I recently raised an issue regarding E-recording with both a local Underwriter and a Deputy Register in one of the County's here in the Detroit Metropolitan area.  I would appreciate hearing other’s opinions on this as well.

In a recent search I came across an affidavit of lost document whereby one partner quit claimed his 1/2 interest to the other.  It was suspect to me, and I made a note of it to my client.  Upon inquiry by the title company, the second partner's attorney claimed that the document was forged.  He claimed that the first partner made a copy of the signature and inserted it in the signature line of the "lost" Quit Claim Deed.  His assumption is that the partner brought it in to the title company when he refinanced the property.  The affiant was an employee of a title company.  He did NOT claim to have first hand knowledge.  What actually occurred remains to be seen, in court (if they don’t settle - which I suspect they will).

With manual recording there is inspection by the Register's office for original signatures.  In this scenario this necessitated relying on an affidavit, which aroused my suspicion.  If there had just been a bona-fide Quit Claim Deed recorded I don’t know if my suspicions would have been aroused. 

The question I posed was “If E-recording were available the only verification would be by the title company’s employee.  If they are involved in misdoings, as may be the case in the above scenario, what safeguards are in place to close this opening that E-recording will create?”

I did not receive any serious reply.  I proposed that ultimately the document should be sent in for review, with provisions made that any suspect document may be removed from record.  I think this addresses the insurer’s concern of having documents timely recorded, yet leaves a check in place.

This obviously would not lighten the Recorder’s workload as E-recording does. 

Any thoughts on this?