Key points from Seth Godin’s post titled Advice for real estate agents (quit now!):

• Order takers (those genetically programed dinosaurs who know the answer to every question, but bring nothing of real value to the table) are as good as extinct. 
  
• The down market offers infinite opportunities for real champions.
  
• You’re either fanatical about your product or you’re “invisible.”
• All real estate marketing is hyper-localized.
• Become the local go to person for anyone and everyone, even your enemies, that can benefit from hearing your message.
• Build blogs to communicate the “real information, not just data” that’s important to past and prospective customers alike.
  

Now comes the title industry …

Real estate agents have done a far better job branding themselves than have title agents.  There’s little risk of short term disintermediation for real estate agents because they’ve wisely positioned themselves as the point of contact within local communities.  They’ve aggregated audiences of loyal fans.  Real estate brokers, considering current models, couldn’t exist without their agents, particularly the top producers.

The title industry has employed a decidedly different business model.   Chronic anonymity complicated by a self imposed identity crises has been the by-product of decades of bad marketing choices by title companies.  I think it’s safe to say that many title companies have no marketing, branding, or positioning strategy at all.  It’s an error that can’t be corrected when boom markets turn sour.  The silent closure of a title company for lack of business goes unnoticed.  Why?  Most consumers don’t know what a title company is, what it does, or that it exists.

The title industry’s favored marketing tool of the past, a box of donuts featuring a stapled business card, is no longer an effective option.

Could title insurers replace their agents with a team of aggressive sales reps?  It wouldn’t be an easy accomplishment on the operations side, but I think it could be done quickly on the marketing side.  It’s something to think about in light of underwriter affinity for direct operations.  If title agents were to instantly disappear, I suspect that title orders would flow to underwriters in direct proportion to current industry dominance.  First American and Fidelity National would control about 70% of the market with the remaining players competing for any remaining business.  It really has nothing to do with technical superiority or claims ratios.  Underwriter dominance is determined wholly by management’s commitment to attracting and developing marketing talent.

As a value proposition, title companies have to build solid brands within their targeted audiences.  While many of you will continue to market only real estate and lender sources, the importance of internet transparency on consumer decision models can’t be ignored.

Title order pipelines have to swell with increasing percentages of consumer directed orders to remain viable in the future.

Title companies have to start championing themselves and the communities which they serve.  You don’t sell title insurance.  Your product is a complicated mix of reputation, credibility, and service.  And yes, the future of title company marketing lies in the power of Web 2.0 and the power to communicate interactively and selectively.  If you’ve never heard of Web 2.0, we need to talk. 

The boring, static web-sites that are the title industry standard have anthropological value at best.  They do nothing to promote business in the Web 2.0 business environment.   It’s not unusual to find underwriter logos featured on title company web-sites.  The practice results in confusion and possibly the branding of underwriters at the expense of title company irrelevance. 

Keep in mind: the underwriters that you’re marketing on your sites are often your direct competition for title orders.

This post is getting lengthy so I’ll hit my key points:

• Hyper-localized blogs offer unlimited opportunities for title companies to connect with consumers and other local sources of business.
• There’s no excuse for not blogging because it’s inexpensive and most title companies aren’t busy.
• Stop selling title insurance and title insurers.  Sell yourselves!  You are the product!  Become your own product champion.  Become fanatical about your title company.
  
• Use blogging to offer valuable information about your company, your community, and anything else that matters to real people.
• Use the internet to engage others.  It works.

Shortly, I’ll share links to some of my favorite real estate blogs with hyper-localized content.

 

Sawbuck Realty’s website states that the company is managed by it’s founders: Steve Barnes and Guy Wolcott.  Guy Wolcott commented on Title-opoly last night after a lively day of readers’ remarks about his company’s unusual business model.  It turns out that Barnes and Wolcott own a mortgage company, but direct orders to a national lender that can offer a broad range of benefits to consumers.   It appears that I was incorrect when assuming that Sawbuck is a lead generator for an affiliated mortgage company.   In his comment, Wolcott was emphatic about avoiding any appearance of impropriety.

