Amen to Doug's posting:  If you are not local you are probably not running the records properly. 

His posting above is exactly why I broke off of the original thread of Members of NALTA/ALTA/SOT and can do online searches?  I think that most of us that understand these three organizations KNOW that there is no way they can regulate the sources that we work with.  The federal government can't even do that or we would all be searching from the same database, computer system.  I was just curious as to how many counties in this unionized nation are on the world wide web.  When I looked at the Heineman scam, two of the rural counties that I search were not hit.  They have the same computer system which is online but not too user friendly.  To access these two counties' computer system you have to apply for a code.  My home county does not have this small annoyance in place and one of our residents was scammed. 

The disclaimer however seems to be on all computer systems nationwide.  I do think the disclaimer  is for the computer companies that had the old data entered by people with no clue as to what they were typing into the computer.  Therefore, I think that any of them can be challenged as to the limit of their responsibility.  "That would be likened to an abstracter turning in  a product and stating that I am only responsible for this product as to what I have found on record, if there is anything on record that I have not found I am not responsible for omitting that." And when I first started abstracting the attorneys were using that as a disclaimer.  Then they changed it to reflect that they are only responsible for the accuracy of the index,  which some attorneys still use that disclaimer today.   

As I said, I am a future candidate for the position of Registrar in our county and I felt that I needed to know more about the computer systems across the nation.  When I asked our county manager's office about the disclaimer, I was told that we stand behind our indexing regardless of the disclaimer.  And that is the way it should be.  Thanks for everyone's input on that issue.

I was also interested in the possibility of lobbying to have our state's Register of Deeds offices taken off line (two of our counties have done that and there is a move in Fla. to do that).  However, after much of yours input, I think that it would be detrimental if not impossible to do to the title industry.  Online searching is here to stay, however, there needs to be some regulation and control.  David Bloy/TX has mentioned several ways to obtain that.  I think that that is the movement that the country should be going in.  That is the issue that I will take up locally since we have no limit to access.

As to the title searchers who do not search online away from the recorder's/registries' offices, you need to understand that those that do search online are probably producing the exact same product that you are.  Online searchers should have the knowledge of the county that they are searching and the knowledge of the computer system that they are utilizing to have the skills to perform  the search.  And that is what it all boils down to:  Whether or not the title searchers have the skills to get the product done, not what source was used.  As I said my county has a hand full of title searchers who make it their civic duty to admonish those that do title searches online, be it an independent abstractor or an attorney's office.  Their idle tongues have harmed some attorney's offices as to their business.  Some attorneys send their title searchers to the registry just to "save face". 

So there is a lot of anomosity among the title searchers across the nation on this issue and the issue of the "newbies".  Therefore, I feel that we are our own worst enemies.  We need to be alot more "positive and encouraging" to each other.  To that note,  I want to say that SOT plays an important role in this occupation to help us see ourselves nationwide which can only enhance this occupation so that we do not lose sight that searching titles is an important field that can not be replaced with machines/computers after all.  That we are on the bottom of the feeding chain in the title industry and should be compensated for that more than we are.  We really do need each other.  That is why NALTA is being formed.  (No I am not a member but I see where it is heading and may join eventually.  $ is my problem.)  I see a lot of potential in NALTA for the independent title searcher.   We need better E&O coverage at a resonable rate, we need group health insurance, we could establish a retirement system for those that come after us baby boomers, we need educational classes similar to the State Bars, and many other perks that groups can get.  

It has been an interesting post.  Thanks for all the input.  I am trying to print these messages but they don't seem to print.