[WSBARP] Recording Standards Commission

Wed Dec 15 12:23:59 PST 2021

Dear Chris:
Thank you for taking on the responsibilities of your role as a member of the Recording Standards Commission.  I have some specific comments and recommendations for improvement of the recording process.
Project # 21-1, Court-Ordered Alteration in Chain of Title.  Recommend including in this process a clear protocol for transferring title from the Torrens registered land system into the current recording system.
Project # 21-4, Multi Title Transaction.  Here's an example of problems that can arise in this area.  I recently created a two-unit professional building condominium out of a building owned by two entities as tenants in common.  The Declaration of Condominium I recorded contained clear provisions to convey each of the two condominiums created to a separate party using the appropriate language and information for a quitclaim deed.  But because the title of the document did not include words that indicated that the Declaration included conveyance language, one title company would not insure title because they did not accept that language as conveying title to either one of the condominiums that were created.
Other Issues/Recommendations.

  1.  Revise the exemption provisions of WAC 458-61A to clearly enumerate the bases for each exemption and to clearly identify any additional documentation required.  As it is, not all of these provisions are "obvious to the most casual observer."
  2.  Change the format of the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit and Supplemental Statement such that they may be printed on letter-sized paper.  This may require either or both of these documents to become two pages long.
  3.  Reconsider whether multiple copies of the real estate excise tax affidavit are required.  The current forms include 4 copies but, in the event the documents are presented for recording over the counter, most Recorder's offices just hand the extra 3 copies back to the submitter.
  4.  Establish and promulgate a protocol for who reviews Deeds and Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavits and in the order in which they are reviewed and handled.
  5.  Only if necessary, establish and promulgate the order in which documents for a particular transaction are submitted for recording.  Some recording offices have rejected electronic recording of a deed where the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit was not the first document entered in the electronic form.  That is evidence of other protocol standardization issues that may need to be addressed in the Recorder's offices.
  6.  For the document review process, if a problem is identified that precludes recording the document, require staff to continue to review the document and identify any further problems that would preclude or otherwise interfere with recording the document, so that the submitter may correct all identified issues at one time.
  7.  Establish and promulgate standards for re-recording documents, including whether a coversheet is needed and acceptable methods for annotating changes on the original document.
  8.  Revise the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit form to reflect the information that is actually required to be inserted.  The most obvious example is the unwritten requirements for entry in the WAC section/subsection where a Supplemental Statement is being used.  In these cases, Recorder's offices are requiring that the "WAC Section/Subsection" entry include not only a WAC, but also a reference to a paragraph number from the Supplemental Statement.  In the alternative, revise the options on the Supplemental Statement to be identified by the appropriate WAC section/subsection rather than the current arbitrary paragraph numbering.
  9.  Revise the protocol for entering price and fee information on the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit.  In particular, in the case of 100% gift transfers, counties do not currently require that an amount be entered for "Gross Selling Price" and then an amount be entered under "Exemption Claimed."
  10. Standardize the order in which transaction information is entered electronically so that order matches the order in which information appears on the Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit form.
  11. Standardize the required field entries for electronic recording and clearly identify those that are truly optional for the submitter.  As it is, not all fields are required and it up to the submitter to figure that out, county by county and sometimes by trial and error.
  12. Establish protocol for promptly and affirmatively notifying submitters if a submission is being rejected and the basis(es) for the rejection.  Simplifile provides this notification but, for example, King County does not, even though its electronic submission process includes a field for entering an email address for such notifications.
  13. Standardize the Assessor's parcel numbering systems as they appear on Assessor websites.  Some Assessor's websites list parcel numbers with extra hyphenated numbers added on, apparently for their internal uses.
I'm sure my colleagues will have more suggestions as well.  Again, thank you for your work in this area.
Mark B. Anderson
ANDERSON LAW FIRM PLLC
821 Dock St  Ste 209  PMB 4-12
Tacoma, Washington 98402
+1 253-327-1750
+1 253-327-1751 (fax)
marka at mbaesq.com<mailto:marka at mbaesq.com>
www.mbaesq.com<http://www.mbaesq.com/>
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This transmission is confidential and is intended solely for the use of the individual named recipient. It may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, or other confidentiality protection. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, be advised that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify the sender via e-mail or by telephone at (253) 327-1750 that you have received the message in error, and then delete it. Thank you.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Chris B
Sent: Friday, December 3, 2021 10:09 AM
To: WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBARP] Recording Standards Commission

RCW 65.24.040 established a new entity, known as the Recording Standards Commission (RSC).  Its purpose, per that statute is:

The Recording Standards Commission is intended to clarify existing laws regarding the recording of documents with county recording departments and county auditors. Recording standards and practices vary from county to county which creates confusion and liability. Simplified and standardized recording standards and fees are therefore needed to better harmonize practices throughout the state.

The 13 members of the commission are mostly county auditors, as well as a representative from the Washington Mortgage Bankers Assn, Escrow Association of Washington and Washington Land Title Association.  One seat was also set aside for a member of the WSBA.  I was nominated and approved to represent WSBA.

The Commission held its first meeting yesterday, with the attachment as its starting point re: issues to work on.  As you can see, most of the issues are technical in nature as to how the various recorder's/auditor's offices work.

I want to bring to the RSC all of your various gripes about county recorders/auditors offices.  One thing I have learned already is that these offices consider themselves entirely separate (and mostly with no accountability) on issues from the DOR relating to REET.  However, I am pushing for them to at least become aware of these sorts of issues from practitioners.  So (at the risk of blowing up my email in-box), I invite all member of the WSBA Real Property section to email me your issues and concerns with various recording offices.  Please identify which county office you are writing about when you respond.

I have a one year appointment to the RSC, so please bookmark my contact info.

Please note our new website and email address as of 1/1/21.

Chris Benis
First Avenue Law Group, PLLC
321 First Avenue West, Seattle, WA  98119
206.447-1900 office - 206.447.9075 fax - www. firstavenuelaw.com

This message contains information that may be CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED.  Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee), you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained in the message.  If you have received the message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-mail chrisb at firstavenuelaw.com<mailto:chrisb at firstavenuelaw.com>, and delete this message. Thank you very much.

To comply with recent IRS rules, we must inform you that this message, if it contains advice relating to federal taxes, was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law.  Under recent IRS rules, a taxpayer may rely on professional advice to avoid federal tax penalties only if that advice is reflected in a comprehensive tax opinion that conforms to stringent requirements under federal law.  Please contact me if you would like to discuss our preparation of an opinion that conforms to these new rules.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20211215/98f6cb33/attachment.html>