MARKETABLE RECORD TITLE ACT        H.B. 4524 (H-1):

        SUMMARY OF BILL

        REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE

 

 

 

 

 

 

House Bill 4524 (Substitute H-1 as reported without amendment)

Sponsor: Representative Douglas Wozniak

House Committee: Judiciary

Senate Committee: Regulatory Affairs

 

 

CONTENT

 

The bill would amend Public Act (PA) 200 of 1945, which defines a marketable record title to an interest in land, to do the following:

 

--       Modify the criteria used to evidence an unbroken chain of title.

--       Subject an unbroken chain of title to interests preserved between September 29, 2025, and two years after the bill’s effective date and to the Act’s exceptions.

--       Extend, from September 29, 2025, to two years after the bill’s effective date, the date by which an interest, claim, or charge in a marketable title could be preserved and kept effective by filing a notice.

--       Modify the information required to be included on a notice of claim.

--       Allow a person acting on behalf of a claimant as an agent or as authorized in writing and a property owners’ association to file notice of a claim.

--       Provide a form that could be used to record a notice of claim.

--       Modify the criteria under which a notice of claim would be deemed effective.

--       Prescribe a statement that a person could use to end or cancel a claim of interest.

--       Expand certain exceptions to the Act to include additional recorded instruments and specified infrastructure.

--       Prohibit the Act from being used for certain purposes, including those that would infringe on individual rights.

 

MCL 565.101 et al.

 

BRIEF RATIONALE

 

According to testimony, PA 200 of 1945 has been amended several times recently to allow people to preserve their interests in property before the period to do so closed; however, these amendments reportedly had inadvertent consequences in some people's abilities to preserve interests, and some people still did not know about the timely need to preserve interests. Accordingly, the bill has been suggested to modify the process and timeline for preserving interests in property.

 

        Legislative Analyst: Nathan Leaman

 

FISCAL IMPACT

 

The bill would not have a fiscal impact on the State; however, it would have an insignificant cost to local units of government in terms of administrative costs.

 

Date Completed: 9-18-25        Fiscal Analyst: Bobby Canell  

floor\hb4524                Bill Analysis @ www.senate.michigan.gov/sfa

This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.