[djlnc]

We're purchasing a house in the Village of Richmond. Seems to me there is virtually no risk of some sort of previous claim against the property. Don't want to waste $1500.

[fishon]

If you are going to have a mortgage the bank will require you to buy title insurance to protect them, not you.

[Dotneko]

We didn't buy it. New home in the middle of a new development.
The villages SELLS title insurance policies. That in itself tells you they don't plan on needing to pay out.

[djlnc]

Originally Posted by fishon

If you are going to have a mortgage the bank will require you to buy title insurance to protect them, not you.

That's lender's title insurance, not owner's title insurance.

[retiredguy123]

I bought it, but, obviously, the risk is lower for a new house than for a resale. But, over many years, it is less expensive than homeowner's insurance. But, also, if there were no risk, why do lenders require it?

[Papa_lecki]

Originally Posted by Dotneko

We didn't buy it. New home in the middle of a new development.
The villages SELLS title insurance policies. That in itself tells you they don't plan on needing to pay out.

You do know the company that SELLS insurance probably doesn’t pay out for a claim? The policies are covered by an insurance company.
The Villages sells it as aconvenience for the buyer and mortgage co (and they make money on it).

[Challenger]

Many previous threads on this subject. There are a number of possible claims against properties that can date back many years. Title policies will provide legal representation as well as reimbursements.

Millions of $ are spent on defense from things like the failure to get the sign off of an heir or partial owner in the chain of ownership that might date back for many decades. Google the subject and make sure you understand the risk that you are taking to save $ 1500+/- when engaging in a $300, 000- 500,000 purchase.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Challenger

Many previous threads on this subject. There are a number of possible claims against properties that can date back many years. Title policies will provide legal representation as well as reimbursements.

Millions of $ are spent on defense from things like the failure to get the sign off of an heir or partial owner in the chain of ownership that might date back for many decades. Google the subject and make sure you understand the risk that you are taking to save $ 1500+/- when engaging in a $300, 000- 500,000 purchase.

Absolutely true. Just because the home was new on property bought by the developer, the title history of the land can go back pretty far. In NY, the big risk was Indian land claims. Lawyers would go back hundreds of years and research whether the person who bought land from native Americans or signed a treaty actually had the authority of Congress or the British crown to do so, and then the fun began.........

[Babubhat]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Absolutely true. Just because the home was new on property bought by the developer, the title history of the land can go back pretty far. In NY, the big risk was Indian land claims. Lawyers would go back hundreds of years and research whether the person who bought land from native Americans or signed a treaty actually had the authority of Congress or the British crown to do so, and then the fun began.........

So many ridiculous things can come up. A bankruptcy 3 owners ago held up a deal at last minute . Why not an issue previously is incomprehensible

[retiredguy123]

I once bought a house and the title search revealed that, two owners ago, a divorced woman had sold the house. Her ex-husband's name was on the deed, but he didn't sign off on the sale.

[sail33or]

I used to be in this business. If you read the fine print of any Title Insurance Policy, they "EXCLUDE" anything that would actually come up.

Seller/Owner signs closing paperwork declaring they have clear title with no liens and can sell the property. If they lied, they can be sued.

[retiredguy123]

Originally Posted by sail33or

I used to be in this business. If you read the fine print of any Title Insurance Policy, they "EXCLUDE" anything that would actually come up.

Seller/Owner signs closing paperwork declaring they have clear title with no liens and can sell the property. If they lied, they can be sued.

Obviously, people can be sued, including the company who did the title search. As I understand it, the purpose for the title insurance is that, if any suing takes place, it is done by the title insurance company. The same way it occurs with any insurance claim.

[Boomer]

………………….

..

[Worldseries27]

Originally Posted by retiredguy123

i bought it, but, obviously, the risk is lower for a new house than for a resale. But, over many years, it is less expensive than homeowner's insurance. But, also, if there were no risk, why do lenders require it?

because someday an obscure entity will appear before the supreme court saying this land was taken illegally from his ancestors who wrote about it on an obscure cave wall and the sc will rule in their favor

[Lisanp@aol.com]

Have you heard of the Native Americans? Do you really want to pay to defend your title to the land? Just buy it, it’s a necessary evil in a RE transaction but $1500 sound way too high it should be closer to $600-$700.