Sheesh. Even if every real estate transaction requires an attorney, it doesn’t follow that some big percentage of attorneys must be involved in real estate transactions as a practice area.
You don’t need a lawyer to buy or sell a house, at least in my state. Title companies do most of what you describe (title searches, etc.) with a single entry in a computer.
What kind of system do you propose that didn’t require verification of ownership or a search for liens and judgements? :dubious:
Title insurance policies are to protect against the highly unlikely possibility that even the professionals missed something. If they did, your potential liability is very great, and if you didn’t have title insurance, a lawsuit would be your only legal alternative, and you could lose.
Lawyers are called into a real estate transaction only for special or unusual cases; our standard real estate forms can handle the typical stuff. Need an opinion about an unusual easement? Want to draw up a customized agreement? Add a special condition to a sales contract? Then you need a lawyer.
You know, I’ve read my posts in this thread three times over now and I see I misread NicePete’s original comment. :smack: Consider my comments withdrawn. :smack: :smack: My apologies to NicePete and LD and thanks to Brazil making me re-read the posts yet again.
I know ralph is in the same state I am (MA). In MA the majority of home sales seem to involve lawyers on both sides, buyer and seller. I don’t think it is an actual requirement, it is just the way things are done here. In know this isn’t the case in every US state. Maybe it is the fact that land ownership around here could theorectically be traced back to the early 1600s, thus making it more likely that problems will arise?
In spite of the fact that we had a lawyer working for us when we bought our house we still ended up with title problems after the purchase. Thankfully we had title insurance and the problem was cleared up.
Like others who have responded though I am curious what kind of alternate system ralph proposes that would be significantly better than what we have now.
It’s my understanding that title companies are largely an American thing and in the rest of the common law world real estate sales usually involve a solicitor (transactional lawyer).
No problem at all. I honestly was beginning to think that I had misread, and was getting ready to go back through the thread. 
Until recently (last 30 years or so), an abstract was prepared by a legal office, showing all known transactions, liens, encumberances, etc. for a property since records were first kept. The idea was that if you go far back enough, then present this data to a lawyer, he could tell if the property was “safe” to purchase.
The abstract system has now been largely supplanted by the title insurance concept. Computerized records make this practical – why should it be necessary to start a brand new search from Year One if the same search was done a few years ago for the previous owner?
So the title insurance company now takes the responsibility of preparing clear title for the buyer. It’s a much better system, IMHO.
I mean, they bill you every quarter for property taxes-how about making them responsible for the title accuracy? It would eliminate those ridiculous title searches and title insurace scams.
I believe that Boston has been using such a system (non-exclusively) for more than 100 years now. As far as I know, people still normally use attorneys for real estate transactions in Boston. Even for land that is “registered.”
Does Boston use a Torrens title system? I see in Wikipedia that Massachusetts has a limited implementation of Torrens title; is Boston one of the areas that uses it?
FTR, Alberta has all of its land under a Torrens system, and we also normally use lawyers here for real estate transactions.
There’s more to a title search than just tracing property ownership back in time. Liens and judgements can be filed, mortgages taken out and repaid, convenants and easements created. Not all of these are recorded against the property; some may be against a buyer or seller. The job of the title company is to search more than just one set of records for all items that would affect the transaction.
It would be nice if the government took this task on, but my experience with my local county courthouse has shown that they are reluctant to change procedures. What private industry accomplishes in 5 short years, government departments are still considering implementation of after 50.
I don’t know about other governments, but if you want to file a deed with my county, it must be submitted on a piece of paper that looks just like the one used 150 years ago. It is now scanned and converted to computer data, but they do not accept electronic submissions, and insist on doing the scanning and converting themselves (inefficient, I know, but lotsa luck telling them that).
To adress the OP more directly, I think one of the reasons why lawyers are frequently used in real estate transactions is inertia.
I’ll give you an example. In my state, if you need a deed drawn up (the actual paper to be filed with the courthouse), the title company has a lawyer’s office do it, and charges the seller $75.
Ever seen an official deed? It could be done by anyone with a word processor. A PDF fill-in file would be easy and take any clerk 5 minutes (and that’s probably what a legal clerk does). I made my own deeds with Corel Draw for two property sales of mine in California and saved $150. I guarantee you can’t tell the difference; they are legal and were accepted by both the title company and the courthouse.
So why does a seller use an attorney for this simple task? Because that’s the way it’s always been done.
Oddly enough, I love the idea of studying for the rest of my life, reading legal briefs. I just don’t get to do enough of it.
I do love my job, but I don’t love discovery. Fortunately the good parts of what I do make up for the boring parts.
I think most people who get into law have little to no intention of seeing the inside of a courtroom if they can avoid it. I was suprised how few of us really wanted to litigate.
I believe so. As I understand things, some of the land in Boston is “registered,” meaning that it is subject to the Torrens system.
Ok, suppose the buyers are John Jones and Susan Smith. What should be put down for grantee?
If you’re asking me for legal advice, IANAL.
If you are asking me to write their names down on a deed, and the information is already supplied by a title company, I can fill in the blanks just fine. I don’t need to make any legal decisions to do that.
Besides, there are standard wordings used according to states. 95% of all real estate transactions that I see don’t require nonstandard text for title. If there is any question, see a lawyer. If the determination has already been made, type it in the form. Don’t need a lawyer for that.
No, I’m just trying to show that things aren’t always simple.
The problem is that you might be making a legal decision without even realizing it.
In most jurisdictions, there is a difference between:
(1) John Jones and Susan Smith, as tenants in common;
(2) John Jones and Susan Smith, as joint tenants;
(3) John Jones and Susan Smith, as husband and wife.
If you just put down “John Jones and Susan Smith,” you’ll be choosing something by default. But you probably didn’t know what you were choosing, or what the implications of that choice were.
Without a lawyer, you might not realize that there exists a question which requires a lawyer. That’s why if there’s a lot of money at stake, it’s usually worth the money to hire a lawyer.
Not any more than title companies make every day. They don’t consult lawyers for most transactions. They just send the data to a lawyer’s office to prepare the deed. An attorney never sees it unless his opinion is requested; a clerk types in the data and sends it back.
Do I know this for a fact? Yes.
I don’t deny that lawyers regularly do routine work that a title company could do just as well. But that’s different from claiming that any old seller can just whip up a deed.
I believe most jurisdictions don’t allow giant robots into schools, at least not as students. Maybe as a class project for the engineers 
/hijack
(sorry, someone had to say it)
I don’t believe that was my wording, but it may have been your interpretation.