How to complain about scofflaw timeshare closing companies

[Carolinian]

Why not give the requirement? Instead of trying instill fear (and at the same time recommend two other companies ) with companies that may or may not be scoffing the law, create a list of which states allow document prep companies to legally complete deeds.

Instead of obsessing about the problem, look for a solution.

One of the ethics rules if you are licensed to practice law is that you cannot aid in the unauthorized practice of law. Therefore, I am NOT going to do anything to educate the scofflaws.

 

[Ridewithme38]

One of the ethics rules if you are licensed to practice law is that you cannot aid in the unauthorized practice of law. Therefore, I am NOT going to do anything to educate the scofflaws.

What about Educating us then?

 

[Carolinian]

Again, you have a lot to learn about real property law.

There are lots of ways that you can describe the real property you are conveying that would be correct. You are right on that point. However, there are many more ways that would not be sufficient and would mean that the instrument would convey nothing. Taking an existing description and screwing it up may very well leave you in that boat. There are some parts of many existing descriptions that could be left out and not impact the validity of the deed, but if you leave out others, you are left with an invalid deed.

I will give you one example from about fifteen or twenty years ago on the OBX. A reseller who was selling HOA inventory sold about 100 weeks and had an out of state non-lawyer prepare the deeds and record them. Someone had gotten a ''go by'' deed from the resort in question. In the property description in the body of the deed, every one of those deeds left the same unit and week number as the ''go by''. The only place it was changed was in a short description for the index position. The HOA attorney gave the opinion that each one of those deeds legally conveyed the go-by week, which the reseller had never even owned. The HOA asked the NC Real Estate Commission their opinion and got the same result. They then asked the reseller to provide new deeds to its buyers and they refused. The HOA had to arrange to get each of those buyers good title, mostly at the additional expense of the buyers.

Bull, there is language the speaks of the intent to convey and there is language that orders lunch, of course they are not interchangeable.

As long as the language shows intent to convey Real Estate that you have a right to convey - it is a deed, just perhaps not a deed that couldn't be challenged in court.

Again there is no such thing as an "invalid" deed on it's face.



Personally, I would never do something as important as getting drunk 1/2 way - something I learned in South Carolina.

Semper Fi

 

[ampaholic]

Again, you have a lot to learn about real property law.

Agreed, and I thank everyone here if they help advance my knowledge - even you.

There are lots of ways that you can describe the real property you are conveying that would be correct. You are right on that point. However, there are many more ways that would not be sufficient and would mean that the instrument would convey nothing. Taking an existing description and screwing it up may very well leave you in that boat. There are some parts of many existing descriptions that could be left out and not impact the validity of the deed, but if you leave out others, you are left with an invalid deed.

To be of any value a claim to any real property must be accompanied by a verifiable and legal property description. A description that often makes use of points or boundaries such as seacoasts, rivers, streams, the crests of ridges, lake shores, highways, roads, and railroad tracks, and/or purpose-built artificial markers such as cairns, surveyor's posts, fences, official government surveying marks (such as ones affixed by the U.S. Geodetic Survey (USGS)).

I will give you one example from about fifteen or twenty years ago on the OBX. A reseller who was selling HOA inventory sold about 100 weeks and had an out of state non-lawyer prepare the deeds and record them. Someone had gotten a ''go by'' deed from the resort in question. In the property description in the body of the deed, every one of those deeds left the same unit and week number as the ''go by''. The only place it was changed was in a short description for the index position. The HOA attorney gave the opinion that each one of those deeds legally conveyed the go-by week, which the reseller had never even owned. The HOA asked the NC Real Estate Commission their opinion and got the same result. They then asked the reseller to provide new deeds to its buyers and they refused. The HOA had to arrange to get each of those buyers good title, mostly at the additional expense of the buyers.

I really do appreciate you bringing out an actual example at last.

