This really raises a crucial issue in title insurance - coverage against forged documents.  I have never actually seen a claim arise because of a forged document, but my bet is that forgeries are common, and with photo shop and color copiers etc., they will become more so. 

I realize an examiner's job is to prevent risk to the insurer and the insured, but I am no handwriting expert, so unless something was pretty blatant, I'm not sure I would raise an objection.  I would run it by my local underwriting counsel, but I'm pretty sure he would take a similar position - that a document that is facially valid may be relied on.

From a claim standpoint, I could see the tile insurers actually welcoming a claim in this area to demonstrate that this is a real risk, up to a point.  From the party whose signature was forged, he/she would still have to prove the forgery.

How far would anybody take this in assigning forgery investigation to an examiner?