Posted by Redline on June 13, 2000 at 13:26:01:
This money is included for purposes of consideration. The person signing this document is receiving this consideration and accepting this as total consideration for quit-claiming the property.
RL
Bronchick’s Quit-Claim Deed - Posted by Scott SC
Posted by Scott SC on June 13, 2000 at 13:11:20:
After looking over Bronchick’s Quit-Claim Deed, can someone explain what the $10 is all about in the following excerpt:
WITNESSETH, that the first party, for and in consideration of the sum of $10.00 and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the said Second Party, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby remise, release and quit-claim unto the Second Party, all right, title, interest, and claim which the First Party has in and to the following described lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the county of _______________________________ State of South Carolina, to-wit:
Why is that included and what’s it’s purpose?
Re: Bronchick’s Quit-Claim Deed - Posted by Michael
Posted by Michael on June 13, 2000 at 23:48:21:
for a contract to be legal, it must have consideration (money) for instance.
Re: Bronchick’s Quit-Claim Deed - Posted by Rob FL
Posted by Rob FL on June 13, 2000 at 16:15:12:
Here is my non-lawyer but 10 years in the title insurance industry answer.
All deeds must have some form of consideration. Bert and Redline described this. The clause stating “$10 and other good and valuable consideration” is somewhat of a formality. It is there to show that consideration was paid on the property.
Hundereds of years ago, people used to list the actual sales price in this “granting clause.” Then some people figured out that by using the “$10 and other good and valuable consideration” jargon that they could do this and thereby hide what the actual sales price was. During the early 1900’s America went tax crazy and developed “transfer taxes” which taxed every title transfer that got recorded in the public records. These transfer taxes are based on the sales price, so now simply by computing the transfer tax you can figure the sales price. Thus this “$10… etc.” jargon is now pretty much just a formality on the deed.
I hope that little history lesson helps.
Bert G. & Redline are correct… - Posted by David Krulac
Posted by David Krulac on June 13, 2000 at 14:27:55:
all valid contracts MUST have a consideration, usually money. $1 deeds are and have been most oftem used for a variety of deeding situations, between spouses, and family members. Also people wanting to to disquise the actual sales price. To distinquish the $1 and other consideration situation, some have used $10 (and no other consideration) as the consideration to indicate that this is the FULL and ONLY consideration.
hth
David Krulac
Re: Bronchick’s Quit-Claim Deed - Posted by Bert G
Posted by Bert G on June 13, 2000 at 14:03:25:
Redline is correct as far as it goes, but perhaps an explanation of consideration is needed. Often for a contract to be enforceable, there has to be some measure of exchange of value. I could deed you a property, but if there were a problem and it came to court, one substantive question would be “what’s in it for me?”. Thats where the consideration comes in.
Consideration doesn’t have to be money, it could be other real property, personal property, or even “love and affection”. But money is the easiest to quantify.
Used to be you’ld see “$1 and other consideration” all the time. Nowadays, a dollar is virtually worthless, so its $10. Some places even that is a joke, so they’ll put $100 in. The general idea is to show that the person giving the deed got something in return sufficient to bind the contract. The “and other valuable consideration” means the grantor got more than $10, but the deed doesn’t specify how much. (side note, recent properties I’ve bought the deed actually specifies the total sale amount. But these were warranty deeds, not QC. I think its for the benefit of the tax office.)
In cases where you’re deeding property to a trust for your own benefit, or to spouse or children, etc, consideration is generally not an issue.
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer and could very well be full of bunk, but this is the way I understand it to be.
BG