I went to the site and took the test run.  Not much to look at.  However, it could be sufficient for equity lenders.  Concidering their only concern seems to often be just enough information to file a mortgage, there is enough there to effect their needs.
For a purchase, or a first mortgage, it seems quite deficient.  I'm afraid though, that moving forward this could become the standard for even purchase situations.
I fear that the underwriters are at a point where they have decided that risk management is more cost effective than affimitave coverage.  To be blunt, we charge a lot of money to examine the titles, and very rarely does something come back to damage the underwriter on residential transactions.  A missed UCC, or and old equity loan are almost never made whole.  These are loans made with the expectation that a good number will default.  The upfront charges cover the exposure for the lender more than the filing of the lien.  The underwriter can write over these items with a pretty good feeling that they are not going to come back on them, and if one does on occasion, the cost of covering is lower than paying for a through search on everything they insure.  The majority of people are honest at the closing on reporting what encumbraces they have on their property.
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out over the next few years.  I think what we will find is that for the lower price residential transactions, refinances and equity loans, the use of an experienced examiner will be deemed to be an extra expense that is not worth the cost verses the potential exposure.
I've been doing this work for thirty years, and I hate seeing the changes we are going through.  My main concern is the problems that some property owners are going to face.  What will look like a manageble problem for the underwriter regarding an easement or restriction could be quite unsettling for the property owner.