A Title Company is NOT a Real Estate Lawyer

[Dion DePaoli]

I just want to point this out. Lately I have seen folks referring situations to title companies instead of properly referring to a real estate attorney. It is important to know what the difference is and it is important to seek out the proper party.

I always like to say, everyone has an answer only some of the folks have the right one.

You wouldn't ask a landscape guy to do your plumbing would you? He might know something about it, but it is just not the same. The same goes for title companies and RE attorney's.

Nothing against title agents at all. Those who are good at what they do are good at what they do. Through the course of their career they may come into many situations where they have had to divert to an attorney giving them knowledge of a topic. Additionally, some title companies are attorney owned which is a good mix of both worlds and aides in the education of a title agent.

Good RE attorney's have litigation experience and multiple years of practice. A title agent can not gain that litigation experience. Also, there is a line between giving legal advice and being a title agent by the mention of some of the posts I have read that line seems to get crossed often.

I have seen it recommended that title companies help draw up contracts along with notes and mortgages or deeds of trust. IMO, that is wacky. Those items are all potential litigation topics and you are best served by an attorney in all states.

Lastly, RE attorney's really are not all that expensive. An attorney can only charge for his or her time. How long does it take to draw up what ever it is you are looking for? A couple hours so a couple hundred bucks. That extra money can make a real difference when the documents get scrutinized. BTW, a title company can not claim the creation of a contract under Errors and Omissions, so good luck recouping any failed interactions.

Any folks have horror stories from their tenure related to the topic? Feel free to share.