Title problems?

[bearishgurl]

Agree with everything you’re saying here, UR, but I wanted to add that there WERE banks that disclosed to borrowers within their loan docs (usually with ARM products) that they kept 100% of these loans within their portfolios.

These were typically the former “giant thrifts,” (the Downey and World Savings and now Chase’s of the world [who swallowed up WAMU who swallowed up GW]). All these notes would still be presumably kept somewhere “in house.”

The BIG QUESTION here is, “How many of these loans are actually active (and still performing) today??” Mine is, and I’m confident my bank could find my note if they had to, in a pinch :=).

These existing “direct” loans may now amount to a “drop in the bucket” compared to all that has “changed hands” through “MERS,” some no doubt multiple times :=(.

[faterikcartman]

UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.

[faterikcartman]

UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.

[faterikcartman]

UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.

[faterikcartman]

UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.

[faterikcartman]

UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.

[bubba99]

I found an article that seems to agree that proper recording of mortgage ownership has changed. The applicable text being “Titles and mortgages on real property are officially recorded in county clerks’ offices, a slow-moving, old-fashioned, deliberate world of ink, paper, and filing cabinets. The process has been perfected over a millennium, going back to the Domesday Book, the survey of English property completed in 1086 for William the Conqueror. This paper-based system, though admirably accurate and permanent, wasn’t equipped for the era of rapid-fire refinancing and securitization. When over 8 million new and used homes are sold per year, as at the height of the boom, and most loans are packaged into securities, you need a lot of clerks.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_43/b4200009860564.htm

[bubba99]

I found an article that seems to agree that proper recording of mortgage ownership has changed. The applicable text being “Titles and mortgages on real property are officially recorded in county clerks’ offices, a slow-moving, old-fashioned, deliberate world of ink, paper, and filing cabinets. The process has been perfected over a millennium, going back to the Domesday Book, the survey of English property completed in 1086 for William the Conqueror. This paper-based system, though admirably accurate and permanent, wasn’t equipped for the era of rapid-fire refinancing and securitization. When over 8 million new and used homes are sold per year, as at the height of the boom, and most loans are packaged into securities, you need a lot of clerks.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_43/b4200009860564.htm

[bubba99]

I found an article that seems to agree that proper recording of mortgage ownership has changed. The applicable text being “Titles and mortgages on real property are officially recorded in county clerks’ offices, a slow-moving, old-fashioned, deliberate world of ink, paper, and filing cabinets. The process has been perfected over a millennium, going back to the Domesday Book, the survey of English property completed in 1086 for William the Conqueror. This paper-based system, though admirably accurate and permanent, wasn’t equipped for the era of rapid-fire refinancing and securitization. When over 8 million new and used homes are sold per year, as at the height of the boom, and most loans are packaged into securities, you need a lot of clerks.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_43/b4200009860564.htm

[bubba99]

I found an article that seems to agree that proper recording of mortgage ownership has changed. The applicable text being “Titles and mortgages on real property are officially recorded in county clerks’ offices, a slow-moving, old-fashioned, deliberate world of ink, paper, and filing cabinets. The process has been perfected over a millennium, going back to the Domesday Book, the survey of English property completed in 1086 for William the Conqueror. This paper-based system, though admirably accurate and permanent, wasn’t equipped for the era of rapid-fire refinancing and securitization. When over 8 million new and used homes are sold per year, as at the height of the boom, and most loans are packaged into securities, you need a lot of clerks.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_43/b4200009860564.htm

[bubba99]

I found an article that seems to agree that proper recording of mortgage ownership has changed. The applicable text being “Titles and mortgages on real property are officially recorded in county clerks’ offices, a slow-moving, old-fashioned, deliberate world of ink, paper, and filing cabinets. The process has been perfected over a millennium, going back to the Domesday Book, the survey of English property completed in 1086 for William the Conqueror. This paper-based system, though admirably accurate and permanent, wasn’t equipped for the era of rapid-fire refinancing and securitization. When over 8 million new and used homes are sold per year, as at the height of the boom, and most loans are packaged into securities, you need a lot of clerks.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_43/b4200009860564.htm

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=faterikcartman]UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.[/quote]

At the theoretical level:
There are 3 basic types of ownership clouds that title covers:

-physical:
where you find out the lot line goes through your living room.

-ownership:
Where a long lost heir claims he owns part of your house.

-lien holder:
There is a lien holder interest (like mortgage or abatement) that was never taken care of and has the potential to cloud the new owner’s interest. This the type that concerns us.

At a practical and anecdotal level:
Speaking as someone who has asked this question of my escrow peeps, I am not terribly stressed out about it.

I have not seen this type of challenge regarding security or ownership interest up close myself.

That does not mean it has not happened on a deal I have done.

It just means that any ruckus was sent directly to the right people (the escrow company and the title company) and not to me (if it happened).

Per my short sale escrow officers, it does happen sometimes (though seldom) that a lender is not compensated correctly at the time of sale (eg: the payoff comes in $1000 short) and nobody notices until after the close and recording.

