DinSFLA Here: Now if we just put these time frames such as ’1999′ with all that is happening today we arrive to some answers…Don’t we?
Electronic communications make it possible to conduct old transactions in new forms. Some of the oldest kinds of transactions governed by law are transactions in real estate: for example, sales, leases and mortgages. In the Middle Ages transactions in real estate were conducted symbolically, without paper or signatures. Writing, printing and more universal literacy brought paper deeds, mortgages and leases, memorialized by words on paper with manual signatures. These were filed in public records to establish who had rightful title to any piece of land. Several centuries have gone by since that initial migration to the then-new technology of paper documents and manual signatures. A new technology of computers, software to run them, and electronic communications has come to replace paper. The law of real property must now make a transition to accommodate the new technology. The efficiency of real estate markets makes this imminently necessary.
This long dependence on paper, however, casts up certain barriers to using electronic communications to carry on real estate transactions. The law of the states of the United States has many “statute of fraud” requirements that inhibit the use of electronic communications. Statute of fraud requirements put total and express reliance upon paper documents and manual signatures to make transactions enforceable. No paper, no enforcement. These same requirements have also made it more difficult to develop electronic analogues to transactions in paper that are equally enforceable.
The first step to remedy the problem took place in 1999 when the Uniform Law Commissioners promulgated the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA). This act adjusted statute of fraud provisions to include electronic “records” and “signatures” for the memorialization of all kinds of transactions, including basic transactions in real estate. It is possible to have sale contracts, mortgage instruments (in whatever form a jurisdiction uses) and promissory notes memorialized in electronic form with electronic signatures that will now be treated the equal of the same paper documents with manual signatures. This is the result of the widespread enactment of UETA and of the subsequent enactment of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-Sign) by Congress.
Real estate documents must be recorded on public records to be effective. Recording takes place in most states in a county office devoted to keeping these records. Recording protects current interests in real estate by clarifying who holds those interests. The chain of title leading to the current title-holder, meaning the historic record of documents relating to transactions for a specific piece of real estate, establishes the marketability of that piece of real estate by the current owner of interests in it. The real estate records establish this chain of title. State law governs these local recording offices, and there are requirements in the law of every state relating to the originality and authenticity of paper documents that are presented for recording. UETA included optional provisions dealing with governmental authority, including that of local governments, to accept and utilize electronic records. However, not all states adopted these optional provisions, and confusion still persisted whether these provisions, coupled with the rest of UETA, authorized recordation of electronic records.
The Uniform Real Property Electronic Recording Act (URPERA) removes any doubt with regard to the ability of a local recording office to accept and otherwise process electronic documents and signatures for recording. Further, there must be an orderly conversion of every recording office in the United States for electronic recording to become accepted universally. That will be a complex process, but it needs a starting point in the law. URPERA, promulgated by the Uniform Law Commissioners in 2004, provides that essential start.
The act does three fairly simple things that will have monumental effect. First, it establishes that any requirement for originality, for a paper document or for a writing manually signed before it may be recorded, is satisfied by an electronic document and signature. This is essentially an express extension of the principles of UETA and E-Sign to the specific requirements for recording documents relating to real estate transactions in any state. Second, it establishes what standards a recording office must follow and what it must do to make electronic recording effective. For example, the office must comply with standards set by the board established in a state to set them. It must set up a system for searching and retrieving electronic documents. There are a minimum group of requirements established in URPERA. Third, URPERA establishes the board that sets statewide standards and requires it to set uniform standards that must be implemented in every recording office.
These may be simple steps in the law, but the entire process of implementing electronic recording of electronic real estate documents will be complex from state to state. Inserting URPERA in the law of a state requires careful scrutiny of its real estate law. If paper documents are effective, for example, when they are time-stamped when delivered to a recording office, when should electronic documents that may be delivered electronically when an office is closed be considered effective? Answers to questions like this one will take some work and some complex decisions as URPERA is considered for enactment in any state.
Notwithstanding this need for careful effort, it is important to make the start on electronic recording of real estate documents. Real estate transactions involve billions of dollars in the United States. The efficiency of real estate markets depends upon the adoption of technology to make them faster and more competitive. After UETA and E-Sign, the key is URPERA. Every state needs to consider it as soon as possible.
- Electronic Property Document Recording (ERDS) Via: perfectreign Introduction As a manager with the Los Angeles...
- QUI TAM: Tennessee vs. MERS, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems April 20. 2010, RECORDING FRAUD From: b.daviesmd6605 COMPLAINT: COMES the State of Tennessee ex rel....
- FRANKENSTEIN Real Estate | TRILLIONS in DEBT Frankenstein real estate market – $3.5 trillion in commercial real...
- 5 reasons why California will face another lost decade in housing – 493,000 real estate agents and brokers for 219,000 homes listed on the MLS. 7 percent of 90+ day late loans in California have no foreclosure filed. State budget depended on real estate bubble jobs for revenues. Wish he can do both New York and Florida…would be...
- COUNTIES TAKE NOTICE | MERS claims savings over $2 Billion in Recording fees! I don’t know about you but this is an awful...