Wrong Legal Description By Title Company
I just bought 6.5 acres of land last month. Today, the real estate lady came and wanted me to sign over a quick claim deed because the wrong legal desciption had been attached to the contract. The wrong one is for twenty acres. If I can sign a quick claim deed, does that mean that right now I own the 20 acres? Can I profit from this mistake?
I'm not an attorney, so this is a question you should ask an attorney. However, my feeling is that currently you don't own the 20 AC. The person you bought the 6.5 AC from didn't have title to the 20 AC property. So the seller of the 6.5 AC parcel cannot convey to you what he didn't have himself -- i.e., good and marketable title to the 20 AC property.
Don't sign anything until the facts are known. 1. Was the 20 acres' legal suppose to be your 6.5 acres? 2. Was there a Title Insurance policy issued? 3. the Real Estate Lady is your agent, or who? The way I see it... I'm a RE agent, not an Attorney: You bought 6.5 acres - lets call it Greenacres.? The RE contract contained a legal for 20 acres - lets call it Petticoat Junction. SOOOOO you own 20 acres of Petticoat Junction, NOT 6.5 acres of Greenacres. By signing a Quit Claim deed, you are stating the interest in the 20 acres (legal, etc.) you are giving up. But what about interest in the 6.5 acres? You have no contract stating that you own it .... I see great things happening here... Profit from this maybe? What is the 20 acres worth? First I would have the agent create a new contract for the purchase of the 6.5 acres. Get this done first. Next, you have a contract for 20 acres that must be honored. The seller must provide the property per the terms of the contract. You don't care for the agent, you just want the 20 acres if it worth more than you paid for the 6.5 acres. The seller's agent and your agent owe a fudiciary responsibility to their principals. That's you for the buyer's agent. You are the buyer, right. The seller of the 6.5 acres is in contract to you to deliver the 20 acres. Not good for them, but good for you. In contracts, they must do either: 1. both agree to a mistake (contract to correct), seller buys the 20 acres from its owner and provide it to you per your contract, or pay you damages for what the 20 acres is worth more than the 6.5 acres is worth. I wouldn't be in rush to sign anything now. Gather the facts and act accordingly. Best of luck...
Todd raises some good points.
I would contact the title company to see what they have to say. Odd that they have not been in touch.
Before signing anything but after collecting the facts as much as you can then you can seek advice from an attorney.
If the title insurance company says there was no mistake then you certainly should not sign a quick claim from the agent. If they do say there was a problem they are more likely to have an interest in it being set straight in a way that is more complete. Again, check with an attorney before you sign. Granted you need to watch how much the attorney will charge and if the fees for the attorney can be covered by another party (the one who make the mistake).
John
[addsig]
Todd_RE_Investor,
There is no contract between mykie and the owner of the 20AC parcel. The only signed contract is between mykie and the owner of the 6.5AC parcel. The owner of the 6.5 AC parcel (Seller A) can't perform under a contract to sell mykie property he (Seller A) doesn't own. What occurred between mykie and Seller A was something I think the lawyers would call "mutual mistake," and that where's there's a mutual mistake, there's no contract. So in other words, right now, there might not be any valid contract between mykie and Seller A concerning the 6.5 AC.
I feel that mykie really needs to consult a RE attorney about this ASAP.
To clarify - the 20 acres of land was owned by the same person as who owned the 6.5 ac. There was title insurance bought and the twenty ac. is worth much more than the 6.5 (they are contigeous) and the RE agent was acting as both sellers and buyers agent! I have an appointment with a RE attorney this afternoon - I'll keep u posted[ Edited by mykie on Date 06/17/2004 ]
Ok so the basic rule here is equity, the end solution is supposed to be fair to both sides. That means that you are not going to profit from this windfall.
In the worst case, assuming you were to be a total a** and attempt to claim the 20 acres here is what would happen: The 20 acre guy would file suit to quiet his title. He would point out to the judge that the 6.5 acre parcel was what everybody thought this deal was about and the confusion of the legal descriptions was in the nature of a "clerical error" and the judge would order you to quit claim his 20 acres back to him and the seller to get you a warranty deed with the correct legal description.
Given that the case is as strait-forward as you present it you might get hit with the other sides attny's fees as penalty for bringing this matter to court should you attempt to be sufficiently obnoxious as to let it go that far.
So, the most you can reasonably expect to profit from this snafu is the amount they will give you to avoid having to file that lawsuit. Say $2,000 (about half what the lawsuit would cost).
Meanwhile, you thought you bought the 6.5 acre parcel, take the title, straighten up the mess, don't be a jerk trying to unjustly enrich yourself over some poor clerks careless mistake.
[ Edited by mykie on Date 06/18/2004 ]
Mark,
I will agree that this will not end up to be an "unjust enrichment" for this poster, however lets look at the facts as posted.
He sought the services of a professional realtor not some poor clerk, who would be blamed for this, the clerk is employed by this realtor this is where the "buck stops" not with the clerk.
Because he did not purchase what he was expecting to purchase, he now has had to employ the services of an attorney who will not be advising him for free.
The first clue as to ownership was they asked him to sign a Quit Claim Deed they did not ask him to sign this deed to get their paperwork, they asked him to sign it because the title to the 20 a.c. was in his name.
I can not blame him for not signing anything at this time, if the realtor did not get it right the first time, why go back for seconds, no telling what property he owned he might be signing away.
I see no wind fall here for this poster but I do see a some monetary liability on the realtor's part.
John $Cash$ Locke
Cash,
Yeah, again there is a certain amount of "nusiance compensation" in order. As stated before not more than $2,000 probably more like the cost of his legal fees-- something like $500 and my guess is that the title co. will pay that willingly.
BTW I don't think the clerk worked for the realtor I think the clerk worked for the title company.
Mark
Mark,
Could be a title clerk, however the title company had to get the original information from someone to start title preparation.
Agreed he won't get much unless Gerry Spence is his attorney.
John $Cash$ Locke
Even then he won't get much-- but Spence will
Interesting comments.... I still contend that there is more to this whole problem. I disagree with NancyChadwick - There WAS a contract for the 20 acres. The Buyer NOW owns 20 acres. True, the seller can bring suit to regain the 20 acres, but there still is no mention to regain the original 6.5 acres in ownership. Because the RE agent was both a seller and buyer's agent they assumed the fiduciary responsiblity to both seller AND buyer. The Title company was provided the legal description from the RE agent. Yes, this was an error. The contract called out the 20 acres, not the 6.5 acres. The buyer DOES own the 20 acres. The Seller and their RE agent should have known it was the 20 acre parcel. The Title Company did nothing wrong - they wrote a policy for the 20 acres as instructed by the seller. I find some comments interesting - Why does Dlitedan (post 5/19/04) in purchasing the wrong lot take it on the chin, and the seller comes out ahead, but this buyer doesn't gain from the error of two savvy people (Seller + agent). I'm not an attorney, nor judge, but I can see that the buyer does not just hand over the 20 acres for just $2000. I would think that maybe renego. the original contract might be in order. Maybe 20% off the 6.5 acres and the seller and agent pay all expenses for the transfer. This is not mean, just business. The seller and agent should have known better in not checking on the legal description. Should the buyer take only $2000 for their trouble, no. I think his time and trouble is worth more.....