Riddle Me This : QCD Versus Warranty?
Okay - scenario 1 :
Two investors want the same property. Unscrupulous seller gets money from both and gives a QCD to both. Only one of them can have the title, so basically whoever records the deed first gets it, right? The other person is screwed, because the QCD just gives all interest in a property that no longer belongs to the seller.
Scenario 2 : What if both sellers insist on a Warranty deed? The Warranty deed specifically lists the land and property as being owned by the seller, and that the property is going from the seller to the buyer. Could the unscrupulous seller give warranty deeds to both parties? What would happen if they did?
Is there more paperwork involved in getting a warranty deed? Does it cost money to have it recorded?
When would it be best to use one versus the other?[ Edited by KittyLitter on Date 04/10/2004 ]
the basic rule in scenerio # 2 is still the same. The first guy to record his warranty deed gets the property. The other guy has the right to sue the seller for fraud. Big deal, seller is probably judgement proof.
So what should one do, in any situation? Get to the courthouse as quickly as possible???
Would this be something to cover in the contract for sale?
As commercialking can tell you, I'm a whole lot fonder of warranty deeds than quitclaim deeds. If the buyers are smart, they will get title insurance. The title company will pull the title and see who, in fact, owns the property.
If the buyers don't insure title, they're playing Russian roulette, particularly when they're using quitclaim deeds.
On this point, at least, we agree Nancy, Get title insurance. At least then if a problem develops you've got someone (the title company) with the pockets to get you out of trouble
In addition to benefitting from the title company's pockets commercialking refers to, if you insure title you will also be able to nail down with the title company the type of insurance coverage they'll be willing to provide and see what that coverage excludes.