who pays title insurance??

[nottelybill]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Florida. I have heard in Fl. that the seller pays title insurance. That seems crazy to me but we are selling our parents house and that is what I am told.

[seniorjudge]

There is no standard; it depends on what the contract calls for.

GENERALLY the seller pays the title search fee (since the seller wants that) and the buyer pays for the actual title insurance (since the buyer is being protected).

[FlyingRon]

Around here the buyer pays for everything. Why does the seller want or need a title search? The title search is usually bundled with the lenders policy which the lender requires. The owner is well recommended to obtain their own policy. Of course nearly all closing costs are negotiable as to who pays them.

[HomeGuru]

Originally Posted by nottelybill

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Florida. I have heard in Fl. that the seller pays title insurance. That seems crazy to me but we are selling our parents house and that is what I am told.

**A: read the contract, there is a standard clause pertaining to title isnurance and who pays. Next, such things are negotiable.

[bocajim]

I am in a similar situation, but from the other side of the coin. I am in Palm Beach county in Florida, and reading the purchase agreement, it reads like the seller is on the hook for the title search AND the title insurance.

Here is a copy of the agreement form:

[url]http://www.pier51mortgage.com/pdfs/Contract%20for%20Sale%20and%20Purchase.pdf[/url]

The relevant sections are 5(c)(1) and 10(a)(1).

In my agreement, under 5(c)(1), we agreed "Seller will select the title agent and will pay for the owner's title policy, search, examination and related charges."

10(a)(1) appears to say that the seller is responsible for the title insurance commitment.

Am I reading the purchase agreement correctly, or am I missing something?

Thanks.

[justalayman]

with only what you provided (I did not go to read entire contract), it appears you are reading it correctly.

As homeguru had stated, read the contract.

There is no legal requirement that requires either party to pay either part of this. You can attempt to negotiate this if you have not signed already. I, personally, like the seller pays for title search and buyer pays for policy since each of those items are for the benefit of the party that would be paying for them.

flying ron

Why does the seller want or need a title search?

to be sure the title is clear. If there is a problem with the title, it will cause a problem with the sale and it is the sellers problem to deal with, not the buyer. Additionally, if there is a problem and the sale falls through, why should the buyer be on the hook for finding a problem with the sellers property?

[nextwife]

Agreed. Whatever the contract states. In my state, the "standard practice" is that the SELLER pays for the owners policy, and the buyer pays for the loan, policy, if any. Thought behind this is that it is believed to be the sellers responsibility to prove that he has good title and to establish exactly what it is that he is selling. As a matter of fact, the State Bar approved standard residential offer form has pre-printed language included that requires the seller pay, and one must proactively negotiate that out if they DON"T want that in the agreement.

AS I understand it, Fl is a mixed state as to title standard practice. Some parts of the state are seller-pays and some are buyer pays or the costs are shared.

Here is the "title" portion of our WI WB11 offer:

TITLE EVIDENCE
CONVEYANCE OF TITLE: Upon payment of the purchase price, Seller shall convey the Property by warranty deed (or other conveyance as provided herein) free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, except: municipal and zoning ordinances and agreements entered under them, recorded easements for the distribution of utility and municipal services, recorded building
and use restrictions and covenants, general taxes levied in the year of closing and (provided none of the foregoing prohibit present use of the Property), which constitutes merchantable title for purposes of this transaction. Seller further agrees to complete and execute the documents necessary to record the conveyance.

WARNING: Municipal and zoning
ordinances, recorded building and use restrictions, covenants and easements may prohibit certain improvements or uses and therefore
should be reviewed, particularly if Buyer contemplates making improvements to Property or a use other than the current use.

FORM OF TITLE EVIDENCE: Seller shall give evidence of title in the form of an owner’s policy of title insurance in the amount of the purchase price on a current ALTA form issued by an insurer licensed to write title insurance in Wisconsin.
CAUTION: IF TITLE EVIDENCE WILL BE GIVEN BY ABSTRACT, STRIKE TITLE INSURANCE PROVISIONS AND INSERT ABSTRACT PROVISIONS.

[HomeGuru]

Good info guys.

[Cedrus]

Don't forget there are two title insurance policies. One is for the LENDER.
Someone MUST pay this.

The other is for the NEW OWNER of the property. Not mandatory but a really good idea.

[nextwife]

Originally Posted by Cedrus

Don't forget there are two title insurance policies. One is for the LENDER.
Someone MUST pay this.

Not if one has a CASH buyer!

[HomeGuru]

Originally Posted by nextwife

Not if one has a CASH buyer!

**A: hey, the lenders still need some bailout money.

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by HomeGuru

**A: hey, the lenders still need some bailout money.

Correct. And we taxpayers should give them big bonuses. To try to take away the bonuses is just WRONG!

"It's a stupid idea," said Woody Cozad, a lobbyist, commentator and Republican from Missouri. "I don't defend anyone who's at those companies now, but if they all need to be replaced, you're not going to replace them with anybody very good for $400,000."

Rudy Giuliani, a Republican and a former New York mayor, defended bonuses.

"If you somehow take that bonus out of the economy, it really will create unemployment," Giuliani said on CNN. "It means less spending in restaurants, less spending in department stores, so everything has an impact."

http://www.idahostatesman.com/1419/story/652150.html