House Bill 524 would require North Carolina registers of deeds to provide an online fraud detection alert system that lets individuals sign up to receive email notifications when land records are filed using a monitored name. The system must be accessible from the register of deeds’ public website, allow monitoring of at least five names per email address, permit unsubscribing, and provide confirmation messages and contact information. When a deed, mortgage, deed of trust, or similar land record is recorded for a monitored identity, the registrant must be notified within 24 hours with basic recording details and instructions for locating the document.
The bill also expands North Carolina’s property-crime provisions by revising G.S. 14-117.8 to cover fraudulent rental, leasing, listing, or advertising of residential real property. It makes it a felony to rent or lease property knowing the person has no lawful ownership or leasehold interest, and to list or advertise property for sale knowing the purported seller lacks legal title or authority. In addition, such conduct is expressly treated as a violation of the state’s unfair and deceptive trade practices law, allowing civil suits and possible attorney’s fees. The new alert system and the property-crime changes would take effect October 1, 2025, with the alert system applying to land records recorded on or after that date and the criminal/civil provisions applying to causes of action arising on or after that date.
Impact
The bill would add a new statutory duty for county registers of deeds to maintain or provide access to a fraud alert portal and would create a limited liability shield for counties and registers of deeds in connection with the system. It would also amend the criminal code and consumer protection law by broadening the scope of unlawful conduct involving fraudulent real-estate rentals, leases, and sales listings, and by tying those violations to Chapter 75 unfair trade practices remedies. The practical effect is to strengthen property-title monitoring and give property owners, lenders, and other interested parties an early warning tool against deed fraud and related real-estate scams.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be framed as a consumer-protection and anti-fraud bill with a generally preventive, pro-property-owner purpose. Its structure suggests support for improving transparency in land records and deterring fraudulent real-estate activity. No contrary sentiment is documented in the supplied context, so there is no recorded evidence of opposition or amendment-driven concern in the available materials.
Contention
The main policy issues likely to arise from the bill are administrative burden, implementation cost, and liability concerns for county registers of deeds. The bill addresses some of that by allowing a reasonable fee limited to actual system-maintenance costs and by providing immunity from civil liability for the creation and operation of the alert system. Another possible point of contention is the expansion of criminal and civil exposure for real-estate-related conduct, especially the new unfair trade practices remedy and attorney-fee provision, which could be viewed as strengthening enforcement but also increasing litigation risk. No specific objections or supporters are identified in the provided transcripts or vote history.