Sawbuck is in the business of earning commission referrals by providing qualified buyers (leads) to a network of trusted real estate agents. 

Sawbuck recommends local title companies that share a vision of creating new opportunities for consumers demanding transparency.

Networked business derived from shared values among services providers isn’t the same thing as affiliated business even though the model is dependent upon directed orders.  The difference lies in the fact that consumers knowingly make choices.  Many of you were concerned that Sawbuck’s preferred title companies were undercharging for their services.  The model is geo-specific and works due to a combination of high property values and favorable title insurance premiums in the DC, VA, MD area.  The concept may not work in your specific market.

I stand firm in my resolve to expose title agents to the ingenious, and compliant, models that are starting to appear.  It’s my strong opinion that the title company of tomorrow will depend wholly on internet models that cast a wide net to produce local customers with highly defined opinions concerning settlement service providers.  Enter generation “x” and generation “y” as the baby boomers lose their dominance as the industry’s primary source of business.

Guy Wolcott’s comment on Title-opoly:

Ed, thanks for your thoughts on our new venture. It is always interesting to hear how people from each industry we touch (real estate, mortgage, title, technology) feel about what we are doing.

To be clear, even though the founders also own a mortgage company, Sawbuck does not refer business to it (both to enable us to scale up, and to avoid any misperceptions about how we make money). Instead, we partered with a national lender and work with their local retail operation. For our buyers, we’ve negotiated a below-market rate with no closing costs. In fact, we subsidize every loan (the opposite of making money).

On the settlement side, we work with local title companies who agree to our “rules” — no fees, no markups, default to standard coverage. We have no ownership interest in any title company, and have no ABAs. But since no one is used to a real estate company negotiating FOR the buyer, it takes a while for what we are doing to sink in.

Sawbuck ONLY makes money from real estate. After working with them during the early “search” phase, we refer our buyers to top local agents/teams we have identified in each community. We don’t charge agents to be our partner, and don’t charge for “leads”. We get paid our referral fee only when a qualified buyer meets a good agent and successfully buys a house. (Then we take a significant portion of that fee and plow it back into the mortgage subsidy.)

Our idea is that commissions are big enough to support a variety of benefits to buyers. Our goal is to turn the molehill of our referral fee into a mountain of savings for the buyer.

 

From the Washington Post:

Sawbuck, a real estate brokerage that exists only on the Web, makes all the usual promises: cool and easy home searches, referrals to real estate agents, and the chance for buyers to save thousands of dollars on each deal. It sounds wearingly familiar, but Sawbuck looks as if it could be smarter than the average URL.

At first, I thought that Sawbuck Realty could be another AfBA claiming not to be.  It’s not!  Sawbuck is a web-based, geo-specific (VA, DC, and MD) lead generation model that offers real benefits to home buyers. 

Things that I like about the Sawbuck model:

• it represents the vertical integration of a local mortgage broker into nearly traditional real estate brokerage.  Prospective buyers are referred to community based real estate agents with local expertise.
• buyers can search for active listings by clicking markers on a localized map.
• the web-site has a blog to engage and inform consumers.
• buyers have the option of saving money by closing with local title companies that have agreed not to charge excessive fees.

Notice how many times I used the word “local” in this post.  The title company of tomorrow will be wholly dependent on business derived from internet sources, but will remain highly localized.   It’s time to question your marketing techniques and look for innovative ways to connect with consumers and other providers of quality services.

Ask yourself: Are there any other local service providers that you should partner with to launch a unique web-based model?  I’ve preached for years that title companies missed an enormous opportunity to open real estate brokerages.  The Sawbuck concept proves that the traditional integration model of real estate broker domination isn’t the only option.

Interestingly, the Sawbuck model defaults to standard title policy coverage rather than the enhanced coverage that has become the industry norm.  As a title company owner, I often questioned the higher premiums associated with enhanced policies.

 

 As many of you know, the Los Angeles Times followed in the footsteps of Forbes Magazine, this week, by pointing fingers at questionable title industry practices.  The media suspects that there are skeletons in the title industry’s collective closet and is trying desperately to find them by stabbing in the dark.  We’ve all heard the litany of renowned evils by now: the title industry is anti-competitive; title insurance is grotesquely overpriced; excessive premiums are used to fund lavish events for real estate agents, etc.

