Robo searching??  Does this qualify as an article or is it just an advertisement??

It's just a press release from Redvision.  We've posted press releases, including those from Redvision, for years among the articles and they are labeled as such.  When a large company like RedVision posts an update like this, we generally pass it along for the information of those who might be interested.  For instance, if RedVision had expanded into your county, you might want to know that, right? 

Judging from the message boards, Redvision is also a client for many abstractors.  It's just the nature of the business right now that the same companies that are working at using automation to cut out the courthouse searcher are also still also the sources of business of many searchers, and I don't see that changing.  I mean, First American, Fidelity, etc. all use automatic searching, offshore title searches, and the like.  Should we not post news releases from them either?  Where do we draw the line?

We don't get paid for posting press releases, so if was going to piss off a significant swath of the people who use the site, we probably would reconsider doing it, but it's not an issue that has come up, at least not recently.  I'd be interested to hear folks thoughts on this.

OK>  As usual, your well reasoned arguments, have swayed me to your side. 

Believe me-- I have a lot of sympathy for your point of view.  This site-- and therefore my job-- depends on the existence of the indpendent title searcher.  As that business shrinks, Source of Title's business shrinks.  So, to the extent that automated title searching erodes the business of the title searcher, our business suffers too. 

I'm currently researching automated title searches for another article, which I should be posting within a day or two I hope, so look for that in the near future. 

I greatly appreciate your posting the press releases.  I like to stay nationally (and locally) informed and this site gives me that opportunity without thousands of google hits.

This week a probate attorney found a use for this ancient title searcher.  Not everything is on-line and not every Land Records recording is in the computer index.  Wails of  "it's not there."  "The Probate Court has no records.   The Court said "we require proof."  Parties all deceased and there's still a survivorship interest unaccounted for according to the deed given to the Court and, if the other party is dead, "where's proof the STATE estate taxes are paid." The beneficiaries have no idea when the person died, but are sure the person is dead.

Not Wonder Woman.  Just did the traditional old fashioned title search ... and there it was, a 1/4 page typewritten copy of an Estate Tax Release, patiently sitting for all to see in the Land Records books right were it was recorded.  Of course, I read the fine print that the computer index only went back X years.  So as an ancient in-the-building abstractor, I moved on to the on-the-shelf archived indexes and paper books.  Truly enjoyable research time because finding it meant reading through years of original chronoligical order index entries by hand or typewriten under alphabetical listings.  It would have been faster if the Sl - So entries hadn't included the only two banks at that time giving mortgages, but then the research would have been boring. LOL

:( Sad to see that 30 years past appears to be a base line archiving point; I suppose using insurable title rather than the 60 year or to a "good" Warrantee Deed base.

I agree, Bobbi. The lack of attention paid to detail by title companies , their substandard expectations for an abstract and the resulting liability for the abstractor were the reasons I left the field of abstracting. ...too little compensation...diminished standards...increased liability...ridiculous turn around times. Sounded like a recipe for disaster. I am having a really good time in litigation/arbitration in this economy.