Update for Recording Fees for Multiple Transactions in a Single Document

The Massachusetts Real Estate Bar Association sent me a notice that:

On July 13, 2008, Governor Patrick signed the FY 2009 budget which included outside sections amending Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 262, § 38 and Chapter 44B, § 8 to require additional recording fees for multifunctional documents. The Amendments provide that “when a document includes multiple references to a document or instrument intending or attempting to assign discharge, release, partially release, subordinate or notice any other document or instrument, each reference shall be separately indexed and separately assessed and additional recording fee.”

The intent of the Amendments is eliminate any confusion that may have arisen with respect to recording fees subsequent to the Patriots Resorts Corporation case [71 Mass. App. Ct. 114] and to codify the current practice of most Registries. The practical result is that if a single document discharges a Mortgage, an Assignment of Leases and Rents and a U.C.C., the recording fee will be $225.00, as if it were three separate discharges. The effect of the Amendments is retroactive to eliminate any potential claims for excess recording fees that may have been brought pursuant to the Patriots Resorts Case

 I previously posted on the Patriots Resorts Case [Recording Fees for Multiple Transactions in a Single Document]. After the case, the registries were still trying to charge multiple fees.  Now the legislature has sided with the Registrars.


Disclaimers

Recording Fees for Multiple Transactions in a Single Document

The Massachusetts Appeals Court issued its decision in Patriot Resorts Corp v. Register of Deeds for Berkshire North (No. 06-P-725) [Social Law Library Membership Required].

At issue was the proper interpretation of MGL c. 262, § 38 and MGL c. 44B § 8, which specifies the fees for recording documents with a registry of deeds. Patriot assigned multiple mortgage interests to a single assignee using a single assignment document. The register of deeds assessed recording fees based on the number of mortgages assigned. Patriot contended that the fee should instead have been based on the single instrument of assignment. The Superior Court agreed with the register's position. Patriot appealed to the Massachusetts Appeals Court, who agreed with Patriot.

The appeals court reversed the judgment of the Superior Court, holding that the applicable statutes did not permit the registry to charge multiple fees for a single document even if the document was effectuating multiple actions.

Even with this ruling it looks like the registries are waiting for final resolution of the case, according to Dick Howe at the Middlesex Northern Registry of Deeds.

Massachusetts Document Recording Standards

Massachusetts is finally jumping on the formatting standard bandwagon. The registries had originally planned to implement the requirement on January 1, 2007. Now the new deadline is January 1, 2008.

Documents recorded after January 1, 2008 must meet the following requirements:

1. Be on white paper of sufficient weight to reproduce in registry scanners.

2. All document pages and attachments must be on paper that is no larger than 8.5 inches by 14 inches.

3. Printing on one side only; double-sided pages will not be accepted.

4. Documents that contain printing, writing or other markings must be sufficiently dark in appearance to be legibly reproduced on standard registry scanners.

5. All printing and writing on a document must be of sufficient size to be legibly reproduced on standard registry scanners.

6. Margins on all sides of all document pages must be of sufficient size to be legibly reproduced on standard registry scanners.

7. The first page of all documents must contain a “recording information area” in the upper right hand corner measuring three inches from the top edge of the document and three inches from the right edge of the document that is free from all writing or printing.

8. Documents that do not comply with Formatting Standard 7 above may still be recorded when attached to an official registry Document Cover Sheet or through the use of some other method adopted by the registry.

I was surprised that the registrars did not set more bright-line tests like half inch margins. I am also surprised that they are taking legal sized documents.

Thanks to Dick Howe of the Essex South Registry of Deeds for pointing this out.

Safeguards for the Paperless Registry of Deeds

Dick Howe of the Middlesex North Registry of Deeds in Lowell wrote about the safeguards being put in place as the real estate records are transitioning to from book-based to paperless: Paperless Safeguards.

His objective is to make "every single documents of any relevance in the possession of the registry to be fully available electronically." In the current market of cheap electronic storage and hard drives, he could "easily load the entire electronic contents of the registry into [a] backpack and still have room for a notebook computer."

It sounds like he is getting some pushback from examiners about the conversion. Rightfully, their first concern should be about the sanctity of the public record. People and businesses invest billions of dollars into real estate and rely on the registry to confirm who owns the real estate and any limitation on the rights to the real estate.

My guess is that examiners are also concerned about the jobs. By making records more accessible and easier to search, it becomes less important to have a good examiner working in the registry.

"If some of the energy now being expended on trying to retain a 19th century, paper based way of doing things was diverted to developing imaginative ways of using our electronic records, the business of title examination would become both more efficient and more precise, but that’s just my opinion."