The article, written by Scott Wilson, was informative, yet flawed in that it relied primarily on the regular, and safe, sources included in every expose of the title industry.

For example:  “Title companies put a lot of time and effort into building and maintaining databases of public records that are used to conduct a title search,” said a First American executive, ” even though automation has helped speed up title searches … workers still have to look over documents turned up in a title search and decide what actions to take.”  The carefully crafted statement, though innately truthful, was misleading in that it didn’t go far enough.  

I applaud the efforts of the Los Angeles Times to educate readers, but there’s so much that could have been included in the article, yet wasn’t.

What Scott Wilson’s readers don’t know:

• an increasing number of title searches are performed by inexperienced, cheap laborers relying on potentially incomplete sources of data maintained anywhere other than on domestic soil. 
• most industry insiders believe that offshored title searches have resulted in elevated claims ratios and a rising tide of nightmarish claims experiences for consumers.
  
• a consumer-centric business model would immediately encourage much needed competitiveness in the title industry.
  
• title insurers have abandoned quality standards without regard for public policy. 
• individual states regulate the threshold of entry into the title industry and have been visibly reckless while setting standards. 
• many title agents lack the training to properly identify and mitigate title related risks.
• title companies are typically entrusted with the management of massive escrow accounts without regular audits by qualified, independent examiners.
  

Most confusing to me was a comment made by Jack Guttentag: “When title companies compete, you [consumers] lose.”   What have I missed? 

Not surprisingly, the article was accompanied by a post on the Los Angeles Times’ Blog.

A revealing excerpt written by blogger Peter Viles:

If you could scan the entire American economy for money that is thrown away —  gift cards never redeemed, home gyms never used, etc. — one of the biggest piles you would find is the title insurance industry. Sixteen billion a year — that’s nearly double the size of what Hollywood movies gross in a year  in American theaters.

Be sure to read an interview with Scott Wilson on the Marketplace.

My advice to reporters with aspirations of exposing the darkest secrets of the title industry:

• That which you seek can’t be found in Santa Ana, Jacksonville, Houston, or Richmond. 
• The words spoken by oligopolists smitten with dreams of market domination make for great sound bytes, but are intentionally cloaked by ambiguities.
• Take to the streets to interview the “rank and file” of a once great and still crucial industry to learn the truth.
• Title insurance itself isn’t the problem.
  
• Look to the deterioration of protocol behind the scenes as the greatest threat to consumers.
  

 

Yesterday, I received the following comment on my Active Rain blog:

“I am new to your site - google-alerts linked me to you.  I have 25 years experience as a Searcher/Examiner, primarily from Southern California working for most of the major underwriters.  The Title Industry has undergone tremendous change in those 25 years, probably more so than in any other time in it’s history.  This is true of any industry, and in most cases “change” in necessary and beneficial.  However, in the case of Title Insurance, this practice of outsourcing searching/examining and policy production is not necessary nor is it beneficial.  Those types of positions have traditionally been the training grounds for higher level positions within the industry.  When I came into the industry, all of the Managers and Executives in the Title Companies had worked there way from the entry level jobs.  However, today, fewer and fewer of the Managers and Executives in the Title Industry have that background.  These new Managers and Executives are implementing changes to an Industry that they have very little understanding of, and the effects of those changes have diminished what was once a high quality, low risk product.  Today, title insurance is all about short-sighted “bottom-line” and shareholder profits.  This is an industry that is under more and more scrutiny from regulators and consumer advocacy groups.  Title Insurance is a vital product, considering the amount of money consumers are investing in real estate.  The leadership of the Title Industry, being those Executives that are trying to maximize profits for shareholders, better come to the realization that conservative underwriting practices, which can only be applied by seasoned, experienced professionals, is the only way to plan for future success and longevity.  That cannot be accomplished by outsourcing. 

Okay, I’ll get off the soapbox and let someone else have a turn.  I’m glad to see there are so many other people out there that seem to share my opinions on this issue.”

