Jay,

I agree with you. Unfortunately the VM's appear to be profit driven rather than quality driven. They seem to think that mistakes in an abstract are the abstractor's problem. They don't seem to be concerned that ultimately a missed lien or mortgage could come back to bite them in the rear end if they are using uninsured or unskilled abstractors. If their client asserts a claim against the VM and the VM attempts to pass the liability by impleading the abstractor as a codefendant or third party defendant, it is going to result in a worthless claim against the abstractor if he has no assets to pay the judgment, is uninsured or worse yet bankrupts the claim. Where does that leave the VM? What does the VM do? Bankrupt out the claim? I don't think so... unless the VM is planning on going out of business. How does a bankruptcy stack up with the VM's other clients? Let's ask Bridgespan.

Can the VM defend against the client's claim? Certainly. There are viable defenses, but the cost of litigating is astronomical unless the VM is big enough to have an in house legal department. Even then litigation is usually farmed out to outside law firms. If the VM is using an unreliable title plant, its ability to pass the liability may be even more limited.

By the time the VM's smarten up to realize that their policy of demanding more for less is ultimately going to hurt them in years to come there will probably be few abstractors left in the industry who give a damn. Most us us will have retired or moved on to more profitable lines of work.