Finishing up an ALTA survey. Keep having issues with the attorney. Their initial title report (provided 3 weeks after we finished the field work) ignored two major utility easements.
Also, the title report provided no legal description of the property we were surveying. It seems the current owner got the property from her fathers estate. (One of those "you get what I've got" deals.)
Her father got the property from his mother's estate. (Another, "you get what I've got" deals.)
After much pushing, the attorney finally went back and found where the current owners grandparents purchased a portion of the property. The first deed I was provided was way wrong and they weren't very pleased when I pointed out that this deed did not cover the subject tract.
Now, they have finally addressed the utility easements and a portion of how the family acquired the tract. I pointed out this morning that we still do not have a deed for ~15 acres of the tract. The attorney sends back a very terse email asking why I care because he is the one certifying the title.
Y'all ever deal with an attorney who didn't care about this sort of detail?
Have already advised my client (a large international firm) that we need to carefully review the title policy to be certain that they are covered for this "minor detail". I already know the answer. NO. It will be an exclusion on the policy and we will have to go back to the Title Company and insist that they take the exclusion off the policy. I see this coming from a mile away. The only good thing about the situation is the client is seeing things the same way I do and seems to appreciate me looking out for their best interests even when their attorney isn't.
Larry P
Keep in mind that it's the 95% of lawyers that give the other 5% a bad name.
cmon Larry, quit being so picky!
I put that situation into the column that I am surveying the property that the client is saying they own and showing in my report the deed references that are either provided or that I have found to show that describe the property. Those references do not always have my clients name on them.
When a deed reference fails to describe the property, it is not include in my report.
My job is to find and/or restore the boundary of the property and not to prove ownership.
The individual properties that make up a large tract are shown where they exist inside the boundaries of the total tract.
Proving ownership is in the hands of the owner, even though it is me or someone else that does the research. That decision is left up to the person they choose to give a title opinion, either their attorney or an attorney of fact for the title company.
Some families do not consider filing or even having the proper paperwork done to ensure their title to their property, especially heirship transfers.
Lately the title commitments that I have been receiving do not include any usable information in the Schedule B and C. The content is all disclaimers and no references.
Most of the time when they call back for updates, I consider that new billable hours.
0.02
Sounds like what we deal with:
You ever try to explain littoral processes like accretion to an attorney who lives a hundred miles from the ocean?
What do you mean that 5,000 S.F. parcel from 1830 is now an acre?
Why isn't the attorney thanking you profusely for doing his work and covering his butt? That doesn't make sense. Send him a "you're welcome" card.
> Keep in mind that it's the 95% of lawyers that give the other 5% a bad name.
You are WAY to generous Perry. I always heard that as 99% and 1%.
B-)