"The borrower read and signed the document before a notary public. The lender (not the borrower) received the signed instrument and sent it to the title company to be recorded. The escrow officer received the completed papers, sent it to her title plant who reviewed it and sent it to the Recorders Office which approved it based on statutory criteria."

It's important to understand that procedures differ throughout the country. Rob gets what I'm saying because Rob is in PA.

The borrower signed two mortgages on the same day, likely in two different closings - perhaps at the same table, one after another.

It's entirely likely that the legal descriptions - which were on separate description riders prepared by the title agent - may not have even been attached in the mortgage documents at the time of signature. In PA, the title agent sends a certified copy of the mortgage to the lender with the loan package. The title agent prepares the mortgage for recording and takes it to the courthouse, does a final bringdown and records. Very often it's the independent abstractor performing this function for the title agent. There is no escrow officer. PA is not an escrow state. There is no title plant. We have title plants but it's not the same system as you are used to.

This is clearly and simply a case of switched riders.

The abstractor in our situation, in a grantor/grantee type of index, should have noticed the two mortgages, pulled the documents, and noted the inconsistencies.

to post a reply: login - or - register