PROPERTY RECORDS EDUCATION PARTNERS North Central Texas Chapter

Transcription

1 PROPERTY RECORDS EDUCATION PARTNERS North Central Texas Chapter Thursday, at 10:00 a.m. Hosted by: KOFILE Preservation 6300 Cedar Springs Road Dallas, TX Registration, Welcome and Introductions: Co-Chair, Stacey Kemp, County Clerk, Collin County In attendance were: Stacey Kemp, County Clerk, Collin County (Co-Chair) Doug Hollowell, Integrity Title Records (Co-Chair) Mary Louise Garcia, County Clerk, Tarrant County Diane Bounds, Tarrant County Jeff Nicholson, Tarrant County Reed Road, ACS Adam Bell, Denton County David Ivey Scott Fausto, Property Info Mark Fehrman, Stewart Title Bob Philo, Title Experts & Management Services Mary Burnett, County Clerk, Hood County Marlina Stuckey, Hood County Brent Sherman, LPS Miriam Gray, Kofile Scott Williams, Kofile Brent Blankenship, U.S. Imaging Scott Robinson, U.S. Imaging Wilma Bush, County Clerk, Grayson County Ricky Marrs, ACS Brenda Cavender, Collin County Cece Leggieri, Collin County MISSION STATEMENT: The North Central Texas Chapter of PREP has been established to provide a free flow of information between public and private sectors in order to encourage unified problem resolutions. Page 1 of 5

2 Brief review of prior meeting and approval of minutes: Co-Chair, Doug Hollowell, Manager, Integrity Title Records Mr. Hollowell presented a brief review of the minutes of the August 18, 2011, meeting and asked for approval of the minutes. Mr. Marrs made a motion to approve and Ms. Gray seconded. The minutes of the meeting of August 18, 2011, were approved. SPEAKER: Mary Louise Garcia, County Clerk, Tarrant County Adverse Possession: Ms. Garcia had a Power Point presentation on adverse possession. Tarrant County has been in the forefront with adverse possession. Ms. Garcia has worked with the sheriff s office, constables and the District Attorney to take care of this challenge to the community and she hoped the steps they have taken will be beneficial to other counties. What was happening was people were filing affidavits of adverse possession on abandoned and foreclosed properties and attempting to take possession of those properties for a $16 filing fee. Adverse possession is a legal action that has been on the books for over 100 years. It is a legal method in Texas to clear property titles such as settling ownership of abandoned real property, ownership claimed by heirs, boundary disputes, and fence placements. When used properly in a court action, adverse possession is a good law. Fraudulent use came to Tarrant County s attention in late summer. The County Clerk is the keeper of the record. If you bring in a document and you meet the five criteria, the County Clerk s office will file your document. Clerks aren t attorneys and it is not their job to determine what is legal and what is not. In late October Channel 8 News came to Ms. Garcia s office and asked if they filed affidavits of adverse possession. Ms. Garcia s office did an audit and determined they had 50 filed in their property records. They were advised by the District Attorney to not accept affidavits of adverse possession. Individuals filing these documents went into the community and made bad decisions by changing locks and moving into properties. Ms. Garcia and the District Attorney put out a press release notifying people that they were committing a crime by breaking into someone s home. Ms. Garcia stated if someone thought they were getting a house for $16, that was not correct. Per Government Code , if the County Clerk finds that something has been filed on a piece of property that is an erroneous filing or something that clouds the original title, the County Clerk has to, by law, reach out to those property owners and say someone has put documentation on top of your deed. Ms. Garcia s office identified the property owners. Many were abandoned properties. She went to the Tarrant County Bar Association and asked for assistance. She had Page 2 of 5