Key Points as Talking Points:

• The title industry has undergone tremendous change in the past 25 years
• Change is necessary; Change is good
  
• The practice of offshoring title searches and policy production isn’t necessary … nor is it beneficial
• Title searching was once the training grounds for industry execs … it’s no longer true
• The change agents are corporate decision makers who don’t truly understand the industry dynamic
• Title insurance is, or should be, a low risk, high quality product that consumers … and real estate agents … and lenders can trust
• Title insurance is a vital product
• Conservative underwriting practices ensure the industry’s success and longevity
• Offshoring is not the answer to the industry’s profitability and credibility woes

Patently Stupid [Source of Title Blog]

Robert Franco opines about a deed covenant with long-term implications.  Can a seller restructure property rights to earn an income stream from future transactions?  A company named Freehold Licensing has proposed a new asset disposition model for the owners of large RE portfolios. 

Am I My Brother’s Keeper? [Fran Gaspari on Active Rain]

Fran grapples with the sometimes undefined borders of professional accountability.

The question at hand:

Well we have a couple of customers who, if attempting to burglarize a home in which the front door were wide open, would climb through a side window anyhow! Are we morally or ethically or judiciously bound to do business with them…should we just dump them and tell them to go elsewhere, or should we maintain a business relationship with them that over time may ‘educate’ them to doing business ethically and correctly…In other words, when it comes to business, are we our brother’s keeper???

Blogger Carlos Gasca Yanez has proposed an innovative solution to this nation’s looming social blight: housing markets in crises.  The idea championed in a post titled Subprime Crises calling for Social Entrepreneurs is to partner nonprofit initiative with corporate enterprise.  Carlos envisions a real estate model that embraces a marriage of compassionate sensitivity to the profit motive.  Essentially, cooperative education would occur at every level beginning with professional development and the implementation of best practices.  Businesses and nonprofits would then endeavor to protect and inform borrowers likely to be victimized by predatory lenders.

A ridiculous proposition?  I think not.

Years ago, I participated in a social experiment with a nonprofit named People’s Homesteading Group.  To make a long story short: homes were awarded to participants based on an equation that favored need over financial qualifications.  My company facilitated thirty or more closings and the quasi-governmental funding that served as the financial mantle of the project.  While it might be said that corporate resources could have been used more profitably from the perspective of balance sheets, it could also be said that my horizons grew in ways that transcended dollars and cents.  The homesteading project was successful overall.

Don’t miss the comment thread on Carlos’ post.  Chris describes personal experiences with a radical and remarkable housing initiative unfolding in Scotland and Norway.  Cheryl gives an incredible dissertation on the importance of teaching credit fundamentals.

I left the post with a realization that housing is possibly the paramount global issue.

I want to go on record as stating that housing markets are not experiencing a mere cyclical fluctuation as suggested by the likes of Ben Stein.  If that were the case, we could expect business to rebound in the spring of 2008, or possibly 2009.  It’s not going to happen!  Nor was the housing crises precipitated by an economic correction in a broader sense.  The president’s perverse five year freeze proposal is a clear indicator that his advisers perceive the crises as something much different than anything seen in the past, at least the recent past.

I feel that we’re witnessing the collapse of a monstrous business model that previously sustained the cherished social institution that is homeownership. 

From day one, housing was subjected to the throes of the most asinine excuse for a retailing model ever contrived by the human mind.  Unlike legitimate industry infrastructures, we lack efficient distribution channels to encourage the uninhibited flow of products and information from suppliers to consumers.  Instead, we’ve tolerated two distinct points of sale.  The first point of sale is best described as the interaction between purchaser and real estate agent.  The second point of sale is the selection of a service provider by the real estate agent for the benefit of the purchaser.  A similar scenario exists between loan originator and borrower in a refinance situation.  In either case, the provider of services is rewarded for greasing the extended palms of those who refer business.  There is no incentive for service providers to innovate in ways that would benefit the consumer who is intentionally kept in the dark and therefor unable to recognize quality or excellence.

Falling housing values are a clear indicator that the old industry model has failed.  It took decades for the demon that is appraiser vulnerability to rear its ugly head, but the effect will prove financially devastating for millions of U.S. households. 