I think however that this example is really an example of the reseller inadvertently conveying the same parcel of real property hundreds of times - a whole different issue/crime(?)/mistake than practicing law without a license.

Tell me, did anyone get prosecuted for practicing law without a license in this case?

I also think I see a bit of our "communication issue" here - you see a deed with a mistake in it as an "invalid deed" - while I see it as still a deed, just with a mistake in it.

Our definition of invalid may be different. I consider a deed invalid only if it has been voided (invalidated) by a court - not by itself (it's language) or a party to it.

If the essential elements that make a deed legally effective are missing, a deed may be voided by a court. For example, if a deed is delivered because of duress or undue influence, someone may petition a court to void the deed on the basis that the offer, acceptance, or delivery was invalid.

What exactly do you mean when you say "invalid deed"?

 

[Carolinian]

What about Educating us then?

If there were a board on TUG that was restricted to timeshare owners, and not visible to the Scofflaws, I would be happy to do so, but unfortunately no such board exists on this on any other timeshare forum.

 

[Carolinian]

Well, actually, a metes and bounds description like you cite is not required. Another common way to convey land is by reference to another deed, and that is also valid. When I was practicing law, I usually backed up the metes and bound description with incorporation by reference of prior deeds in the chain of title. If I was doing a title search, I took those references back to ten years prior to the Marketable Title Act kicking in, and if I was just preparing the deed without a title search, I at least referenced the one past deed I had. Of course, if I was drafting a new description, that was another matter.

One think I have never seen the Scofflaws do is add incorporation by reference of past deeds to their descriptions. They are likely afraid that this will defeat their silly ''typing service'' defense.

As to how a small defect in a metes and bounds desctiption can be a serious problem, I remember one title search I did for a million dollar line of credit on one third of a plantation that my client owned. It had been in her family for generations and had physical divisions that naturally created three roughly equal parts; one from the river to one rual paved road, then between two rural paved roads, and the last south of the southermost rural paved road. Agriculture no longer made that much, so she had gotten into other businesses and used the land for security on loans for those businesses. The title I was searching was on the southermost tract of the plantation for security of this loan, and I knew she also had a million dollar line of credit with another lender on the middle tract. I had to follow the description in detail of the deed of trust on that other loan to be sure it did not overlap any of the tract I was searching. When I did, I discovered that the description did not close meaning the deed of trust did not create a lien on anything. The other lender thought they had a loan secured by a valuable piece of land but in fact had an unsecured loan for a million dollars. A metes and bounds description has to ''close'' or to describe a complete perimeter without leaving a gap. This description started at one road on the east side of the property, ran south correctly to the other road from there, then west correctly along that road, then north correctly to the first road, but then headed west again from there instead of east like it should have to go back to the point of beginning. The attorney drafting that descrtiption should have reversed the calls of the last road line from the survey to go the correct direction to make it close but falied to do so.

When I use the term ''invalid deed'', I mean one that is not valid to convey title. That can be from a defect in the description or from a defect in the body of the deed. The latter can happen from using a deed template from another state that does meet all the requirements of the state the property is in or it can be a corporate rathet than individual form or it can be from not copying something correctly. One Scofflaw clsoing firm, for example, had a ''deed'' on its computer for some months that failed to include the granting clause of its ''deeds''. While they apparently caught that and corrected that error on deeds going forward, I never saw any indication of them doing deeds of correction for those to whom they had provided bad deeds while that error was on their template.

Agreed, and I thank everyone here if they help advance my knowledge - even you.



To be of any value a claim to any real property must be accompanied by a verifiable and legal property description. A description that often makes use of points or boundaries such as seacoasts, rivers, streams, the crests of ridges, lake shores, highways, roads, and railroad tracks, and/or purpose-built artificial markers such as cairns, surveyor's posts, fences, official government surveying marks (such as ones affixed by the U.S. Geodetic Survey (USGS)).



What exactly do you mean when you say "invalid deed"?