3 several attorneys come forward offering pro bono legal services. According to the law, it is incumbent upon the original property owners to take action to reclaim property claimed by adverse possession. Squatters are people that took adverse possession by going to an abandoned house, calling a locksmith, presenting a document stamped by Mary Louise Garcia, had the locks changed and took possession of the property. Adverse possession came to the public s attention after a man in Denton County got into a multi-million dollar home by filing an affidavit of adverse possession. This man had a website called $16home.com, he wrote a book and spoke at SMU Law School. He has since been removed from the home. Local law enforcement has evicted some squatters. The Tarrant County District Attorney brought charges against people and more prosecutions are following. Tarrant County is putting steps into place to stop this and make sure the community is safe. Ms. Garcia asked other County Clerks if they are taking adverse possessions. Some are and some aren t. Her office will not take them. Her office is taking a different approach. She is telling her clerks if something comes in that is not business as usual, they are to notify her. Mr. Hollowell asked about the proper use of an affidavit of adverse possession that is allowable for recording. Ms. Garcia said it is not a standalone document that would come into the clerk s office. It is part of a court proceeding and is part of an entire court packet. A question and answer session followed. Scott Fausto, Property Info, introduced the Chief Deputy from Maricopa County, Phoenix, Arizona, to speak on Augmenting Language in Local Government Code: Mr. Fausto met Barbara Frerichs, Chief Deputy Recorder from Maricopa County, Arizona, at a NACRC meeting last year. After learning about the kiosks used in Maricopa County for electronic recording, he invited her to speak via a conference call at today s PREP meeting on augmenting language in the local government code. Prior to her call meeting attendees discussed Property Fraud Alert and erecording. A recess was taken from 11:30 a.m. until 11:45 a.m. Following the break, Ms. Frerichs called. Mr. Fausto asked Ms. Frerichs about the challenges and successes she experienced as she built her erecording program and about augmentation of statutory language of trusted submitters as determined by the County Clerk. Ms. Frerichs stated Maricopa County started a pilot program in 1998 with two title companies. Eventually the language in the statute was amended to allow them to accept electronic images, or digitally scanned images, from government entities, title insurance companies and mortgage companies. When electronic recording maxed out Page 3 of 5

4 at 50%, they realized they were missing out on many customers such as attorneys, medical lien services and homeowners associations that could not submit electronically scanned images based on statute. They wondered how they could open the service up to those loyal customers and make them able to participate. The Maricopa County Recorder s office decided that they could offer this service to these customers by having them executive a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) before they were able to submit the electronic recording. The memorandum outlines what is expected with an electronic recording. It also states that the submitter will adhere to policies and procedures, and if they violate the regulations, Maricopa County can cancel their electronic recording capability. Maricopa County is now at 80% in electronic recording and it continues to grow every month. Ms. Garcia asked about potential liability in making a choice as to who is a trusted submitter. Ms. Frerichs replied they decided that a trusted submitter must meet the criteria outlined in the executed MOU. They also looked at whether they had done business with someone in the past. Ms. Frerichs said a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding could be found on their website at Companies such as Simple File and ACS could now file electronically. As long as the same methodology was applied to all submitters, Ms. Frerichs could not foresee a problem. Trusted submitters must have an account set up with the Recorder s office with a $300 deposit. A submitter will be cut off if they have insufficient funds. A discussion of trusted submitters followed. Mr. Fausto asked about kiosks. Ms. Frerichs said they have interactive recording kiosks located at three county libraries throughout Maricopa County. Maricopa County is 9,300 square miles, and the challenge was reaching all of their citizens. The kiosk has a small desk top, a touch screen, credit card swiper, scanner, printer and audio and video technology. When a customer sits down, cameras are rolling. When he touches the screen, the session is activated and the customer can talk to a clerk in the downtown office. That customer must also execute an MOU. When the transaction is completed, a receipt and a cover page that has the recording information on it will print out. The customer can leave with their original recorded document which is now public record. Ms. Frerichs office records approximately 1.5 million documents annually; about 1,200 of those are recorded at kiosks. Eventually they would like the kiosks to allow citizens to complete voter registration and address changes. A question and answer session followed. In answer to a question, Ms. Frerichs said the State of Arizona has unified recording standards. A lunch recess was taken from 12:45 p.m. until 1:05 p.m. Page 4 of 5

5 Round Table Discussion points about MERS, unified recording standards: There was a round table discussion on Mortgage Electronic Registration System issues, or MERS. A lawsuit has been filed alleging that MERS allowed documents to be signed that were false. The clerks involved in the lawsuit are seeking damages for loss of income based on the fact that the documents they filed were false. The panel next discussed the pros and cons of unified recording standards which would include standard margins, font size and paper size. Set Date and Time for Next Meeting: Mr. Hollowell thanked everyone for their participation. The next meeting was set for August 16, Hearing no further discussion, Mr. Hollowell adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m. Page 5 of 5