BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1974
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB
1974 (Gallagher)
As Amended August 19, 2016
Majority vote
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |79-0 |(May 5, 2016) |SENATE: |39-0 |(August 23, |
| | | | | |2016) |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: L. GOV.
SUMMARY: Establishes procedures for the re-recording of
recorded documents.
The Senate amendments revise and recast the provisions of the
bill to provide for a more comprehensive procedure for
re-recording documents and to specify documents that are exempt
from this procedure but are, instead, subject to more limited
requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS:
AB 1974
Page 2
1)Bill Summary. This bill establishes procedures for the
re-recording of recorded documents. The bill requires a
document that is presented to a county recorder for
re-recording to be executed and acknowledged or verified as a
new document, unless any of the following apply:
a) The document is exempt from acknowledgement and
execution under existing law;
b) The document is presented solely to correct a recording
sequence; or,
c) The document is presented solely to make a minor
correction.
This bill specifies, pursuant to b), above, that the intent of
the parties with regard to the priority of recorded documents
shall be controlling regardless of the sequence of recording
by a county recorder or the sequence of recording specified in
instructions given by a submitter to a county recorder. This
provision is declaratory of existing law, and any re-recording
of documents to change the sequential numbers assigned to a
document by the recorder shall not require the document to be
executed and acknowledged or verified as a new document.
A document presented solely to make a minor correction must be
accompanied by a corrective affidavit, which must be attached
to the original recorded instrument, paper, or notice; set out
the information corrected; be certified by the party
submitting the affidavit under penalty of perjury; and, be
acknowledged pursuant to existing law.
The bill defines "minor correction" to include any of the
following:
AB 1974
Page 3
a) An incorrect or missing address of the party to which
the instrument, paper, or notice is to be returned
following recording pursuant to existing law;
b) A clarification of illegible text pursuant to existing
law;
c) An incorrect or missing printed or typed name of an
individual or entity near the signature pursuant to
existing law; or,
d) An incorrect or missing documentary transfer tax amount
due pursuant to existing law.
This bill requires each re-recorded instrument, paper, or
notice to include a cover sheet that complies with existing
law governing the format of documents submitted for recording
and states the reason for re-recording. This bill makes
conforming changes to existing law, and provides that no
reimbursement is required by the bill.
This bill is sponsored by the County Recorders Association of
California.
1)Author's Statement. According to the author, "Under current
law, there is no codified way to re-record documents in county
recorder offices. This bill would set a standard procedure
for re-recording documents. This bill will ensure records
remain accurate when being re-recorded and will help in
keeping local government efficient."
2)Background. County recorders are responsible generally for
examining and recording all documents that deal with
establishing ownership of land in counties. This includes the
recording of title documents, notes, and home loan payoffs by
AB 1974
Page 4
homeowners, title companies, mortgage companies and government
agencies involved in real estate transactions.
Documents such as deeds, loan documents, easements, power of
attorney, liens, and other documents which affect title to or
possession of real property need to be re-recorded when there
is an error in a previously recorded document or there needs
to be a change in name or other details. There is no formal
procedure in statute to re-record documents. According to the
County Recorders Association of California, sponsor of this
measure, county recorders each have their own procedure, which
creates uncertainty over the accuracy and correct procedure
for re-recording.
3)Arguments in Support. The County Recorders Association of
California, sponsor of this measure, writes, "AB 1974 would
create a formal procedure for re-recording documents. This
will end consumer confusion when fixing errors in previously
recorded documents."
4)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
Analysis Prepared by:
Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958 FN:
0004776