 

[e.bram]

Carolinian(and anyone else):
If you copy the developer's deed, how can you go wrong?

 

[timeos2]

Carolinian(and anyone else):
If you copy the developer's deed, how can you go wrong?

Not all Developers deeds are correctly done either. In researching 700+ delinquents over 5 years we discovered a handful of original deeds that were incorrect for a number of reasons. All had to to be reissued (at Developer expense only because we had them in house to badger into complying).

 

[csxjohn]

Some attorneys will do initial consults for free or in the alternative, a number of states have a Bar Association that will make a referal to a attorney and the attorney will do a initial review for a nominal amount. This would probably be a good way to go.

Thank you, I will look into this when the time arises.

Helpful website:

http://www.deeds.com/recording/

This may serve as a good resource to some. Worth opening the link.

Information not guaranteed to be current, so contact the state (contact info provided for each state) with questions/concerns

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

This is a good site. I'll also be looking here in the future.

 

[e.bram]

John:
Who prepared the deeds for the developer you cited? A scofflaw or jackleg , I suppose?(toungue in cheek )

 

[Carolinian]

Carolinian(and anyone else):
If you copy the developer's deed, how can you go wrong?

While that is one of the best sources, it is not foolproof. The big cavaet is that it will be almost certainly a deed from a corporation and you will need a deed from individuals. Some corporate needs are worded in a way you can get by with that and some are not.

 

[ampaholic]

-snip-
The attorney drafting that descrtiption should have reversed the calls of the last road line from the survey to go the correct direction to make it close but falied to do so.

Yes attorneys can screw up just like us mortals.

When I use the term ''invalid deed'', I mean one that is not valid to convey title. That can be from a defect in the description or from a defect in the body of the deed. The latter can happen from using a deed template from another state that does meet all the requirements of the state the property is in or it can be a corporate rathet than individual form or it can be from not copying something correctly.

I think you mean "does not meet all the requirements ..." yet how can you say that when all the states (except perhaps LA) do not have a "statutory requirement" for deed language?

What do you think "no statutory requirement" means?

One Scofflaw clsoing firm, for example, had a ''deed'' on its computer for some months that failed to include the granting clause of its ''deeds''. While they apparently caught that and corrected that error on deeds going forward, I never saw any indication of them doing deeds of correction for those to whom they had provided bad deeds while that error was on their template.

As good a job of screwing up as an attorney could have done, yes? I would say those were "voidable" deeds - might not stand up in court (but that is a case by case thing).

 

[Carolinian]

When an attorney screws up, which happens but much less than a layperson, there is usually a remedy readily availible, either his legal malpractice insurance carrier or the State Bar's client security fund. There is almost never such a remedy availible when a layperson screws up on a deed or closing.

If John Faeth had been an attorney, for instance, his lawyer's trust fund (where escrow money goes) would have been subject to periodic routine audits by the State Bar so the problems there were unlikely to have occured, at his death the State Bar would have immediately seized control of his office and accounts to protect his clients and sent in an attorney to supervise winding them up, and if missing client money were found, his legal malpractice insurance or the State Bar client security fund would have made them good for his clients. But, of course, John Faeth was not an attorney, so none of these things happened.

A stautory requirement and a legal requirement are not necessarily the same thing. The legal systems of 49 states are Common Law systems based on English common law, in which precedent of legal cases from appelate courts is just as binding as stautes adopted by legislative bodies. These two sources of law are interrelated. Courts can interpret statutes to add to their meaning or fill in gaps, and legislative bodies, if they do not like case law made by the courts, can adopt statutes that change the law and would take precedence over the case law.

Conveyancing (deeding) law at the time of the American Revolution was mostly or entirely basesd on case law rather than stautory law, and that was the starting point for law in this area in all US states except Louisiana. Since that time, the law has changed in each of the states as either courts or legislatures have made changes around the edges, In some situations, requirements in English common law were deleted and in other cases new requirements were added. There were common trends in what states did but not all states did the same things in each area.

