Steve,
Connecticut licenses its attorneys and commissions its notaries. It does not yet license abstractors unless something has happened recently since I stopped doing abstracting. However, the Standards of Title promulgated by the Connecticut Bar are the bible for title abstracting. They determine what is or is not marketable title. Virtually every sales contract in Connecticut incorporates them by reference to determine what is or is not acceptable for the marketability of a property's title. Regardless of whether an abstractor is licensed or not he is still held accountable to the standard of reasonable care contained in the Standards of Title. That is why E & O Insurance is vital for him.

The point I was trying to make is that I think licensing could only help the Connecticut abstractor. A statute requiring both licensing of the abstractor as well as requiring abstracting to be performed by a duly licensed abstractor would possibly keep the work local, and prevent the outsourcing to the the third world where there is little if any quality control.

The problem is that the title companies and vendor managers are calling the shots, and the only motivation they have is profit...quality be damned. The abstractor already has the liability...why should he not have the benefits that go with it. You are right in that licensing suggests a greater degree of expertise which in turn needs to be properly compensated.

to post a reply: login - or - register