Title claims, the overt evidence of title industry malfeasance won’t inundate court dockets for years.  In December of 2007, the concept of “litigation free” homeownership is roughly as popular among title insurers and ALTA as a 60’s cultural awareness society.  When the mad rush to reach for deep pockets finally occurs, surviving title agents, if there are any, will collapse in an inevitable storm of credibility slander by the media. 

The title industry isn’t endangered at this time, independent title agents are!  Underwriters will survive the storm.

What if … the emerging model tolerated a single point of contact between the real estate industry and the consumer.  Regulators, elected officials, and academic types would scrutinize the personal, social, and economic consequences emanating from that singular point of interaction.  The current housing crises has placed us beneath a microscope forever.

What if … the very nature of homeownership in this country is about to change forever. Future generations would draw substantiated analogies between the housing crash of 2008 and the stock market crash of 1929.

What if … title insurers begin branding themselves in consumer directed markets.

What if … title insurers begin competing with traditional real estate brokerages for commissions.  Underwriters have quietly positioned themselves to provide information for free, or the practical equivalent of free.  It makes no sense for these enormous global conglomerates to continue reaching for the pennies derived from the sale of information and a rapidly diminishing premium revenue stream.  Real estate commissions are the next logical plateau on the evolutionary path.

What if … federally chartered banks were allowed, even encouraged, by the feds to partner with underwriters entering the business of listing and selling real estate.

Imagine a model where the singular point of contact with consumers occurred in retail bank locations. 

Considering the cataclysmic developments of the past year, is the proposition all that ridiculous?

 Note: Slight changes were made to the form and content of this post after it was initially published.  I felt a need to change the message somewhat.

Recently, I’ve published a number of posts dealing with the outsourcing of title work to India and other foreign locations.  The volumes of comments by title professionals prove that we are a concerned group.  I’m always impressed by the intelligent and relevant responses made by Title-opoly readers.  The comment thread often reads like an article in the Harvard Business Review.

The core theory on which title insurance is based is the elimination of all known defects as revealed by an exhaustive examination of title.  Homeownership should come with the assurance that the threat of litigation is statistically unlikely, almost non-existent.  The willful use of unpredictable  sources of title information for examination purposes raises any number of important questions.  I was taught that an abstractor has an obligation to rely on every available index and known source of title information.  In my mind, to do anything other transforms title insurance into a casualty product rather than an indemnity contract.  The outsourcing of title orders overseas hasn’t necessarily taken place long enough to establish a claims and litigation pattern.

I have to raise the question:  If a title policy is prepared using an unreliable search, isn’t it in the consumer’s best interest not to purchase an owner’s title policy?  

My reasoning:  The title policy severely limits the scope and dollar amount of the insurer’s liability.   Title insurers should be prepared to suffer losses if they want to cut corners with searches.  New developments in abstracting standards will greatly change the nature and volume of claims.  A consumer might be well advised to litigate, without the limitations of a policy, in an attempt to reach for the deep pockets of insurers and possibly receive additional punitive damages. 

Please feel free to disagree.

I like Rhonda Porter’s idea that regulated labeling, or disclosure, might be an appropriate measure to aid consumers, and their attorneys, to make proper choices regarding the purchase of a title insurance product.

Rhonda also raised the valid point that most of us posses only localized abstracting expertise.  Her particular knowledge comes from working with title plants on the west coast where a high degree of automation has existed for some time.  It might make sense for a consumer in Washington state to purchase a title policy when the search was outsourced overseas.   In Maryland, I don’t think it does.

To my knowledge, Chicago Title has the only significant title plant at its disposal in Maryland.   I find the starters provided by the company to be a good starting point for a search, but generally unpredictable and often unreliable.  The starters are simply past policies and are only as good as the office that wrote them. An abstractor has to know enough to delve deeper when the exceptions appear inappropriate.  I’ve seen starters for condo units that took a blanket exception to all condo documents and plats of record without referring to them specifically. That doesn’t work for me and it shouldn’t work for any underwriter interested in preserving the notion of homeownership as we’ve known it in the past.