A good example of the interplay between courts and the legislature is the development of the law on joint tenacy in North Carolina. Joint tenacy existed at English common law and recame part of North Carolina's real property law at the time of independence. Roughly a century ago, the legislature decided they did not like joint tenancy and passed a law abolishing it. When a lawyer tried to construct a deed that in essence created a joint tenancy even though it was abolished, this was challenged in court and went all the way to the state suppreme court, which decided it did like joint tenacy and ruled that if you did it the way this lawyer had, you could in effect still create a joint tenancy in spite of the legislature's statute, which to this day is still on the books. Lawyers in North Carolina rarely create joint tenancies (I did it twice in about 20 years) because in many situations a tenancy by the entirety will offer the same benefits and is easy to create, but when they do they track the language approved by the Supreme Court in that case exactly. Any other language runs the risk of falling afoul of the legislature's statute.

A ''deed'' that lacks a granting clause is not a deed. It is at best a contract. It is void, not voidable.

Yes attorneys can screw up just like us mortals.



I think you mean "does not meet all the requirements ..." yet how can you say that when all the states (except perhaps LA) do not have a "statutory requirement" for deed language?

What do you think "no statutory requirement" means?



As good a job of screwing up as an attorney could have done, yes? I would say those were "voidable" deeds - might not stand up in court (but that is a case by case thing).

 

[AwayWeGo]

Trying Not To Get Caught Rolling Our Eyeballs.

Yes attorneys can screw up just like us mortals.

During 35+ years in the U.S. federal bureaucracy, I noticed that some of the political appointees -- not all, but a sure plurality, Democrats or Republicans mox nix -- just loved to lord it over us civil servants in a haughty & condescending manner.

Some of the Schedule C politicals were attorneys, even if the positions they held did not require law degrees or bar membership, & those tended to lord it over us the worst, looking down their noses because we were both non-lawyers & non-members of their political in-group.

One of the haughtiest of the haughty forced a bunch of us from different but related bureaus to show up for weekly Management By Objectives meetings, whose purpose I believe was more to rub our noses in the status arrangement than to advance any real work agenda.

As we duly reported what was going on, item by item, this particular Deputy Assistant Cabinet Secretary would comment on what was wrong with how we were doing whatever it was we were doing. Sometimes the guy was right, but not always, which mattered not -- we knew it & he knew it & he knew we knew it & we knew he knew we knew it. In any case, he always got the last word, which typically was, "I'm a lawyer & I know what I'm talking about."

Yeh. Right.

-- Alan Cole, McLean (Fairfax County), Virginia, USA.​

 

[ampaholic]

When an attorney screws up, which happens but much less than a layperson, there is usually a remedy readily availible, either his legal malpractice insurance carrier or the State Bar's client security fund. There is almost never such a remedy availible when a layperson screws up on a deed or closing.

If John Faeth had been an attorney, for instance, his lawyer's trust fund (where escrow money goes) would have been subject to periodic routine audits by the State Bar so the problems there were unlikely to have occured, at his death the State Bar would have immediately seized control of his office and accounts to protect his clients and sent in an attorney to supervise winding them up, and if missing client money were found, his legal malpractice insurance or the State Bar client security fund would have made them good for his clients. But, of course, John Faeth was not an attorney, so none of these things happened.

I see no reason to disagree with this assessment.

A stautory requirement and a legal requirement are not necessarily the same thing. The legal systems of 49 states are Common Law systems based on English common law, in which precedent of legal cases from appelate courts is just as binding as stautes adopted by legislative bodies. These two sources of law are interrelated. Courts can interpret statutes to add to their meaning or fill in gaps, and legislative bodies, if they do not like case law made by the courts, can adopt statutes that change the law and would take precedence over the case law.

Such as the "Statute of Frauds" here in Washington - Many states have such overarching statutes that override and "clean up" much of the old common law.

