zlacker

[return to "221 Cannon is Not For Sale"]
1. emptyb+dq[view] [source] 2026-02-03 18:38:24
>>mecred+(OP)
1. Author lost me at his first sentence: "Like most people, I’ve had my identity stolen once or twice in my life." I am careful and aware of this possibility, but AFAIK I have not experienced this, nor have "most people" I know. o_O Crazy times.

2. I don't even understand how a title transfer could happen without verifying ownership. Is the title system in the USA decentralized or that much different than elsewhere? i.e. Torrens-style

◧◩
2. jjmarr+Wr[view] [source] 2026-02-03 18:44:50
>>emptyb+dq
Unlike most common law jurisdictions, the United States doesn't have a central land registry due to lobbying from the title insurance industry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrens_title#United_States

◧◩◪
3. dcrazy+XA[view] [source] 2026-02-03 19:20:56
>>jjmarr+Wr
No, the United States doesnt have a central land registry because that is not an enumerated power of the federal government. The individual states have sovereignty over their own land and each has its own system for land registration. The article you linked to even names several states that have a partial Torrens title system.

The claim that the title insurance industry is the reason for lack of adoption of Torrens title schemes is uncited, and immediately followed by descriptions of several cases where Torrens title was adopted (often poorly) and later abandoned.

◧◩◪◨
4. weinzi+vE[view] [source] 2026-02-03 19:35:21
>>dcrazy+XA
"No, the United States doesnt have a central land registry [..]"

Fascinating, how is ownership established if there is no single source of truth?

I feel the answer to this is also crucial to understanding OP. It could be a minor annoyance or the real possibility to lose your land.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. pdonis+8J[view] [source] 2026-02-03 19:57:18
>>weinzi+vE
> how is ownership established if there is no single source of truth?

There is: the county clerk in the county where the land is located.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. skissa+5M[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:08:56
>>pdonis+8J
No, the county clerk records aren’t a “single source of truth”. In the US system, it is possible to convince a court the county records are wrong, and order them overridden-which makes them not the single source of truth.

By contrast, in the Torrens system, whatever the government records say are final. If you are the innocent victim of a mistake by the government (or a fraud against it), the government has to compensate you; but you don’t actually get the land back if it has since been sold to an innocent purchaser.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. pdonis+fO[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:19:17
>>skissa+5M
> in the Torrens system, whatever the government records say are final

First, it doesn't seem like that's always the case, based on another post upthread talking about a land ownership case that went to the high court because of an error in the government's records.

Second, since there is no single government for the entire world, any government trying to implement a Torrens system is still going to face the problem of events happening outside its jurisdiction that its records do not and cannot contain, which affect ownership of property in its jurisdiction. So there cannot be a "single source of truth" in the sense you appear to be using the term, even in the Torrens system.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. rcxdud+VR[view] [source] 2026-02-03 20:37:03
>>pdonis+fO
In the Torrens system, if you do not register the transfer of property with the government, then the transfer hasn't happened. So whatever else happens in the rest of the world doesn't matter (at least, unless the land itself is annexed by another government).

(And, from similar cases in the UK which has this system, if the land registry fucks up the transfer is still final and this has been upheld by the court, the government may just be liable for damages)

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. pdonis+g41[view] [source] 2026-02-03 21:39:44
>>rcxdud+VR
> In the Torrens system, if you do not register the transfer of property with the government, then the transfer hasn't happened.

This is also true of county clerks in the US: any transfer of property in the county has to be recorded on a deed that is submitted to the county clerk and kept on file by them. Otherwise it hasn't happened.

> if the land registry fucks up the transfer is still final

This is the part that might not be the same in all US jurisdictions (though it appears it is the same in some, someone posted upthread about Iowa having a system like this).

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. mindsl+iR3[view] [source] 2026-02-04 17:07:33
>>pdonis+g41
> any transfer of property in the county has to be recorded on a deed that is submitted to the county clerk and kept on file by them. Otherwise it hasn't happened.

No, the point is that this is actually not true. The transfer has happened as soon as the deed has been executed. There are many reasons you generally want to record the deed in a timely fashion, but doing so is not strictly necessary.

[go to top]