The subject property (parcel 1) is located in an older community in Baltimore County. The property is described using a metes and bounds description.  The legal description to the subject property became "corrupted" in 1958 when someone inadvertently used the description for the adjacent parcel (parcel 2). That corrupted description has been used consistently in numerous deeds, mortgages and deeds of trust since 1958. The subject property has since gone into foreclosure. My abstractor pointed out the description problem and we filed a title claim.  Prior to filing the title claim I took the matter to the foreclosure attorney only to be told by them that they did not find a title defect.  As is ususal, because they did not look.  They admittedly did only a two owner search and relied upon the title policy that had been issued to the lender.  The foreclosure file is closed and the court ratifed the foreclosure sale early last year. No deed has been recorded from Trustee to the purchaser at foreclosure, in this case Fannie Mae.

The claim was assigned to outside counsel for resolution.  This is their proposed resolution:

They will obtain a court certified copy of the title deed into the foreclosed party and the deed of trust that gave rise to the foreclosure, they will attach the appropriate legal description and they will then re-record the certified copies.  

They state that throughout the chain of title a clear intent has been established to acquire title to and use parcel 1 as collateral for the debt instrument(s), and, that because the tax ID number is correct the deeds in the chain and the debt instrument that gave rise to the foreclosure actually gave the debtors and their predecessors title to the correct property by way of adverse possession.  They make no distinction or representation as to whether or not all parties in the entire chain of title used the entire "adversely possessed" property at all times during their ownership, but....

While I don't disagree with their assessment of intent, I do disagree with their "fix".  How can you take a "court certified" copy, alter it, re-record it and state that the title defect is cleared? In the ordinary course you would obtain a "court certified" copy of an instrument to prove or disprove it's legitimacy not use it to as a basis for a correction, unless, in so doing, all parties to the instrument have executed an affidavit allowing for the alteration.  Correct?

I took the matter to underwriting counsel and have been advised that with this "fix" we still can't insure the parcel.  Outside counsel is not willing to initiate an action to quiet title.  So.... back to the drawing board we go.  Any ideas or suggestions?

We need to keep in mind that neither I, the foreclosure attorney nor outside counsel have addressed the problems that may arise for the owners of Parcel 2.