Related Posts
Honest question. Does LinkedIn give people cancer??
Junior writer jobs where are you?
Wearing to work today

11 likes to enable DM
True story 😂

Does EY check GPA on experienced hires? (3yrs)
Additional Posts in Real Estate - Law
Welcome to Real Estate!
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Depends on if I’m the seller or the buyer.
If I’m the seller, I argue for the commitment since it would be the more comprehensive option. When the buyer inevitably says we should use the pro firms because the exceptions deleted from the commitment shouldn’t be permitted exceptions, I usually tell them that while title companies may make underwriting decisions for many reasons including relationship reasons, I’m not willing to delete of record matters.
I’m sometimes able to win that argument, sometimes not. It’s not one I’ll fight hard, but I’ll take a shot at it.
Agreed
I would take it from the title commitment. Odd to me that anyone would rely on the owner’s pro forma exclusively.
Proforma if possible since that is what will appear on the title policy. Especially if you get a few exceptions removed, you don’t want to copy the commitment and accidentally pull one of those over
Well as an underwriter here’s my take, if it appears in the final recorded deed, we than must take exception to it, even if we had underwritten it out previously. An insurer should not cover a matter the grantor specifically will not warrant. Just my take.
I wouldn’t typically underwrite based solely on a QCD. Note that if title is insured without warranties the insurer has no rights of Subrogation, not to mention the reasons I stated above.