Colleagues-
Give 'em an answer.
I've just cut and pasted the two ?s
Cheers
Derek
_______________________________________________________
From: Devlin, Christopher J [CDevlin@UNUM.COM]
Fair enough on point #1, though alternate certification forms were allowed under the earlier standards and a number of national survey companies published widely-used certification forms based on the 2005 ones which included a certification that “the property described hereon is the same as the property described in [title co] commitment No. _____” This kind of language is apparently not kosher under the new standards.
Christopher J. Devlin
AVP and Sr. Counsel, Investments
Unum
2211 Congress Street, C474
Portland, ME 04122
207-575-4218
207-575-1296 (fax)
cdevlin@unum.com
* This e-mail was sent from Unum’s Legal Department, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, et seq., and is legally privileged. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited; you are also requested to please reply to this message by notifying the sender that it was sent to you in error and delete it from your system.
From: Steve Gottheim [mailto:steve@alta.org]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 10:42 AM
To: DIRT - Real Estate Lawyers Listserv; Devlin, Christopher J
Subject: RE: [DIRT] FW: New ALTA/ACSM Survey Standards
Chris,
1. Actually, no prior versions of the ALTA/ACSM certification ever had language to the effect that the property is the same as that described in the title commitment. If that would be desirable, the ALTA/ACSM committee certainly could look at requiring a note to that effect with the next version of the standards. When a new description is written it seems entirely appropriate to include such a statement (assuming it’s a true statement, which it’s not always).
2. Table A item 21 is brand new to the standards and it’s not entirely clear whether title companies will insist upon this item or require a correlation to the loan amount. I suggest you talk some title companies to get a sense on what their underwriters will require.
Steve
Steve Gottheim
Legislative and Regulatory Counsel
American Land Title Association
1828 L St., NW
Suite 705
Washington, DC 20036
202.261.2943 direct
steve@alta.org
www.alta.org
From: DIRT - Real Estate Lawyers Listserv [mailto:DIRT@LISTSERV.UMKC.EDU] On Behalf Of Patrick Randolph (UMKC Dirt)
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:58 PM
To: DIRT@LISTSERV.UMKC.EDU
Subject: [DIRT] FW: New ALTA/ACSM Survey Standards
From: Devlin, Christopher J [CDevlin@UNUM.COM]
I had a couple of questions regarding the new ALTA/ACSM survey standards on which I was hoping to get input from title gurus. These are asked from perspective of commercial mortgagee:
1. The new ALTA/ACSM survey standards don’t include the language from the old certification to the effect that the property is the same as that described in the title commitment, but instead just call for a note identifying the commitment. Does this omission create any new requirement for issuance of the “same as survey” endorsement?
2. How are title companies handling the requirement for identification of E&O coverage limits for the surveyor? Do they look for any correlation to loan amount? Does omission of the item from Table A have any coverage implications?
Thanks for your attention to this.
Regards,
Chris
Christopher J. Devlin
Senior Counsel, Investments
Unum
2211 Congress Street, C474
Portland, ME 04122
207-575-4218
207-575-1296 (fax)
cdevlin@unum.com
* This e-mail was sent from Unum’s Legal Department, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, et seq., and is legally privileged. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited; you are also requested to please reply to this message by notifying the sender that it was sent to you in error and delete it from your system.
From: Steve Gottheim [steve@alta.org]
Chris,
1. Actually, no prior versions of the ALTA/ACSM certification ever had language to the effect that the property is the same as that described in the title commitment. If that would be desirable, the ALTA/ACSM committee certainly could look at requiring a note to that effect with the next version of the standards. When a new description is written it seems entirely appropriate to include such a statement (assuming it’s a true statement, which it’s not always).
2. Table A item 21 is brand new to the standards and it’s not entirely clear whether title companies will insist upon this item or require a correlation to the loan amount. I suggest you talk some title companies to get a sense on what their underwriters will require.
Steve
Steve Gottheim
Legislative and Regulatory Counsel
American Land Title Association
1828 L St., NW
Suite 705
Washington, DC 20036
202.261.2943 direct
steve@alta.org
www.alta.org
From: DIRT - Real Estate Lawyers Listserv [mailto:DIRT@LISTSERV.UMKC.EDU] On Behalf Of Patrick Randolph (UMKC Dirt)
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 4:58 PM
To: DIRT@LISTSERV.UMKC.EDU
Subject: [DIRT] FW: New ALTA/ACSM Survey Standards
From: Devlin, Christopher J [CDevlin@UNUM.COM]
I had a couple of questions regarding the new ALTA/ACSM survey standards on which I was hoping to get input from title gurus. These are asked from perspective of commercial mortgagee:
1. The new ALTA/ACSM survey standards don’t include the language from the old certification to the effect that the property is the same as that described in the title commitment, but instead just call for a note identifying the commitment. Does this omission create any new requirement for issuance of the “same as survey” endorsement?
2. How are title companies handling the requirement for identification of E&O coverage limits for the surveyor? Do they look for any correlation to loan amount? Does omission of the item from Table A have any coverage implications?
Thanks for your attention to this.
Regards,
Chris
Christopher J. Devlin
Senior Counsel, Investments
Unum
2211 Congress Street, C474
Portland, ME 04122
207-575-4218
207-575-1296 (fax)
cdevlin@unum.com
* This e-mail was sent from Unum’s Legal Department, is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510, et seq., and is legally privileged. The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited; you are also requested to please reply to this message by notifying the sender that it was sent to you in error and delete it from your system.
I contacted Chris directly a few days ago and answered his questions.
