Month: October 2019

SC DOR announces implementation of tax lien registry as of Nov. 1

Standard

Nov 1 smaller

SC tax liens will no longer be filed in individual Counties

This blog previously discussed tax lien legislation effective March 28, 2019 that will change the way titles are examined in South Carolina. The South Carolina Department of Revenue has announced that the change will be effective November 1.

The announcement indicates the statewide tax lien registry will have a similar look and feel to the Mississippi Department of Revenue Lien Registry, which can be accessed here.

The legislation, an amendment to South Carolina Code §12-54-122, is intended to allow the Department of Revenue (DOR) to implement a statewide system of filing and indexing tax liens centrally, that is, “accessible to the public over the internet or through other means”. Once the new system in in place, the clerks of court and registers of deeds will be relieved of their statutory obligation to maintain newly filed tax liens.

The new law states that it is not to be construed as extending the effectiveness of a tax lien beyond ten years from the filing date, as set out in South Carolina Code §12-54-120.

When the new system is implemented, the law requires a notice to be posted in each county where liens are generally filed providing instructions on how to access the DOR’s tax lien database.

We will keep you posted as more details become available. Title insurance company underwriters will certainly weigh in on this issue.

Supreme Court to hear CFPB Challenge

Standard

Seila Law, LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau likely to be heard by mid-2020

CFPB building

The United States Supreme Court announced on Friday, October 18, that it will hear a case challenging the constitutionality of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The allegation in question is that the structure of the agency grants too much power to its director, in violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.

Under the current structure, the director of the CFPB cannot be fired by the president absent “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” The heads of other federal agencies may be removed at the pleasure of the president.

The order posted by the Court last Friday requested that both sides address whether the CFPB can remain in effect if its structure is found to be unconstitutional.

Concern about the structure of the agency has been voiced since its inception based on the fact that such huge power has been placed in the hands of one individual director. The argument continues that the CFPB has more power than any agency ever created by Congress. While most federal agencies are controlled by commissions or by a director who serves at the pleasure of the President, the CFPB’s sole director is removable only for cause. Also, since all of the funding of the agency is not controlled by Congress, there is little legislative oversight.

In previous hearings, when the CFPB has been asked what the appropriate remedy should be if the structure of the agency is held to be unconstitutional, the CFPB has maintained that formative statute would have to be amended to allow the President to remove the director with or without cause.  Some have suggested that all of the actions of the CFPB might be suspect if its structure is held unconstitutional. Others have suggested that agency should be headed by a multi-person, bi-partisan commission rather than a single director for greater transparency and accountability.

If a decision in the case is announced in mid-2020, the presidential election could be affected since Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s role in creating the agency is a central pillar of her presidential bid.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh has made clear in a previous dissent that he believes the structure of the agency is unconstitutional.

The Law Firm of Your Dreams

Standard

Say Goodbye to Your Boss, Say Hello to the Law Firm You’ve Always Dreamed of

JFisher Book 2Readers of this blog know I am prone to write a book report from time to time, but only about books that I think will benefit South Carolina real estate practitioners. I’ve blogged previously (twice!) about John Fisher’s The Power of a System; How to Build the Injury Law Practice of Your Dreams. John Fisher has a new book that I also recommend for dirt lawyers.

By the way, John was a speaker at our Chicago Title annual seminar on October 14, and he did not disappoint. If you missed him, I highly recommend that you begin following what he writes and that you seek out the opportunity to hear him speak.

His 2019 book is entitled The Law Firm of Your Dreams; Say Goodbye to Your Boss, Say Hello to the Law Firm You’ve Always Dreamed of.

In the formative days of his medical malpractice firm, Fisher wished for a step-by-step manual for running a profitable practice because, like the rest of us, he was not taught strategic planning, goal setting, business metrics, managing employees, managing clients, and marketing in law school. He later developed that manual for his firm, not just technical systems for running a business, but also the managerial and entrepreneurial principles to keep a constant stream of new cases and clients coming through the pipeline.

Those systems were covered in his first book, and numerous lawyers have said the book provides a roadmap for accurate and precise business development for any lawyer in any practice anywhere!

The 2019 book starts with the premise that the lawyer’s mindset is the most important aspect of creating the ideal law firm. Without the right mindset, the author says, the best policies and systems won’t do you much good. He recommends becoming a “specialist” even though that word is a “no no” under our ethical rules. John believes that if you don’t specialize in something, you will be marginal in everything.

