Posted by LS_Ca on 11/3/10 4:50pm
Msg #359526

DOT no vesting

DOT no vesting, I thought all DOT had to have a vesting. At a signing the other night married couple no vesting was this a mistake on the title companies part?

Reply by Doris_CO on 11/3/10 4:55pm
Msg #359527

Do you mean their names were not on the first page or there was no explanation after their names, such as "married" or "joint tenancy", etc.

Reply by Linda Shepperd on 11/3/10 5:17pm
Msg #359532

there was no vesting after there names (i.e. community property, etc)

Reply by Yoli/CA on 11/3/10 5:28pm
Msg #359535

Was there a document in package where borrowers chose their vesting?

If so, maybe escrow was waiting for additional instruction. Or, maybe borrowers just their names listed and no capacity.

Reply by Linda Shepperd on 11/3/10 5:35pm
Msg #359536

They didnt seem to be familiar with what the DOT should say or not. As a pratice I always point out the spelling of their names, the vesting as well as the address to make sure there are no errors.

Reply by Linda Shepperd on 11/3/10 5:18pm
Msg #359533

husband and wife just nothing after there names that would identify who they were to each and the transacation

Reply by James Dawson on 11/3/10 5:38pm
Msg #359537

In Ca when there is nothing after the name the "default" is Joint tenants!

Reply by Calnotary on 11/3/10 5:49pm
Msg #359538

Are you sure about that James? n/m

Reply by James Dawson on 11/3/10 5:55pm
Msg #359539

Re: Are you sure about that James?

I did not set the policy but I had the same question a couple of years ago and when I questioned it, that's what I was told by Lawyer's Title when they were Commonwealth Title. 90% of the time when it is missing I make sure the borrowers make the selection on the form provided. That's my best answer to your question.

Reply by LKT/CA on 11/3/10 6:08pm
Msg #359540

<<<In Ca when there is nothing after the name the "default" is Joint tenants!>>>

I was told that too. When I took an Escrow class at the local community college some years ago, and asked the instructor about that from a loan signing I had where the DOT just said "John Borrower and Jane Borrower, husband and wife"........the instructor (a broker who handled the escrow for her own deals, which a broker in CA can do) said joint tenancy would prevail.

Reply by James Dawson on 11/3/10 6:10pm
Msg #359542

Whew! Thanks LKT...for a minute I thought I was stew! n/m

Reply by Pat/IL on 11/3/10 6:52pm
Msg #359548

Am I understanding this correctly? We're talking about a Deed of Trust vesting title in California? So, if a Deed of Trust fails to state a tenancy, then a joint tenancy would be created by default?

I believe, in every other state, tenancy is created at the time a deed of conveyance is delivered and recorded. There may be a requirement to state the tenancy on the mortgage or DOT, but that should reflect the tenancy already of record.

I'm not familiar with the form you speak of, never saw one in Illinois. Here, if no tenancy is stated on the deed of conveyance, it would default to Tenancy In Common. To correct, we would generally just quit claim to ourselves with the desired tenancy language.

I'm not saying you are all wrong, as I am often mystified by the California ways. Just seems odd, that's all.

Reply by James Dawson on 11/3/10 7:05pm
Msg #359550

Joint tendnancy is correct.

Reply by LKT/CA on 11/3/10 7:13pm
Msg #359551

<<<...I am often mystified by the California ways.>>>

Me too. When I took this Escrow class, I learned (or shall I say the book stated and the instructor taught) that Northern and Southern CA real estate transactions are done very differently. And since "opening Escrow" is as normal and customary as sunshine and sliced bread, I learned that there is no law requiring Escrow. While it's foolish not to.....there is no legal requirement.

Reply by jba/fl on 11/3/10 7:17pm
Msg #359555

L: are you talking escrow or impound when you say escrow?

As in escrow being 3rd party handling transaction/funds
and impound being account for taxes, insurance, etc.

Reply by LKT/CA on 11/3/10 8:32pm
Msg #359561

Re: L: are you talking escrow or impound when you say escrow?

The former <<<escrow being 3rd party handling transaction/funds>>>

Reply by James Dawson on 11/3/10 7:15pm
Msg #359553

The form is titled "Vesting instructions" a it list all the choices. That option also appears on "amended" escrow instructions.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 11/4/10 6:50am
Msg #359578

CLTA states default as community property for 'couples'

"In California, real property conveyed to a married person, or to a registered domestic partner, is presumed to be community property, unless otherwise stated. "

http://www.clta.org/for-consumers/consumer-holdingtitle.html

I'm not well versed in CA title/real estate, but everything I found (perused your civil codes & recording requirements) seems in sync with the mid-west - how title is vested is nailed down with the Grant Deed; the DOT is conveying FROM those already vested TO the Trustee ("dormant" title - i.e. conditional), the DOT is therefore not providing or altering title vesting to those already vested.

CA Civil codes requires a pretty bare minimum of information on the DOT - names (specifically it says in effect, 'names as they appeared on record' - that reflects back to last deed on record), addresses, property ID, signatures, acknowledgement ...nothing even said about marital status of mortgagors. Same with recording requirements.

I'll tell you one big surprise I had - I'd have expected CA codes, etc. to be a whole lot more chewy if a read than I did. I guess my assumption was due to how engaging CA's notary laws seem compared to my state. Anyway - I'd sure swap you, ours are a lot more words and a lot less substance, if you ask me.

Reply by GWest on 11/3/10 7:16pm
Msg #359554

Vesting (ie. joint tenants, community property) is not required on the Deed of Trust but should be on the Deed, as far as California is concerned. If it just states husband and wife or just the borrower's marital status, that is okay.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/4/10 3:50am
Msg #359576

I've seen quite a few from a particular lender that only has the borrowers' names on the vesting on the DOT. I was told by an escrow officer that it wasn't necessary and that this particular lender didn't always include the full vesting on their DOTs. She seemed to be a pretty savvy EO, but I have no further info on this. I have seen the same thing many times since from this major lender.

Reply by James Dawson on 11/4/10 9:29am
Msg #359592

more info if desired....common ways to hold title



http://www.ltic.com/commontitle.aspx