I have to keep open the option that underwriters have secretly amassed vast sources of information in this state and have made the resources available to adequately trained outsources.  There’s also the possibility that underwriters have bought access, from local jurisdictions, to more reliable indexes than are available to the public at large including local abstractors.  I’m just hoping, and praying, that no one is stupid,or greedy, enough to attempt a Baltimore City abstract using only the on-line site with which I’m familiar.  

A reader named Sam made any number of important comments including:

“I appreciate the other points of view and agree that outsourcing has it’s drawbacks. We see errors on a daily basis and try to have the “cookie cutter” work go to our offshore vendors as that is what they are good at.”

Another reader, Shelley, raised the question of the technical qualifications of abstractors trained overseas.

She wrote:

“Property owned since 1980. I discovered a ‘slight’ discrepancy in the property description. I ended up having to search back further (using a real-live searcher located IN the court-house) and together we discovered my present owner’s property was “accidentally” sold, along with the adjacent lot (previously owned by PO) to a builder and financed with an over $1M mortgage. We now have to get new deeds and mortgage releases, etc etc. I wonder if this would have been discovered in India; or otherwise online. So far, I don’t think any bulldozers have torn her house down yet.”

We can’t forget about certain nuances, like mortgage releases, that are sometimes difficult to hunt down for even the most seasoned abstractor working inside of a courthouse.   I predict that underwriters will be writing volumes of letters to indemnify over unreleased mortgages by builders and developers in subdivision resales.  Attorneys will figure out a way to capitalize on the situation by refusing to close without actual releases and charging heavily for their curative services.  I saw it happen in the western part of Virginia several years ago.

One of my favorite comments was made by Title911, who wrote:

“I recently worked with a First American Company that uses this oversea’s method. So I have personal experience with this process. It puts much more burden on the already over burdened Title Officer to check and recheck every detail.”

Rebecca Levinson said:

“How very scary. I worked for a title company underwritten by Fidelity and cannot imagine how this decision came to pass.”

Gary Sloane opened my eyes with the following statement:

“I agree the final title product cannot be any better than the search from which it is created, and the idea that a search would be done overseas strikes me as ridiculous…but I work for a midsize title co. that is fairly old fashioned: We have a company that actually looks at information on paper in county buildings and such. And no, it’s not Mayberry, we’re in Chicago … there are problems that face small to midsize title companies that far exceed the abstract issue.”

I’d like to thank everyone who added so much to this discussion by commenting.  In addition to those already mentioned,  many familiar industry pundits including Diane Cipa, Tim Killcoyne, Robert Franco, and Fran Gaspari weighed in with great advice worth visiting.

Timothy wrote an interesting comment to a post named Indifference. Timothy feels as I do. Seasoned abstractors, though unfairly facing the threat of dis-intermediation, are needed more today than ever before. The reason: Land record integrity is being questioned in many parts of the country and an algorithm cannot replace human judgement. Timothy almost predicts a model that includes abstractors long after the title agent is gone. It’s an interesting concept.

I want to share a draft of a white paper that I wrote just about a year ago. It’s final form and content was changed dramatically by an informal research project conducted in Baltimore City. I’ll share the final paper with you tomorrow along with additional background information. Timothy’s comments reminded me of this draft which was written shortly after the State of Maryland made land record information available on-line for all of it’s jurisdictions including Baltimore City. Keep in mind: Baltimore City has a well deserved reputation for being one of the most screwed up land records anywhere. Abstractors must deal with traditional grantor/grantee indexes along with an arcane system known as a block index. In the draft, I raise questions that seem almost inconsequential in light of recent industry developments. Paradoxically, the questions take on great importance after reading Timothy’s comments.

Information in the Rough

We all feel the need to act quickly to changes of any type in our business environment for fear that an opportunity may escape our grasp. You should, however, consider the unusual nature of the title insurance industry when rapid innovation suddenly appears on your doorstep, or your computer screen. You should also take the time to conduct research and evaluate consequences when newly unleashed technology directly impacts your customer who is typically a homeowner. In regards to your career, patient observation may prove to be the best method of self preservation during changing times. Most importantly, a period of noticeable technological innovation is a que for management to revisit its company’s core beliefs and practices.

