[WSBARP] Title insurance question

[Scott Thomas]

I'm still confused.  In the abstract, an easement to a governmental entity
is treated differently than an easement to a private party?  I can
understand treating an encroachment into a zoning setback or a wetland
buffer differently, but isn't an easement a property right that is the same
regardless of who owns it?  Or am I reading the facts wrong ("encroachment
within 10' of easement")?

 

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
[mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Douglas W. Scott
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 9:39 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Title insurance question

 

Thanks for the explanation.

 

Douglas W. Scott

Law Offices of Douglas W. Scott

Windermere Building

1810 15th Place NW, Suite 203
Issaquah, Washington, 98027
V.  425.392.8550
F.  425-392-2829 

www.davisscottlaw.com <http://www.davisscottlaw.com/> 

 

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
[mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of John McCrady
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 9:03 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Title insurance question

 

Without seeing the response from Chicago Title, my best guess is that the
garage encroached onto a governmentally imposed setback rather than across a
boundary line, and that Chicago denied the garage issue under what we
sometimes call the "Government Regulation" exclusion, which I quote below:

 

EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE

The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this
policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees,
or expenses that arise by reason of: 

1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including
those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting,
or relating to

(i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; 

(ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on
the Land; 

(iii) the subdivision of land; or 

(iv) environmental protection;  

or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental
regulations.  This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage
provided under Covered Risk 5. 

.

 

John McCrady

Puget Sound Title Company

5350 Orchard Street West

University Place WA 98467

253-476-5721

j.mccrady at pstitle.com <mailto:j.mccrady at pstitle.com> 

 

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
<mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
[mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Douglas W. Scott
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2017 2:51 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv (wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> ) <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
<mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com> >
Subject: [WSBARP] Title insurance question

 

Client made claim against Chicago Title for:

1.       Having to move a garage that encroached within 10' of a King County
drainage easement.

2.       Neighbors claim that client exceeded his easement rights for a
parking pad. 

Title company says the 2007 Owners Policy provides coverage for
encroachments of existing improvements.  It accepted the encroaching parking
pad, but denied moving the garage.  They are both encroachments only of a
different nature that had been there well before my client bought the
property in 2008---any ideas? 

 

Douglas W. Scott

Law Offices of Douglas W. Scott

Windermere Building

1810 15th Place NW, Suite 203
Issaquah, Washington, 98027
V.  425.392.8550
F.  425-392-2829 

www.davisscottlaw.com <http://www.davisscottlaw.com/> 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20170905/5663eac5/attachment.html>