Conveyancing (deeding) law at the time of the American Revolution was mostly or entirely basesd on case law rather than stautory law, and that was the starting point for law in this area in all US states except Louisiana. Since that time, the law has changed in each of the states as either courts or legislatures have made changes around the edges, In some situations, requirements in English common law were deleted and in other cases new requirements were added. There were common trends in what states did but not all states did the same things in each area.

A good example of the interplay between courts and the legislature is the development of the law on joint tenacy in North Carolina. Joint tenacy existed at English common law and recame part of North Carolina's real property law at the time of independence. Roughly a century ago, the legislature decided they did not like joint tenancy and passed a law abolishing it. When a lawyer tried to construct a deed that in essence created a joint tenancy even though it was abolished, this was challenged in court and went all the way to the state suppreme court, which decided it did like joint tenacy and ruled that if you did it the way this lawyer had, you could in effect still create a joint tenancy in spite of the legislature's statute, which to this day is still on the books. Lawyers in North Carolina rarely create joint tenancies (I did it twice in about 20 years) because in many situations a tenancy by the entirety will offer the same benefits and is easy to create, but when they do they track the language approved by the Supreme Court in that case exactly. Any other language runs the risk of falling afoul of the legislature's statute.

So, an attorney is a good idea in a "complex" situation - I agree.

A ''deed'' that lacks a granting clause is not a deed. It is at best a contract. It is void, not voidable.

I agree that it is just a piece of paper (likely not even a contract) without the usual words of conveyance in a deed such as "convey and warrant"; "grant"; "grant, bargain and sell"; etc. that demonstrate the grantor's intention to convey the property right now with the instrument.

HOWEVER - if the parties have been using the paper as if it were a deed for years and years - ie: relying on it - the situation would need sorted out on a case by case basis in court - like I said.

To say it is "void" is simplistic at best - it is voidable by a court. It is not void on it's face giving the original writer's (grantor if you must) brother the right to swarm the property years after the "new" owners moved in and say "this still belongs in my family - so I'm taking it since you don't have a deed".

 

[Jollyhols]

Well. Having agreed to give away my Florida timeshare for free except for reimbursement of MF via escrow, using a simple transfer company, I thought I had it all sorted. Then I read this thread ... :-/

 

[csxjohn]

Well. Having agreed to give away my Florida timeshare for free except for reimbursement of MF via escrow, using a simple transfer company, I thought I had it all sorted. Then I read this thread ... :-/

You will be just fine. Look at it this way, the deed you have forced you to pay your MFs over the years. That deed copied exactly with the new names on it will force the new owner to pay the MFs from here on out.

If there is a problem with that deed and some one, some where, wants to send the actual ownership up the line, it will pass you since you had the same paper work.

No one is going to do that, assuming you passed this on to a real person and not someone on the streets or already dead.

 

[Jollyhols]

You will be just fine. Look at it this way, the deed you have forced you to pay your MFs over the years. That deed copied exactly with the new names on it will force the new owner to pay the MFs from here on out.

If there is a problem with that deed and some one, some where, wants to send the actual ownership up the line, it will pass you since you had the same paper work.

No one is going to do that, assuming you passed this on to a real person and not someone on the streets or already dead.

Thanks for that. I am sure my recipient is 'real' but I guess ID wouldn't be a bad thing to safeguard us both.

 

[Carolinian]

You will be just fine. Look at it this way, the deed you have forced you to pay your MFs over the years. That deed copied exactly with the new names on it will force the new owner to pay the MFs from here on out.

If there is a problem with that deed and some one, some where, wants to send the actual ownership up the line, it will pass you since you had the same paper work.

No one is going to do that, assuming you passed this on to a real person and not someone on the streets or already dead.

You are right that a DIY deed copying things EXACTLY is likely a good bet. Much better than using a deed mill that may use the wrong state's basic form and leave out things critical to the deed's validity. It also saves the fee charged by the deed mill.