What I find interesting is that Iowa went off line when it was discovered that a 'Politician's" social security number was discovered by him to be on a mortgage or deed of property he owned.

Same thing happened in Suffolk County New York a few years back.

I wonder if this would have happened if an average Joe found his ss # on documents of his that he found on line?

  A factor that resonates with me is the privacy advocate's contention that signatures can be clipped and pasted easily. 

  Robert is correct, that this would make it easy for scammers in Nigeria or anywhere to commt fraud.  I would remind everyone that the focus should not be on foreign fraudsters alone.  Before Oklahoma City, few people would have expected to be the victim of home-grown terrorists, but it did happen, and still does.  I'm not saying "report on your neighbor", but do exercise reason when operating in the world.  A ounce of prevention....

  Anyway, a point to also keep in mind is that, when good title practices are used, access to signatures can also help to prevent fraud.  Comparing signatures from one document to the next in a title chain can raise concerns, suspicions and questions that will only be clarified by a good chain of pratices being followed, involving Statements of Identity, notaries, and other verification mechanisms.  Yet, all too often, such procedures are not followed, as it is easier to pay out a claim at the other end of the process and take the claim cost as a tax write-off under "cost-of-doing-business".

  Another point to be  made about signatures is that they are, under some legal traditions, part and parcel to your personal property (why do you thing celebs charge huge fees to  autograph photos?).  Really, if this is the case, then it can be argued that posting them online when you never agreed to that twenty years ago when signing your mortgage paper, might violate your privacy and property rights. 

  As ya'll know, I'm very much in favor of public records being online.  However, I do not have a problem with redacting information.  As to address and marital status, these are easily found on Google Maps, Ancestry.com, wedding registry sites, newspaper announcement search sites and a dozen other places, so I am hardly worried about those red herrings.

Comparing signatures from one document to the next in a title chain can raise concerns, suspicions and questions that will only be clarified by a good chain of practices being followed, involving Statements of Identity, notaries, and other verification mechanisms.

My fear is that one day, abstractors may be held responsible for NOT identifying inconsistent signatures on documents. The burden should not fall on abstractors to point out potential forgeries.  I do agree that abstractors should keep an eye out for them and when detected it should be noted on the search.  However, I see that more as a courtesy than a requirement.  After all, we are not handwriting experts and we shouldn't have to print every document so we can compare them side by side to evaluate their authenticity. 

We should be able to rely on recorded documents as being what they purport to be.  But that may change as fraud become more prevalent.  Sooner or later, someone will claim that the abstractor was negligent in not noticing a red flag of forgery.

  I think that a way to respond to this is to encourage every abstractor to be aware of this potential claim issue so that they can, beforehand and with forethought, provide a good disclosure as part and parcel to their contracts and report which address this issue.  Now is a good time for each of us to review our contracts, report templates and insurance coverage in order to make sure that this issue is covered by each. 

  To wait for a claim or case to arise is irresponsible, and I've already reviewed and altered each of my papers to better expound on this matter.  My contracts are pages long, as are my disclosure notices, and this one adds a good paragraph to the contemplation of suh matters. 

  Next, I am going over with my staff today to ensure that our internal procedures are stronger and better in reviewing papers in light of this discussion.  I do not believe that we've failed in this regard, but using this as a good training point is a great refresher on the matter.

   Once again, I seem to fall to the role of devil's advocate:  We are more experienced and knowledgable about handwriting issues than most people.  Most of us analyze, parse and discern handwriting on old indices and documents that would be unreadable to the Common Man.  Going back to the 1960's puts us into handprinted and cursive-written papers on digital reels, old books and microfilms.  We, more than almost any other profession, deal in old hand-scribed works (actually, doing the additional genealogy work that we do here, we REALLY get into the old records in this way too, so I have even less basis for not being able to discern signatures on a professional level).  I think doctor's secretaries and pharmacists are the only professionals outside of CSI Miami that can read a scribble better.  lol