Per them, it then ends up as either a small write off (the bank says “oh fuck it, its only a grand”) or the escrow company eats it (assuming the mistake is primarily theirs) or the lender puts in a claim with the title company (who pays all or part of it).

They insure the new buyers ownership and the old owner’s conveyance.

I have never heard of a lender coming after a ex-borrower-cum-seller or after a new buyer or even attempting to undo a sale.

I suppose it is possible but it ranks along with ranks (along with FHA short refis) as a unicorn.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=faterikcartman]UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.[/quote]

At the theoretical level:
There are 3 basic types of ownership clouds that title covers:

-physical:
where you find out the lot line goes through your living room.

-ownership:
Where a long lost heir claims he owns part of your house.

-lien holder:
There is a lien holder interest (like mortgage or abatement) that was never taken care of and has the potential to cloud the new owner’s interest. This the type that concerns us.

At a practical and anecdotal level:
Speaking as someone who has asked this question of my escrow peeps, I am not terribly stressed out about it.

I have not seen this type of challenge regarding security or ownership interest up close myself.

That does not mean it has not happened on a deal I have done.

It just means that any ruckus was sent directly to the right people (the escrow company and the title company) and not to me (if it happened).

Per my short sale escrow officers, it does happen sometimes (though seldom) that a lender is not compensated correctly at the time of sale (eg: the payoff comes in $1000 short) and nobody notices until after the close and recording.

Per them, it then ends up as either a small write off (the bank says “oh fuck it, its only a grand”) or the escrow company eats it (assuming the mistake is primarily theirs) or the lender puts in a claim with the title company (who pays all or part of it).

They insure the new buyers ownership and the old owner’s conveyance.

I have never heard of a lender coming after a ex-borrower-cum-seller or after a new buyer or even attempting to undo a sale.

I suppose it is possible but it ranks along with ranks (along with FHA short refis) as a unicorn.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=faterikcartman]UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.[/quote]

At the theoretical level:
There are 3 basic types of ownership clouds that title covers:

-physical:
where you find out the lot line goes through your living room.

-ownership:
Where a long lost heir claims he owns part of your house.

-lien holder:
There is a lien holder interest (like mortgage or abatement) that was never taken care of and has the potential to cloud the new owner’s interest. This the type that concerns us.

At a practical and anecdotal level:
Speaking as someone who has asked this question of my escrow peeps, I am not terribly stressed out about it.

I have not seen this type of challenge regarding security or ownership interest up close myself.

That does not mean it has not happened on a deal I have done.

It just means that any ruckus was sent directly to the right people (the escrow company and the title company) and not to me (if it happened).

Per my short sale escrow officers, it does happen sometimes (though seldom) that a lender is not compensated correctly at the time of sale (eg: the payoff comes in $1000 short) and nobody notices until after the close and recording.

Per them, it then ends up as either a small write off (the bank says “oh fuck it, its only a grand”) or the escrow company eats it (assuming the mistake is primarily theirs) or the lender puts in a claim with the title company (who pays all or part of it).

They insure the new buyers ownership and the old owner’s conveyance.

I have never heard of a lender coming after a ex-borrower-cum-seller or after a new buyer or even attempting to undo a sale.

I suppose it is possible but it ranks along with ranks (along with FHA short refis) as a unicorn.

[urbanrealtor]

[quote=faterikcartman]UR — I can’t imagine title companies covering this sort of thing. Have you read the exclusions lately? Anything that isn’t a public record located at X, Y, or Z is probably not going to be covered. Nor can I imagine most ever getting near this sort of coverage via a standard policy.[/quote]

At the theoretical level:
There are 3 basic types of ownership clouds that title covers:

-physical:
where you find out the lot line goes through your living room.

-ownership:
Where a long lost heir claims he owns part of your house.

-lien holder:
There is a lien holder interest (like mortgage or abatement) that was never taken care of and has the potential to cloud the new owner’s interest. This the type that concerns us.

At a practical and anecdotal level:
Speaking as someone who has asked this question of my escrow peeps, I am not terribly stressed out about it.

I have not seen this type of challenge regarding security or ownership interest up close myself.

That does not mean it has not happened on a deal I have done.

It just means that any ruckus was sent directly to the right people (the escrow company and the title company) and not to me (if it happened).

Per my short sale escrow officers, it does happen sometimes (though seldom) that a lender is not compensated correctly at the time of sale (eg: the payoff comes in $1000 short) and nobody notices until after the close and recording.

Per them, it then ends up as either a small write off (the bank says “oh fuck it, its only a grand”) or the escrow company eats it (assuming the mistake is primarily theirs) or the lender puts in a claim with the title company (who pays all or part of it).

They insure the new buyers ownership and the old owner’s conveyance.

I have never heard of a lender coming after a ex-borrower-cum-seller or after a new buyer or even attempting to undo a sale.

I suppose it is possible but it ranks along with ranks (along with FHA short refis) as a unicorn.

[Author]

Posts