Posted by PAW on 12/13/10 7:32am
Msg #364837

ALTA has issued the following ACTION ALERT

On November 30, 2010, Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) introduced H.R. 6460, the Transparency and Security in Mortgage Registration Act of 2010 which could lead to a federal land titling system and bans Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mae from accepting loans registered with the Mortgage Electronic Registrations System (MERS).

The bill requires HUD to issue a report on land title recording systems on five items:

1 - how a lack of electronic records and uniform recording standards across the states impacts land titling;

2 - progress states have made in developing electronic recording systems with uniform standards and their best practices;

3 - the current federal oversight role in the local recording process;

4 - the feasibility of creating a system to maintain records without preempting state real property law governing the transfer of real estate; and

5 - the feasibility of creating a federal land title recordation system.

ALTA opposes any legislation that would federalize the recordation of land records. The recording of documents associated with the local transfer of property should not be governed from Washington, D.C. Property rights are protected through local county recorders working with the land title industry. Rep. Kaptur wants to federalize the property recording system and thereby your business and way of life. It is imperative you reach out to the Congresswoman today and tell her the damages H.R. 6460 would inflict upon your business. Your immediate action is needed today.

Thank you for taking action.

(Provided as a service announcement only. Any views, opinions or statements made or expressed above do not necessarily state or reflect ours and they cannot be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.)

Reply by Julie/MI on 12/13/10 8:54am
Msg #364842

I agree with ALTA.

Wonder how much Rep. Kaptur really knows about mortgages and title insurance?

Reply by jba/fl on 12/13/10 9:25am
Msg #364843

Probably what the talking heads have told her... n/m

Reply by LynnNC on 12/13/10 9:36am
Msg #364844

Perhaps JP, but more federal government over-reaching. n/m

Reply by Tess on 12/13/10 10:31am
Msg #364850

PAW, What logical conclusion do you draw for us


as an industry if this goes through?

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 12/13/10 11:07am
Msg #364854

Re: PAW, What logical conclusion do you draw for us

I can't see this passing... First of all, if the federal government was in charge of all property transfers this would cause some major jurisdictional issues with county courts, etc., particularly in issues where a piece of land is devised by a will. The county records and court system go hand in hand. If the fed wants to take over all county records they would have to take over all courts as well. Not to mention the effect it would also have on marriage and divorce records, which are also recorded in county records in Florida.

Even if the federal government were to simply keep a national index of property ownership, without overseeing the recordation of the records themselves, this would require an insane amount of funds - they would have to hire document examiners for each county in the union to review conveyance records and report the changes to the federal authorities.

I am glad to see efforts to keep away from MERS, which is nothing but trouble... but I can't imagine the federal government being able to take over something that has been so historically county-governed.

Reply by Tess on 12/13/10 11:47am
Msg #364857

Re: PAW, What logical conclusion do you draw for us

I am thinking, all done in Federal offices in all Counties…. Not unlike the IRS offices?? This Country is based on Money and Real Estate and we have problems with both!

Reply by PAW on 12/13/10 1:45pm
Msg #364877

Re: PAW, What logical conclusion do you draw for us

As others have stated, I do not think the federal government should be involved with recording and tracking property. I do think that it would be greatly helpful if there was an "industry standard" methodology, but the implementation should be left up to each state. There are some good ideas in the bill to help unravel and prevent another debacle because of MERS. But, like anything, a national resolution to multiple state problems is not always the best way to go.

If it does become federalized, I don't think it would have any direct effect on signing agents. It may change and/or add documents to the package, but since we aren't really involved in the recordings and tracking of loans and property, I don't see anything major that will affect our effectiveness or usefulness.

Reply by Tess on 12/13/10 2:02pm
Msg #364886

Re: PAW, What logical conclusion do you draw for us

Thank you, for your answer, so you don’t think we would have to become agents through the government like what is required by HUD agents, that is if we are needed at all, by the time they are done? There is usually red tape that comes with this, not freedom of choice.