Showing posts with label indexing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label indexing. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 02, 2018

REBA Spring Conference Report

Yesterday I attended the 2018 Spring Conference of the Real Estate Bar Association of Massachusetts at the Four Points Sheraton in Norwood, Massachusetts. My Register of Deeds colleague Mary Olberding (Hampshire County) and I formed a two-person panel for a breakout session on the Massachusetts Deeds Indexing Standards.

Two of the topics that dominated our discussion were acknowledgements and addresses.

Here is what we said about acknowledgements:


The Deed Indexing Standards contain a list of documents that must be acknowledged before being recorded. If a document is not on that list, it does not need to be acknowledged to be recorded.
The minimum information needed to make an acknowledgement sufficient for recording is the signature of the notary; the printed name of the notary; the expiration date of the notary’s commission; and some language that reflects that the document has been acknowledged.
Most registries will reject a document that lacks the written name of the person whose acknowledgement has been taken in the acknowledgement clause.

Most registries do not require the notary stamp to be affixed in order to record a document. (But since the notary statute requires a notary to affix his stamp when taking an acknowledgement, the notary should comply with the statute and always use the stamp).  

On a document that has multiple grantors, it is sufficient if the signature of just one grantor has been acknowledged. However, on a declaration of homestead executed by two people, both signatures must be acknowledged for the document to be recorded.

For out-of-state and out-of-country acknowledgements, registries will defer to the person recording the document to determine the adequacy of the acknowledgement. Because the law of the place where the acknowledgement is taken controls the adequacy of the acknowledgement, registries will assume compliance with the appropriate law and record the document.

Regarding out-of-state or out-of country acknowledgements, these standards use the terms “notary public” and “justice of the peace” as generic references to any public official authorized to take an acknowledgement in that jurisdiction. For example, a document acknowledged in Connecticut by a “commissioner” could be recorded in Massachusetts.

Here is what we said about addresses:

A deed must contain two addresses: the mailing address of the grantee and the address of the property being conveyed by the deed. The grantee mailing address is so the municipal tax collector will know where to send the property tax bill. The property address is so the municipal assessor can identify the property to update ownership information in assessing records.

In many cases, a deed presented for recording fails to state that property address. When confronted with this omission, the customer presenting the document for recording will hurriedly write an address in the margin of the deed. The address so written is often wrong. However, this is the address entered by the registry of deeds in the searchable index. While those in the real estate law business understand that an incorrect address does not negate the property transfer, most homeowners think it does and will become very agitated when they discover the discrepancy. To avoid an expensive fix, please make an extra effort to ensure the correct property address is clearly stated on a new deed before it reaches the registry of deeds.

Remember that most liens are indexed only by the debtor’s name, not by any property address or town. Consequently, trying to narrow a search by limiting the results to a particular city or town will exclude things like attachments and federal tax liens that are indexed with a town code of “none.”

While searching by property address can be a useful starting point, it can also be unreliable. Most registries of deeds did not consistently enter property addresses in the index until the late 1990s. Also, the registry will index an address however it appears on the document presented for recording. While a post office address may be 3-5 Main Street, one-third of the documents recorded will say 3 Main Street; another third will say 5 Main Street; and the remainder will say 3-5 Main Street. Similarly, a street with a numeric name – like 3rd Avenue or Third Avenue – will be entered in the index in whatever way it appears in the document being recorded.

Monday, October 23, 2017

2018 Deed Indexing Standards DRAFT

The Massachusetts Registers of Deeds Association will release a new version of the Deed Indexing Standards on January 1, 2018. The current 2018 DRAFT is available online for your review. The Association invites your comments. Please send them to me at richard.howe@sec.state.ma.us or by traditional mail to Richard Howe, Middlesex North Registry of Deeds, 360 Gorham St, Lowell MA 01852.

To allow us to incorporate your suggestions into the final version of the standards, please send your comments by this Thanksgiving.

Wednesday, December 07, 2016

Misspelled Names and Index Entries

A homeowner called to report that when she searched for her recently-recorded deed on our website, she could not find it, although she did find the mortgage and declaration of homestead that were recorded at the same time. It turns out that her name on the deed was spelled incorrectly. Let’s say the correct name was Hickam, but the deed spelled it Hickham (added a second “h” to the middle of the name).