The introduction of “MdLandRec.Net” to the Baltimore City land records earlier this year [ January 2006 ] offers an interesting case study for the title company manager interested in primary risk avoidance. Volumes of documents and information spanning more than a century were instantly available to anyone with access to a computer and the internet. The interface between the user and the data appears inviting and friendly. The information is offered without charge, at least for now.

Initial questions: 

• Did the new web-site proffer a glimpse of the future of abstracting?
• Could a title search now be completed from home or office with an enormous savings of time and effort?
• Could an abstractor now avoid the need to travel to the land records each morning and the expense of parking?
• Was it now possible to apply sound business principals to the task of abstracting increasing both efficiency and profitability?

At the same time, an alternate stream of questions soon came into focus:

• Would title company employees have the ability to sit at their desks and gather accurate title information by simply entering names and dates into fields on a computer screen?
• Was the traditional role of the abstractor instantly altered?
• Would the need for abstractors be eliminated in the not so distant future?
• Would title insurers encourage the use of “MdLandRec.Net” by agents when preparing commitments and issuing policies?
• Would E&O carriers agree to insure title company employees who perform searches on “MdLandRec.Net”, but otherwise lack abstracting experience?

Changes are inevitable for abstractors and title agents alike with the later profession facing its own complex menu of challenges. Public policy favoring directed business has altered the landscape of the title industry forever. We can expect to see alternative insurance products designed to benefit the consumer with price points determined by calculable risks. Lenders will continue to require title policies for fewer loan products than in the past. Yet, the title industry has traditionally reacted slowly to new concepts in comparison to other industries. An abstractor possesses unique skills and knowledge that play a significant role in every real estate transaction. It seemed unlikely that the stability of the profession could be greatly diminished by a single innovation. The need to formulate and answer a more urgent set of questions became apparent:

• Did “MdLandRec.Net” generate search results that were identical to other information sources available at the land records?
• Could “MdLandRec.Net” be relied upon for limited searches including current owner searches, two owner searches and rundowns?
• Were the search queries employed by “MdLandRec.Net” intuitive enough to produce accurate results for novice users?

In other words, was it safe to assume that “MdLandRec.Net” produced final search results that were verifiable, consistent and accurate?

Title Agent vs Title Abstractor

A web based source of accurate title information would prove enormously beneficial to a title company that has made a decision to perform searches internally. Diminishing revenue derived from insurance premiums partnered with any number of other factors will result in a new title company model in the future. Insurers and agents alike may have no choice but to re-invent the ineffective channels currently used to obtain title information. The abstracting community is not without blame. It has managed to exist somehow without cohesiveness or identity. The content and appearance of work products can vary disturbingly while research parameters are ambiguous at best. As a group, abstractors have a reputation for ignoring delivery times and being difficult to contact. The fax machine may be the last technological advancement that was universally embraced by the profession. Consider this fact: It’s the year 2006 and the hand written title report remains the accepted norm rather than the exception. Future title business will be directed by sophisticated sources with quality control requirements along supply lines. The advent of vertical integration and brand accountability in the title industry will soon arrive.

What thoughts come to mind when you hear the word juicy?  Call me old fashioned, but I think of something other than the “hit rate” for an automated title product.  It seems perverse for a national underwriter to use the adjective to publicly anticipate the pleasures of market dominance at the expense of loyal title agents and abstractors.  First American did exactly that in the text of an advertisement for TitleSmart (opens in pdf format). 

In all fairness to First American, Merriam-Webster condones the use of the word to describe lucrative encounters.

From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary:

Juicy: Rewarding or profitable especially financially.

Still, I don’t think the word appropriate for inclusion in media that’s both a corporate promotion and an obituary for the faithful.  In the vernacular, the word juicy is synonymous with other sexually connotative descriptives like lusty, robust, racy, succulent, or steamy.  

My opinion: The choice of the word juicy to sell a product that’s conceptually questionable and scandalously controversial is a tasteless display of contempt for the industry and the consumer.