Why the title insurance industry remains on self-imposed party probation

Firms are trying to follow the rules for now to be on the safe side

TRD New York /
Aug.August 28, 2019 08:15 AM
Several court reversals as to what title insurance brokers can and can’t do have created a confusing work environment (Credit: iStock)

Several court reversals as to what title insurance brokers can and can’t do have created a confusing work environment (Credit: iStock)

They won’t be bringing clients to strip clubs. And they won’t be buying up luxury boxes at the Garden to gin up business. Not yet, anyway.

Despite a recent court ruling that reversed the state’s prohibition on wining-and-dining clients, the title insurance industry is taking it slow.

Several court reversals as to what title insurance brokers can and can’t do have created a confusing work environment, and multiple executives said their companies are choosing to play it safe and abide by the regulations for now in case they ultimately remain on the books.

Aaron Krantz, vice president of business development at Omni Title Agency, described the string of court rulings as “ping pong” and said the general feeling in the industry was one of caution. As far as Omni is concerned, the Department of Financial Service regulations are still the law, he said.

“We’re staying in compliance even though it’s supposedly out because we don’t know what’s next,” he said of the rules. “So we are acting as if they’re still enacted.”

Stephen Spedaliere, counsel for Statewide Abstract Corporation, said there was “cautious optimism” in the industry that the rules will stay annulled at the Appellate Division this time, but title insurance companies remain largely confused and cautious in the meantime. This is especially true given the possibility that, if the regulations are reinstated, DFS might revisit actions companies took that went against them when they were not being enforced, he said.

“Everybody is kind of trying to feel their way through until we know firmly what the rules are going to be,” he said.

At the beginning of 2018, the state’s Department of Financial Services imposed strict new regulations on the industry, banning the companies from their infamous wining and dining of clients in an attempt to stop them from overcharging consumers. The New York State Land Title Association filed a lawsuit against the rules soon after, and New York Supreme Court Judge Eileen Rakower annulled them all that summer.

But DFS quickly appealed Rakower’s decision, and at the beginning of 2019, the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court reinstated most of the rules while remanding other parts of the case back to the lower court.

And then, in a somewhat surprising move, Rakower overturned the entire law again in August, writing that it violated the Constitution’s First and Fifth Amendments. DFS is appealing her ruling once again, meaning it could just be another few months before the rules get reinstated for a second time.

DFS did not respond to multiple requests for comment, and the NYSLTA declined to comment.

In the Appellate Court’s initial January ruling, it voided the restrictions that DFS had put on payments to closers as part of the new regulations. Jim Hunter, president of the New York State Closers Association, said their segment of the title insurance industry has remained stable since then, despite the uncertainty surrounding other aspects of the regulations.

They have not focused very much on the remaining aspects of the court battle, he said.

“We’re grateful as a class of professionals that the industry is treating us the way they treated us before the regulations went into effect,” he said, “and we don’t feel it’s our place to interject ourselves into what’s happening between them and DFS.”


Related Articles

arrow_forward_ios
Firefighters work to extinguish a fire as a building burns after an explosion on 2nd Avenue in March 26, 2015 (Credit: Getty Images)

$24K in rent set in motion the fatal 2015 East Village blast. Prison now looms for the landlord and contractors

Harry and Linda Macklowe (Credit: Getty Images, iStock)

The Macklowe’s massive art collection nears auction

Heritage Equity Partners Toby Moskovits and Michael Lichtenstein

Lawsuit: Toby Moskovits, Michael Lichtenstein owe investor $3M

250 Fort Washington Ave and 310 Convent Avenue with Housing Rights Initiative’s Aaron Carr (Credit: iStock, Facebook, Google Maps)

Two more rent-overcharge lawsuits get class-action status

1074 Eastern Parkway in Brooklyn (Credit: Google Maps)

Crown Heights tenants sue infamous landlord for rent overcharges

Rent overcharge claims against landlords are on the rise (Credit: iStock)

Rent overcharge cases pile up

Crunch at 250 West 54th Street and Zar Property NY Principas David Zar (top) and Dario Zar (Credit: Google Maps)

Crunch sues landlord for trying to evict it from 54th Street location

Judge Janet DiFiore and attorney Deborah Riegel (Credit: North Country Public Radio and Rosenberg & Estis)

High court hearing rent overcharge cases puts lawyers on the spot

arrow_forward_ios
Loading...