I have a lawyer friend who has learned to specialize. He practices in the area of residential real estate closings in a coastal area. He is a sole practitioner, and he very narrowly defines the scope of his work. He seeks to make buyers, sellers, real estate agents, and lenders happy in connection with their closings. For that reason, he will not write what I call “nasty lawyer letters”. He refers that work to a friend. He will also not do any kind of work that will slow down the very well-oiled machine that keeps him churning out his closings in a timely and accurate fashion.

He may set up a simple LLC for a closing, but he refers out complicated entity formation, complicated trust formation and anything to do with estate planning. He may draft a simple set of restrictive covenants, but he refers out complicated subdivision development and commercial real estate closings of any type. His clients, lenders and real estate agents are happy and return again and again. Fellow lawyers love that he refers complicated work to them, and they refer residential closings to him in return. Win. Win. Win. John Fisher would approve of his system.

John Fisher recommends that a lawyer should delegate almost everything, both professionally and personally. He says, “your career (and life) will be chaos if you answer every phone call or email during your work day. You will never go home in time for dinner or attend your kids’ ball games if you insist on being everything for your clients. That’s why you have to delegate everything you can and do only those things you cannot delegate.”

And the best thing you can do for your career, according to this author, is to devote as much time and energy as you can to marketing and growing your law practice. A large part of both books is devoted to marketing.

I am a huge fan of the ideas and step-by-step instructions of this thoughtful lawyer and author. I invite you to read his books and follow his advice to improve your practice and your life!

Holy Statute of Frauds

Standard

Can text messages create binding real estate contracts?

shocked business woman text smaller

South Carolina real estate practitioners, do you remember that old case from law school where a contract was created on a napkin?  That case made me imagine drunken parties in a bar passing a napkin back and forth as drinks came quicker and caution evaporated.

That simple case is seen in a new light, however, as courts across the country struggle to apply the ancient statute of frauds to the evolving world of electronic communications. Telegrams, faxes and emails have all been found to satisfy the statute of frauds in some situations.

We haven’t seen a South Carolina case on the topic of text messages and binding contracts, but The Southern District of New York and a Massachusetts Land Court recently found that text messages may be sufficient to serve as evidence of the existence of binding agreements between negotiating parties.

In the New York case, the plaintiff real estate broker relied on a series of text messages to show the existence of a binding fee agreement. The court held that the text messages satisfied the writing requirement of the statute of frauds but failed to satisfy the signature requirement.

The Massachusetts court, on the other hand, found that a series of text messages did satisfy the signature requirement of the statute of frauds because a signature of a sort was included within multiple text messages between the parties. Some of the texts contained typed names of the parties beneath the substantive messages.

Real estate practitioners should caution their clients in the use of texts and other non-traditional means of communicating. Advise clients to refrain from typing their names under text messages. Better yet, advise clients to include disclaimers to the effect that no agreement involving the subject matter is final until wet signatures are applied to a physical document.

And even better than that, caution clients that texting and negotiating real estate contracts may be almost as dangerous as texting and driving.

While text messaging can’t be surpassed, at least in 2019, when it comes to speed and efficiency, a new and different level of caution may be needed when engaging in negotiations through such seemingly informal means of communicating.

Rock Hill residential real estate lawyer arrested

Standard

businessman theif briefcase smaller

Thankfully, it has been ten years or more since we’ve heard word “defalcation” used in connection with a South Carolina real estate lawyer. Sadly, we have to use that word in 2019 because a Rock Hill lawyer was arrested on September 13 after funds allegedly went missing from a residential closing. That lawyer, Thomas Givens, was suspended by the South Carolina Supreme Court on September 25.

The closing took place on July 15, but the $166,000 mortgage payoff was never made. Two months later, Givens was arrested and charged with breach of trust over $10,000. The arrest warrant reads that Givens failed to make the mortgage payoff and does not have the funds.

We usually do not experience defalcations when the economy is good. With the economic downturn that began in 2007, we learned the difficult lesson that attorneys who are prone to dip into their trust accounts often manage to keep the balls in the air as long as closings continue to occur. They typically steal from one closing to fund another. They rob Peter to pay Paul.

Like a game of musical chairs, when the music (and closings) stop, bad actor attorneys no longer have closings to provide funds for prior transgressions, and the thefts come to light.

It is a very sad commentary, and one I hoped not to see again.