SB 1552
Requires the county clerk to notify the owner of real property when an instrument affecting the title to the property is presented for recordation unless presented by a financial institution, an insurer or an attorney, or an employee or agent of the professional person.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
69%
Oppose
31%
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill requires county clerks in Oregon to notify property owners when documents affecting their property’s title are presented for recording. However, this notification isn't required if the document is submitted by a financial institution, insurance company, licensed real estate attorney, or their employee. The bill also allows the county clerk to charge a small fee for providing this notification.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsor
Cosponsor
David Brock Smith
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of SB 1552 agree that the bill is necessary to prevent "title theft," a growing problem in which individuals can change title without the owner's knowledge or consent. They believe that prompt notification of title changes is crucial to preventing potential fraud and enabling homeowners to protect themselves. Many the bill as a means to address this issue, with some advocating for additional verification steps to prevent fraudulent activities. Overall, supporters see SB 1552 as a sensible stopgap measure to protect property owners against theft and believe that it aims to provide a mechanism for homeowners to receive notifications about potential property theft, making it easier for them to safeguard their properties.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Many concerns that Senate Bill 1552 does not adequately address the issue of title theft and deed fraud in Oregon. They argue that the current wording of the bill falls short in protecting homeowners from potential title theft, with some proposing amendments to require contact with the legal owner before stamping a document or to enhance the notification system after a theft has occurred. Others question the effectiveness of the bill's notification system, citing concerns about its ability to prevent fraud and the added cost without clear benefits. Furthermore, there are doubts about the bill's ability to effectively discern fraudulent initiators and the timing of notification, raising questions about its overall efficacy in preventing title theft and deed fraud.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.