I told her she should call the lawyer who handled the closing but added, after giving a disclaimer about not providing legal advice, that she still owned the property despite the misspelled name. I told her that people frequently changed their names - usually as a result of marriage or divorce - but continue owning the property without their new name showing up anywhere in the record. In such a case, when the person recorded some other document in the future, they would identify themselves by their current name and add a “formerly known as” or “also known as” to show the two names referred to the same person.

I also told her that while I could not change the recorded document itself, I could add her correctly-spelled name to the index entry for that document even though that spelling of the name did not appear in the document. She asked me to do that, so I did.

The general rule of indexing is to enter the name in the index the way it appears in the document. In this case, we had done that even though the spelling in the document turned out to be incorrect. My rationale for adding the correct spelling of the name to the index entry was that the purpose of the index is to assist researchers in finding documents relevant to their inquiries. Someone researching this person’s property would search by her correctly-spelled name. Such a search would not find the deed since the name on the deed and the resulting index entry was misspelled. I thought it would be better to increase the odds of that researcher finding this deed, and then making his or her own determination of the effect of the misspelled name.

So I guess a corollary of the “index it the way it appears in the document” rule is that it’s OK to index it a little more than that if the extra entry will help someone find the document. Our index entries have no independent legal significance, so adding an additional spelling of the name, even if that spelling is not contained in the document, does no harm.

I will say that my decision to add the extra name was made easier by the presence of the correctly-spelled name in the mortgage and homestead that accompanied this deed. This also is an important reminder for closinging attorneys to closely check the spelling of the grantee name on a deed. The closing attorney is the one who prepares the mortgage and the homestead, and so is more likely to spell the name correctly on those documents. But the deed is prepared by the seller’s lawyer who is not as well-acquainted with the name of the buyer and more likely to spell it wrong. But if the closing attorney misses it and the deed with the misspelled name gets on record, it’s the closing attorney who will have to deal with it. A little extra attention at the closing can save a big headache afterwards.

Thursday, October 27, 2016

Recission of Satisfaction of Mortgage

An email from a national title company based in Florida arrived the other day asking if we would record a Rescission of Discharge of Mortgage or a Rescission of Assignment of Mortgage.

I don't think we would or should record them. To me, rescission is part of contract law, as in you rescind a contract or an agreement. I don't see it as part of real estate law. Both a discharge of mortgage and an assignment of mortgage are conveyances of an interest in real estate. Under Massachusetts law, a mortgage is a deed because the homeowner conveys an interest in the real estate to the lender. That interest is the right to foreclose if the terms of the associated promissory note are violated. An assignment of mortgage transfers that interest in real estate from the lender to a third party. With a discharge of mortgage, the holder of the mortgage releases or gives back its interest in the property to the homeowner.

Once that interest in the mortgage has been assigned or released, I don't think the mortgagee can say "never mind" and undo that conveyance with a document labeled "rescission." If a mistake was made, I think the mortgagee would have to get either an assignment back or re-execute and confirm the mortgage. Either that or initiate a lawsuit and ask a judge to order either of those things to happen.

The concern isn't just to the homeowner. It's to the entire real estate system. If a potential buyer of property does a title exam and sees that a mortgage has been discharged, that potential buyer should be able to act upon that information without fear that the lender on that mortgage will suddenly yank back the discharge and thereby reinstate the mortgage.

I assume these rescission documents are used in other states. I'm curious to find out how they are used and the legal theory that allows their use. It is another example of how much real estate law can vary from state to state and a cautionary message to anyone handling real estate matters in more than one state to not assume that the law in one jurisdiction carries over to another.


Monday, April 11, 2016

The Use and Misuse of 5B Affidavits



Massachusetts General Laws chapter 183, section 5B states 

Subject to section 15 of chapter 184, an affidavit made by a person claiming to have personal knowledge of the facts therein stated and containing a certificate by an attorney at law that the facts stated in the affidavit are relevant to the title to certain land and will be of benefit and assistance in clarifying the chain of title may be filed for record and shall be recorded in the registry of deeds where the land or any part thereof lies.

Some registers of deeds across the state – including me - have found that these “5B” affidavits are sometimes used not to clarify the chain of title as required by the statute, but to cloud the title with information that, as a practical matter, constitutes an encumbrance on the property. Given the strong public policy against allowing encumbrances to be created without judicial or specific statutory authorization, do the registries of deeds have the authority to refuse to record a 5B affidavit that has the effect of tying up the property, not clarifying the title?

