Dallas-Fort Worth Real Estate Investor Club

Offer accepted, real home owner lives in Austin

  • 02 Oct 2013 7:32 PM
    Message # 1403625
    I have an offer accepted, but lady I've been talking to informed me the house is in her sons name.  He lives in Austin.  I explained a quitclaim deed, and she said that won't be an issue.  There is an understanding between mother and son that the house is hers to do with what she wants.

    So first off, a quitclaim IS the proper way to handle this correct?  Second, how is the distance going to complicate things?  I'd expect something like a deed can't go through fax, but what about mail?  Can he fill out a form from Austin and mail it to the title company?

    I'm open to any comments or suggestions.  Thanks so much for being here for me, especially Greg, Robin, Kyle McCaw and Matt Walker.  You've all given me way more information than I deserve for free.
  • 03 Oct 2013 6:16 AM
    Reply # 1403922 on 1403625
    Deleted user
    Michael,

    Title companies do remote closings all the time. In fact, assuming all parties are willing, for something as simple as the execution of a quitclaim deed you can have a mobile notary go the son's office, get everything signed and notarized, then FedEx the paperwork back to your title company. Shouldn't take more than a day or two, or cost much at all.

    -Greg

    PS - And you're welcome. Rarely in my life have I ever found a group of professionals more willing to share of their knowledge than on our forum.

    Greg Wilson
    The REI Mentor
    Last modified: 03 Oct 2013 6:18 AM | Deleted user
  • 03 Oct 2013 8:53 AM
    Reply # 1403996 on 1403625
    Deleted user
    Found at this site:
    http://www.expertlaw.com/library/real_estate/Texas-deeds.html

    The Infamous Quitclaim

    One of the more common questions we get about Texas real estate law involves Quitclaim Deeds (often mispronounced "Quick Claim Deeds.") There seems to be some sort of popular idea that a Quitclaim Deed is a simple and inexpensive means of selling land or solving real estate problems. Our clients are often shocked to learn that Quitclaim Deeds are practically worthless in Texas.

    So what exactly is a Quitclaim Deed? The courts have said:

    "A quitclaim deed conveys any title, interest, or claim of the grantor in the real property, but it does not profess that the title is valid nor does it contain any warranty or covenants of title. Thus, a quitclaim deed does not establish title in the person holding the deed, but merely passes whatever interest the grantor has in the property." Diversified, Inc. v. Hall, 23 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2000, pet. denied).

    When a person signs a Quitclaim Deed, he is essentially saying, "I don't promise that I own any interest in this land, but if I do I surrender it." Compare this to language in a Warranty Deed, where the seller "grants, sells and conveys the property to the buyer ... to have and to hold it ... forever, and binds seller and seller's heirs to warrant and forever defend the property to the buyer." Under Texas real estate law, a Buyer under a Quitclaim Deed is charged with notice of any defects in title, whether they appear of record or not. (For example, John conveys the property to Bob, who does not record the deed. John then conveys the same property to Sue by a Quitclaim Deed. Even though Bob's deed does not appear in the public records Sue would be charged with notice that John no longer owned the property, and she would receive nothing through the Quitclaim Deed.) For this reason, title passing under a Quitclaim Deed is not insurable and a property that has a Quitclaim Deed in the title will remain uninsurable until the applicable statute of limitations has passed (in most cases, 25 years).

    Does this mean that a Quitclaim Deed should never be used? No. Quitclaim Deeds can be useful in clearing title in some limited circumstances, such as when there is a question about whether a particular heir might have a claim to the property of an estate, or whether a person may have acquired title by adverse possession ("squatter's rights.") In the vast majority of cases, however, it will be preferable to use another kind of deed.


  • 03 Oct 2013 9:16 AM
    Reply # 1404002 on 1403625
    Robin Carriger (Administrator)

    Michael, I'm not an attorney, and I'm not offering legal advice.  My opinion is as follows.  From the description of the situation you gave, there's no reason not to use a General Warranty Deed which is much stronger than a Quitclaim Deed.  Jean's post is consistent with everything I've heard from every title attorney I know.  Bottom line - Don't use a Quitclaim Deed.  IFF the son insists, a Special Warranty Deed might be used which essentially will constitute him legally saying "No encumbrance was added to the title during the time I owned the property" as it's conveyed to the next owner.

    Robin Carriger

    Robin@AcceleratedPropertySolutions.com

  • 03 Oct 2013 9:51 AM
    Reply # 1404032 on 1403625
    Deleted user
    I am not an attorney. But I am a real estate broker with a fair amount of overseas clients we are accustom to remote closings.
    -Mobile notaries are cheap. 
    -General Warranty Deed is the way to go. Under very rare circumstances would I go the Quitclaim route.


    Side note: Even if you don't pay for a title policy I would suggest using a title company or attorney. They are very experienced in remote closes. I would hate for you to go to all that work only to have a cloud on the title that will kill the marketability of your  property. After you have had some experience you can go without the title company. Even with 12 years experience I hire people to keep me from making mistakes. Too many people are tempted to save a couple hundred dollars only to open themselves up to the risk of costing thousands later.

    Kyle McCaw
    broker/owner
    McCaw Properties
  • 03 Oct 2013 5:12 PM
    Reply # 1404430 on 1403625
    I spoke with a title company today.  They gave me several options, one included bringing the contract to them, and allowing them to take care of mailing/faxing/emailing it to the current deed holder.  They would then handle it from there.  From what you all are suggesting that sounds like the best option.

    If this is the way I go, should I fill in the contract, sign an initial it as if I'm sitting with the seller, then just allow the deed holder to initial and sign everything and mail it back to the title company?  I'm thinking this will be the simplest way, unless anyone has any other suggestions.

    Also on a side note, the lady at the title company told me in no uncertain terms, that quit claims are no longer recognized in Texas.  Is this news to anyone else?

    In response to Kyle's post, you state that in the future, it's possible to close WITHOUT a title company?  Or am I not understanding you correctly?  It was my understanding that title companies, and title agents are a must in closing on a property.  If I'm incorrect please let me know.
    Last modified: 03 Oct 2013 5:14 PM | Michael Mixon
  • 04 Oct 2013 1:20 AM
    Reply # 1404603 on 1403625
    Robin Carriger (Administrator)

    Closing with a title company is not absolutely required, but it is eminently wise.  Closing Real Estate transactions cleanly is their job.  Getting a title insurance policy in conjunction with a clean title commitment is another colossally good idea.  Please, please, please close with an investor friendly title company, use a General Warranty Deed, and make sure the end buyer gets a title insurance policy.

  • 06 Oct 2013 10:21 AM
    Reply # 1405959 on 1403625
    Deleted user
    Follow Robin's advice. But a title company is not required.
  • 08 Oct 2013 7:06 AM
    Reply # 1407542 on 1403625
    Deleted user
    Michael,

    Why are you ask about NOT using a title company? What is your reasoning or motivation?

    LMK.

    -Greg

    Greg Wilson
    The REI Mentor
  • 08 Oct 2013 1:09 PM
    Reply # 1407852 on 1403625
    Greg,

    Something mentioned in one of the above posts stated that it is possible to close without a title agent.  This was 100% brand new news to me.  I was under the impression title agents were as necessary as recording a deed.  I was asking for some clarification on this, which I received.  But at this stage in my investing career, I'm certainly NOT going to go at it alone.  I doubt I'd ever NOT use a title agent.  But it's interesting to know you could if you chose to.
Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software