You have to be very sensitive to claims of price fixing. You can not engage in formal or informal agreements that would restrain trade. The civil and criminal penalties are severe. One major discount retailing chain recently went through this. You would all know the name of the chain. It was accused of predatory pricing...undercutting its prices below the cost of its acquisition of goods. The net effect of such methods is to put small competitors out of business.
The retailer lost at the trial, but won on appeal. As it turned out the retailer had not been engaging in predatory pricing. Rather it ordered its goods from wholesalers in such large quantities that it was able to get huge volume discounts and pass the savings along to its clientele as a marketing stategy. Although the retailer was right, the cost of litigation was astronomical... much more than the average individual could afford. The case is now taught at Penn State University's College of Business Administration as one of the pitfalls of discount pricing.

Perhaps something that SOT could look into when formulating its group marketing strategy could be suggested voluntary guidelines for the market prices of title searches in different areas of the country. They probably already exist on an informal level. It is just a matter of informing the client. It might be a good idea in addition to educating the national vendor management companies, title companies and/or lenders in the quality versus price issue of a title search. I think that the quality of the search and its price need to be linked together as a marketing plan. The client would still have the option of going with the less expensive lower quality search if it chose to do so. I keep hearing the abstractors in this area voicing an old maxim..."You get what you pay for." In exchange for the higher suggested market price, the abstractor is free to offer some service in his/her abstract that his/her competitor may not offer. As long as there is no restraint of trade and and pricing structures promote competition, there probably would be no problem. The competition among abstractors should be focused on the quality and creativity of work rather than the price of the search, and that is the challenge we all face in order to stay in business. From the past few years of experience we all seem to know what the problems are. We need to do some research to find out why they exist, and then find a method to overcome them.

With respect to the issue of electronic research, outsourcing, information mining and disemination of personal information on the internet, I would like to congradulate David Bloys on the recent article he published on the subject. I have reprinted it, and begun handing it out to the town clerks in Connecticut. They are interested in the problem. Most of them were unaware that there was a problem. A town clerk in told me yesterday that she had run into conflicts between the Freedom of Information Act and the Patriot's Act already. Someone recently walked into her office and demanded access to the local registry of marriage certicates. She refused. As it turned out she was being tested by some state or federal agency who reported her to the mayor. She was repremanded for her conduct, when she should have been applauded.

to post a reply: login - or - register