However, I am also of the opinion that by requiring an express, written certification by an attorney “that the facts stated in the affidavit are relevant to the title to certain land and will be of benefit and assistance in clarifying the chain of title,” the statute places the authority for making that determination on the attorney and that the registry of deeds may be powerless to second guess that determination.

The last sentence of the section – that such an affidavit “shall be recorded in the registry of deeds” – does raise a question of who the “shall” is directed to. Is it to the attorney, telling him or her that such an affidavit must be recorded? Or is it directed to the registry, commanding us to record a 5B affidavit, however, egregious we feel its content may be?

The registers of deeds association will discuss this in upcoming meetings. If any readers have an opinion on this issue, please share it here as a comment or send it to me directly at mailto:lowelldeeds@comcast.net.


Thursday, April 07, 2016

Updating Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards

The Massachusetts Registers and Assistant Registers of Deeds Association met on Tuesday at the Worcester Registry of Deeds to begin the task of updating the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards. Originally adopted on January 1, 2000 and revised in 2006 and 2008, the Indexing Standards continue to be a valuable tool for registries and for those who use registries. The new version, which we hope to make effective on January 1, 2017, should reflect the many technological, statutory, case-law, and registry practice changes that have taken place in the past eight years.

Our tentative timetable is to have a new draft tentatively adopted by the registers' association by the end of the summer and then publicly share the draft and solicit comments on it from those in the legal and conveyancing community. Once those comments have been received, the registers' association will adopt a final version and share it publicly prior to the end of 2016.

As milestones are met in this process, I will write about them here. In the meantime, if you are unfamiliar with the current Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards, they are available in PDF form on the Middlesex North Registry of Deeds website.

Monday, April 06, 2015

Sufficiency of property description in a mortgage


A query from a major national lender recently found its way to me.  Here's the question posed:

Must a Schedule A (property description) be attached to a mortgage to be recorded?  Do most registries require the metes and bounds information as a separate attachment?  If so, must it be freshly typed or can it be a legible copy from a previously recorded document?  Or, is it sufficient to just add the property address, property tax ID number and deed book and page information to the mortgage?

Here is my answer:





There is no specific rule on what constitutes the minimum property description for recordability.  In Massachusetts, a mortgage is a deed so the rules for deeds apply to mortgages.  The property description in a deed must “describe the land [being conveyed] with such particularity as to make it capable of identification.” 

I think the property address plus the book and page of the deed that established title in the seller/borrower with some contextual language would be the bare minimum required.  Something like "Property description: The land and buildings located at 360 Gorham Street in Lowell, Middlesex County, described more fully in the deed from Middlesex County to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dated June 27, 1997 and recorded in the Middlesex North Registry of Deeds at book 12345, page 321.”

I think the better practice is to include the full property description from that deed in the new mortgage.  Whether that is done by inserting that language in the body of the mortgage or attaching it as an Exhibit A, including that full description helps eliminate any potential ambiguities plus it is probably considered by many (lawyers and registry employees) to be a requirement.  While I don’t think it is a requirement, the potential hassles involved in convincing people the shorter description is sufficient probably outweighs any time savings in dispensing with it when the document is first created.

Friday, April 04, 2014

Updating Deed Indexing Standards

Earlier this week the Massachusetts Registers of Deeds Association met in Worcester and agreed to begin the process of updating the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards which were created back in 2000 and last updated in 2008.  The hope is to have this new version take effect on January 1, 2015.  We expect to have a draft available for public comment by July 1, 2014.

Here are some of the items we hope to clarify or address in the new version of the standards:



Acknowledgements
Update/explain list of documents requiring acknowledgement
Revisit requirements for out-of-state acknowledgements
Must acknowledgement clause state the name of the person who has signed the document (and not just “the person who signed above”).  In re Giroux, Bankruptcy case
Modification of Mortgage – signatures of all parties must be acknowledged?
Raised Seal – should it be shaded?

Mass. Uniform Probate Code
deed of distribution
disclaimer of property statement

Deed Excise Tax
Selling a stamp although no document is presented for recording?
Is excise tax due in a transfer for consideration if incident to divorce decree?

Names
Punctuation marks in names such as E*Trade or Amazon.com
Non-traditional names – which is first name; which is last name?
Deed of distribution – Code for “Personal Representative”
Affidavit relative to note signed by officer – just institution name or signatory name too?

Certified documents – adding book and page reference

1.