Larson's Radiator Service, Inc.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this does not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
As stated previously, this is not a lot line dispute.  It is a case of a buyer, me, being provided a defective deed, where the legal description describes the adjacent property.  Clearly, a title company performing even a minimal amount of due diligence would be able to determine that the legal description on the deed does not match the address of the property.  No survey required to figure that out.  I have been harmed by a loss of property value, overpayment in taxes for 11 years, and surveying costs to correct this matter.  To do business under the name 'Guaranty Title', and bear no responsibility in this matter is dishonest, at best.  I simply asked Guaranty Title to help with Surveying Costs to clear up an error they are well compensated not to make.  Unfortunately, it seems my only recourse is legal action.
Regards,
Brian [redacted]

As we stated in our previous response: The sellers in the 2006 transaction conveyed the same real estate to the buyer that the sellers themselves took title to in their 2001 purchase of the real estate.  The fact that the improvements are not located on the conveyed parcel would have been made apparent had a survey had been provided to GTS at the time of the insured transaction in 2006, the seller did not provide a survey.

Response to Revdex.com Complaint Complaint Dated May 9, 2017 RE: First American Title Insurance Policy No. [redacted] On August 23, 2006, Guaranty Title Services (GTS) received an order to insure the purchase of real estate located at [redacted] County Road B in Gleason, WI. The order form...

identified the property by address.  It did not contain any reference to the acreage of the parcel being conveyed.  The sellers provided to GTS a copy of their 2001 vesting deed and a non-GTS owner’s policy of title insurance as evidence of their ownership of the parcel to be conveyed to the buyer.  GTS was not provided with the offer to purchase, nor any other information that indicated the acreage of the parcel to be conveyed. GTS conducted a standard search of the public record for the real estate described on the seller’s 2001 deed and owner’s policy.  The legal description attached to the GTS title insurance commitment was identical to the legal description shown on the seller’s title insurance policy and vesting deed. The commitment sent to all parties bore a standard exception for “encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises.”  It does not appear as if a survey of the real estate was obtained by the sellers when they purchased the parcel in 2001 or by the buyer at the time of the 2006 transaction insured by GTS.  Therefore, all parties were unaware that the seller’s improvements were not located on the insured parcel.   This matter would have been apparent had a survey been provided to GTS at the time of the 2006 transaction. To summarize…The sellers in the 2006 transaction conveyed the same real estate to the buyer that the sellers themselves took title to in their 2001 purchase of the real estate.  The fact that the improvements are not located on the conveyed parcel would have been made apparent had a survey had been provided to GTS at the time of the insured transaction in 2006.