[WSBARP] Deed signed in counterpart and other issues

Sat Jan 14 11:17:03 PST 2023

Thanks for you response Christopher. Appreciate you thoughts.

The only reference to the easement is in the deed and that simply says, “AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES 60 FEET IN WIDTH, THE CENTER LINE OF WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:” Then it goes on to describe the easement. There is no language of “subject to” or “together with” that would give any guidance and there is no reference to any parcels being benefited. Since the easement being described in on the property being conveyed, it would not be needed to access the property by the owner, so the mere existence of the easement suggests that the owner’s parcel is burdened, but again, no suggestions as to who is benefited unless you go out to the property and see that it is used by other property owners. Nothing about who maintains, so I can only imagine the burdened property owner is responsible for maintenance.

I am going to reach out to the title company and see what they say, if anything.

Sincerely,

Tom

Thomas J. Westbrook

Attorney at Law

324 West Bay Drive NW, Suite 201

Olympia, WA 98502

(360) 866-4000 phone

(360) 866--3832 fax

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

COVID POLICY:

Our firm continues to follow guidance from the CDC and Governor Inslee’s office regarding social distancing and the wearing of face coverings, and we encourage the public and our clients to do the same.  Our staff is still working remotely much of the time so electronic communication by phone and email continues to be encouraged.  We appreciate your patience and understanding.

From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> On Behalf Of Britt, Christopher
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2023 8:55 AM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
Subject: Re: [WSBARP] Deed signed in counterpart and other issues

I would say that the first two points you are ok on.  

With regard to the first:  Because of the warranties - both implied and explicit - there is nothing retained by the couple to pass via survivorship.  To that end, they have transferred their interest except for their survivorship interest which is moot because they no longer have the equity or possessory interest in the land.

With regard to the second:  Deeds signed in counterpart could be looked at as individuals signing different deeds but it would have the same effect.  They are perfectly allowed to divest themselves individually.  

The last point gives me pause, however.  I would want to see some document referencing this easement.  Further, I would examine this more if it is troublesome to the client and get something in writing.

Christopher G. Britt, M.A., J.D.

Attorney at Law

1403 S. Grand Blvd., Suite 201-S

Spokane, WA 99203-2278

P: 509.455.3713
D: 509.316.2131
F: +1.509.455.3718 (must dial 1 before area code)

E:  <mailto:christopher at lucentlaw.com> christopher at lucentlaw.com

Web:  <http://www.lucentlaw.com/> www.lucentlaw.com

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 8:37 AM TJW <tjw at w3net.net <mailto:tjw at w3net.net> > wrote:

Good morning list mates,

I have 3 primary questions regarding one transaction:

1. Property deeded to A and B as H&W. A and B later sell to C and D by SWD
as tenants in common. No recorded Deed from A and B as H&W to A and B as
TIC. Does that make the deed from A and B as TIC to C and D ineffective or
does it even matter?

2. When A and B sign SWD to C and D, it is signed in counterparts, not as
one document with both signatures. Is a SWD signed in counterparts an
effective deed? 

3. Legal description from A and B to C and D also includes an easement for
ingress, egress and utilities over the property being transferred, but does
not identify who has the benefit of the easement. There are 11 households
that are currently using the easement for access but none of them are
identified as the beneficiary of the easement and there is no easement
document or roadway agreement. Can there be an legally effective and binding
easement for the 11 households without each parcel being identified? To make
matters worse, the title company wants to change the prelude to the legal
description of the easement as "a nonexclusive easement"; that language is
not in any of the prior deeds in the chain of title. Does the title company
get to change the description sua sponte?

Am I over thinking? The title company does not seem to care.

Sincerely,

Tom

Thomas J. Westbrook
Attorney at Law

324 West Bay Drive NW, Suite 201
Olympia, WA 98502
(360) 866-4000 phone
(360) 866--3832 fax
www.buddbaylaw.com <http://www.buddbaylaw.com>  <http://www.buddbaylaw.com/> 

COVID POLICY:
Our firm continues to follow guidance from the CDC and Governor Inslee's
office regarding social distancing and the wearing of face coverings, and we
encourage the public and our clients to do the same.  Our staff is still
working remotely much of the time so electronic communication by phone and
email continues to be encouraged.  We appreciate your patience and
understanding.

***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***

_______________________________________________
WSBARP mailing list
WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com> 
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230114/e38f68c6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD0100.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230114/e38f68c6/WRD0100.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 3334 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20230114/e38f68c6/image001.jpg>