

Post by NoSalt »

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 have had my identity stolen [at least] three times in the last 15 years:

* OPM Hack

* Target Hack

* Equifax Hack

I say "at least" because there have been more, but I just started ignoring them after a while. I also had it stolen back in the late 1990s; and, thinking back, that was crazy for that time period.

Re: 221 Cannon is Not For Sale

#100

Post by Lammy »

recursive wrote: post #97
kstrauser wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the dark old days before Apple Pay, where it was common in America to hand your credit/debit card to some rando at a restaurant and have them disappear with it for a few minutes, about once a year my bank would call me to ask if I'd been using my card in some far-off locale: "Hi! Are you in Tijuana?" "Not since 1993. Why? What's up?" "So you didn't just try to buy gasoline at a PEMEX there?" "Nope, I'm in San Fran…

You must have been going to some very shady restaurants. I still hand off my credit card to a rando. I did it today. I did it last weekend. I've never had this problem.

This exact thing happened to me once at the hotel bar in the Santa Clara Convention Center / Hyatt Regency Santa Clara.
Post reply on HN