Talk:Title insurance

I think this is only part of the story

"Title insurance exists in the US in great part because of a comparative deficiency in the US land records laws." I believe a greater part has to do with the liquid secondary mortgage market in the US with Mortgage Backed Securities and FNMA, etc. In Canada, the registry systems and laws regarding solicitor's negligence have always been superior to those in the US. In addition, with Canada's national lending institutions and their substantial funds, the secondary mortgage market has not been as critical to the growth of the mortgage industry. These factors help to explain why title insurance has grown at a slower pace in Canada. The introduction of Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) to Canada in the mid 1980's provided impetus for title insurance as investors and the MBS guarantor, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), wanted assurance of clear and unencumbered title. More recently, fraud in the real estate industry has reinforced the need for title insurance for both lending institutions and property owners. A number of lending institutions now require title insurance on all mortgages. Dfahey 15:57, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Dfahey, I agree with you if what you are saying is that the secondary mortgage market increased the desirability of title insurance. However, the point I was trying to make is that the dominant land title records systems in the US are the base reason for the existence of title insurance here. At least in the US commercial real estate markets, individual loans for millions of dollars that are rarely sold, e.g., construction loans, would be less likely to be made if lenders faced the problem that poor Mr. Watson faced in Watson v. Muirhead in 1868. Also, the older of the title insurance companies in the US were in business before the existence of the secondary mortgage market and securitized lending programs you mention. I think it is the superior land registration system in Canada has made it possible to have commercial projects mortgage lending there without title insurance. Nevertheless, I think the secondary market and securitized lending factors should be included in the article. Anoneditor 23:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Plug for a single company

I removed link to one specific company, which was included as an "example" of a title insurance agent. This seems to be a veiled attempt to advertise for this company. If it was included among others, it might be different, though I still feel that would not add to the article. Gblaz 02:33, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

About the plug you should not have removed It. That company myclosingspace.com is about saving people real money. Its the only company out their that is aggressive with pricing, it also gives the consumer information so they dont get riped off.

Title insurance premiums are for most part regulated, in some states the premiums can be discounted the Junk and ancinilary fees are a gray area. the big issues with premiums is consumers dont get the proper reissue rates, Because of fine print disclouses and soft laws the consumer get screwed out of a discount at the closijng.

After reading everything on this board it seems that no one has a clear understanding of the realities of the title insurance business and how it operates

every one has their hand in the comsumers pocket with back office deals the consumer should buy their title insurance direct, some companies have made it easy, most have not.

I take issue with this statement

myclosingspace.com is a ripoff —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.184.133 (talk) 02:57, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Surprisingly, lower title premiums are generally found in the unregulated states.

Is this really surprising? The purpose of rate regulation, I thought, was to assure that the insurers would have sufficient income and reserves to pay claims. If anyone is more familiar with ins. regulation please comment. Ellsworth 14:36, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• I believe this comment comes from the fact that most attempts to regulate title insurance premiums are implemented as a consumer protection statute intended to save consumers money, not to insure sufficient income to pay claims. That would generally fall under the reserve requirements imposed by regulators. The statment above is true however... Often an attempt to limit(regulate) premiums will acutally result in higher premiums overall Gblaz 02:33, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd have to second the question -- to a PhD in economics (my partner), it's not surprising at all; he actually sent me email saying that that word should have been "unsurprisingly". I didn't see this discussion link until after editing the word a minute ago; my apologies. If the edit is disagreeable, I recommend removing the word entirely so that the sentence begins "Lower title premiums are...". -Jeff, July 5, 2005

Somewhat Puzzled about the Title Business

Can someone explain to me the relationships between the parties. I know in Texas there are underwriters, there are issuing agents, and there are fee offices for attorneys. Why are so many parties necessary? Why aren't the attorney's also the issuing agents? Why do underwriters need both issuing agents and fee attorneys? Next there is the question about the plant where the abstracts of title are made. Who owns the plant, how does one buy a plant? The plant is just the title records for the county. This is public information so how can someone own the plant?

The Agent is the sales arm of the underwriter he performs all the work collects the money and remits a percentage of the premium collected to the underwriter. Should the agent do a bad job or a defect surfaced in the title the underwriter pays the claim.

The Attorney usally acts to represent the banks interest in the transaction. Title agents can perform the same service. Attorneys typically dont act as title agents because of a confilct of interest.

Why do underwriters need both issuing agents and fee attorneys?

The underwriters dont charge attorney fees the attorney fee is usally an expense connected to the loan. If the underwriter charges an attorney it may be at the request of the bank that an attorney close the transaction. The Plant Plants are privatly owned by underwriters or private ownners Some states are plant states like califorina. public property records are not centerlized in a lot of states, and are not put together on in an organized chain of title. so if i need a title reprot for abc street address in in trailer park usa i can get a 60 year history in 24 hours. a plant is an enhanced form of public record. the plant record is housing not only the public record also past produced report for that property. it could take weeks to produce the same report gathering the same public records from the various departments within the couty to produce the same title report A title report consist of more then just who owns the property so you have to go to various county offices to produce one report.

hope this helps

Attorneys represent more than the interests of the lender in many states. In Illinois, for example, both purchasers and sellers of houses (not to mention commercial real estate) are represented by separate counsel. This is also true in parts of the Mid-Atlantic region of the country. There are also parts of the country where attorneys do act as title insurance agents. They believe that the conflict of interest is abated by their disclosure to their client that they represent the title insurer in the transaction.

