wrote:
Stuart Bronstein wrote:

For example in the US the distinction between registered and
unregistered land does not exist - it's all registered (we call
it "recorded").

My understanding was that this isn't the case - that there is no
registered land, as we would understand it - in the US and that
you rely on title insurance. Isn't that right? Your system is
essentially a form of deed registration, whereas ours is a full
"Torrens title" system.

Thanks for pointing that out - I hadn't realized that and just made an
assumption. According to Wikipedia one of the states uses the Torrens
system, the others rely on chain of title. It seems to me that the
Torrens sytems works better than the chain of title system.

Title insurance is used in some but not all states, though it is
becoming more widespread. Primarily it's just a way to research the
chain of title. It's thought that, if there is a loss as a result of a
mistake in the research, collecting on insurance is easier than suing a
lawyer for malpractice.

Stu