Open Forum

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

I appreciate all the comments in this thread.  I am pleased to have this forum in which we can discuss such issues.  As Mary Enzi said "there is a significant burden that falls upon us", and I am happy to shoulder that burden, as long as it is fair.  We are in business to provide a valuable service and to make money providing that service, but we cannot be left holding the bag for everyone else and their mistakes.  Thomas Cronkright was spot on with his comment that, "it provided fodder for why the title insurance and escrow services should not be replaced with alternative and non-insured products."   Could you imagine that mess! 

Thank you all for your support and I appreciate the opportunity to speak out and to hear your comments. 

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email

We've been in business since 1988 - and I've learned never to say I've "seen it all."

Just last week, we had a payoff situation that really highlights how much extra responsibility keeps landing on the title industry's shoulders - often with little support or recourse.

We closed a file on June 16th but held all seller proceeds because we hadn't received the payoff yet. We were told it would be faxed the next day. When it finally came - dated 6/17 and faxed to us on 6/26 - it was good through 6/30. We verified the payoff wiring instructions through CertifID to guard against fraud, issued the check, and sent it via FedEx. It was signed for on 6/30 - within the "good through" window.

Then on June 30th - the same day the lender signed for the check - they faxed a new payoff with additional fees and a new "good through" date. Our team saw that the first check was delivered, so the clerk moved on.

On July 2nd, the lender called to say they'd rejected the original check and demanded an extra $3,000. Thankfully, we still had the seller's remaining proceeds to cover it - but how is this acceptable?

On page 4 of 7 of the payoff statement, there was some vague language about possible updates - but honestly, who's reading every line of a payoff letter when we're relying on the lender to get this right? It's hard enough to get accurate payoffs in a timely manner, and now we're forced to verify wire instructions through third-party tools to avoid fraud - but even they can't guarantee the actual numbers are correct.

What are we supposed to do? Hire someone full-time to call and verify every payoff figure - even with signed borrower authorizations? And half the time, lenders still insist the borrower join the call anyway.

We're already the compliance arm for state tax departments, lien holders, and soon with FinCEN, we'll be part of the policing for money laundering. Are we now also responsible for second-guessing every payoff we receive?

We do our jobs with integrity and take on enormous risk to protect everyone else - yet we're constantly carrying the liability for other parties' mistakes. Where's our protection? Where's our indemnity?

I'd love to hear how others are handling situations like this. How are you verifying payoff amounts? What protections (if any) have you put in place to shift or share this burden?

We all want to do our jobs well, but this is becoming unsustainable - and we need to speak up about it.

Looking forward to your thoughts and ideas.

Gina A. Curran

President

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc.

1100 Berkshire Blvd., Suite 100

Wyomissing, PA 19610

PH: 610-372-8201 x115

Fax: 610-372-8237

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

Stewart Abstract of Berks County, Inc., 1100 Berkshire Blvd., Ste 100, Wyomissing, PA  19610, USA, www.stewartabstract.com

Send me a Secure Email