The underwriters don't charge attorneys fees at all. If an attorney's fee is included in the title insurance bill, it is merely a convenience to the lawyer. The general law is that title insurers are not allowed to practice law except in certain limited circumstances, such as filling in the blanks in standardized deed forms.

Except for tax records, the public records that concern title insurance are almost always centralized in the office of the county recorder or a similar governmental office. Tax records may be kept in various public offices due to the fact that not all of the assessments are for ad valorem property taxes. (An example is assessments for fire protection districts in some places.) The title plant merely makes it easier to do the searching because it is organized on the basis of tracts of land rather than the names of sellers and purchasers (grantors and grantees). Anoneditor 22:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Category

Someone should add a Category: insurance tag to this artical...I dont know how :) Bob000555 06:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed and done. Also added to Category: Types of insurance. Panchitaville^talk 05:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Title insurance companies' market shares

Before I take any action on the multiple amendments of January 29 setting forth the views of an undisclosed person on the market shares of title insurers, I would like to give user 210.193.131.177 an opportunity to defend what he or she has written on this subject. The reasons: First, no source for these numbers is given. Second, it's not clear whether the author is listing title insurance company families or individual companies. Third, No criteria is given for factoring in the non-US operations listed, and some of the companies listed as having only US operations do, in fact, write policies in other countries, e.g., Stewart Title and Fidelity National Title. Finally, if this kind of information is to be included in the article, it seems to me it should be at the end of the article rather than at the beginning. Anoneditor (talk) 06:03, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I would agree. It's not even clear whether these are U.S. market share figures, or global market share figures. Without a source, it's hard to know what this means.EastTN (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your affirmation. If there is no response from the poster in the next few days, I'm going to pull this section. The more I look at it, the more it looks like a subliminal ad for First American; it gives all kinds of details about that company and virtually none for the rest. Anoneditor (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

need some education on title companies and insurance

I am currently interested in ivesting in a home on a land contract, what role does a title company play and what procedures do i need to follow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.60.111.230 (talk) 03:00, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I view title insurance as a due diligence product that discloses matters that effect the subject property. This information is important to a purchaser and any lender securing the property. The title commitment will disclose ownership, the estate to be insured (fee, leasehold, etc...), the legal description, exceptions to title that are a variety of matters such as easements, boundary line agreements, access agreements, property restrictions, and much more. There is also a list of requirements that list all matters that must be resolved in order for the title underwriter to issue its owner or lender title policy. The requirements will typically be payment of consideration for the subject property, payment of title insurance premium, recordation of a deed, release of any liens burdening the property, resolution of open litigation affecting title to the property, clarification of the applicability of judgments or liens affecting a common name that is similar to the vested owner, etc... Once the requirements are satisfied (many to be satisfied at the closing) the title company will close and issue a policy or policies.

For a purchaser of real estate, my suggestion would be to review the title commitment carefully. Make sure the seller you are working with is vested in title as the owner by the last deed filed of record. If there is any discrepancy find out why. Make sure the legal descriptions of the title commitment and purchase contract match each other. Review title exceptions to be sure there is no restriction prohibiting your intended use and understand who may have rights to access, cross or otherwise use your property and where that use is located. The title commitment requirements will let you know what debt is existing on the property that must be released at closing or has not been released from prior closings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Longhorn97 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

World wide view tag

Unless this topic is going to delve into the different land registration systems in other countries, a substantial "world wide view" is going to be very difficult. The reason: As stated in the article, title insurance exists primarily because of the nearly unique real estate title records system in the U.S. Except for some places in Canada and, perhaps, the U.K., the vast majority of countries use government-run land registrations systems. Although a substantial number of properties located in other countries are insured by U.S. title insurers, they do not constitute a very significant proportion of either the properties changing hands in those countries or of the U.S. title insurer's revenues. Many, if not the great majority, of them are properties to be used for commercial purposes by U.S. companies doing business abroad or by U.S. lenders who are financing the purchases. They acquire title insurance because they want the security of a U.S. company backing up the evidence of title that they receive from those other systems, and it's payment of the costs of defense if there is a challenge to that title. Therefore, I would opt to remove the tag. Anoneditor (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Would there be any benefit in renaming the article something along the lines of Title insurance in the United States to make it clear that this is essentially a US-specific form of insurance? I agree with you that, unless we learn that there's a significant title insurance market in another country, it doesn't make much sense to turn this into a global article. (On the other hand, a global article on providing an overview of different land registration systems might make a lot of sense.) EastTN (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the article as I suggested above, and reworked the lead to reflect the US-specific nature of this kind of insurance. EastTN (talk) 15:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

This should be moved back to Title insurance. The move made zero sense to begin with. If it is unique to the United States, there is no need to disambiguate. If no one defends the move, I will put this on the Requested moves list soon. --Coolcaesar (talk) 02:50, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No one ever stepped up to defend EastTN's foolish move, so I finally stepped in and put this article back where it belongs. --Coolcaesar (talk) 07:49, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

©₧₦₭¶∞== History section ==

This sentence is included in the introduction section, but there is no mention of this anywhere in the History section: "The first title insurance which has bee₵₵₵₵₡$₯₠