Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lawmakers consider tougher deed‑fraud penalties and a task force after victim accounts

Judiciary Committee · February 4, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

HB130 would create a specific deed‑fraud offense, enhance penalties, add a discovery‑rule statute of limitations, and fund a task force and victim assistance. Victims told lawmakers of sudden, forged‑deed evictions; title insurers, realtors and banks supported the bill with amendments on task‑force membership and notification mechanisms.

Delegate Malcolm P. Ruff introduced HB130 to make deed fraud — forging deeds, coercing owners into conveyances, and recording counterfeit instruments — a distinct criminal offense with enhanced penalties and a discovery‑rule statute of limitations. Ruff and several victims told the committee that scammers have used forged or counterfeited instruments to transfer ownership of family property and to clear title for loans and evictions.

Nicole Gatewood, an attorney and community leader, described how deed fraud can leave older or vulnerable homeowners suddenly dispossessed with no practical recourse; Jada Ward recounted that family members lost a home and belongings when fraudulent filings were recorded and an eviction followed. Banking and title‑industry witnesses (Maryland Bankers Association, Maryland Land Title Association, Maryland Realtors) urged the committee to approve the bill with technical amendments they said would strengthen prevention, add lease forgery coverage, and place title industry and mortgage experts on the proposed task force. They also suggested a notification mechanism to alert owners about recorded transfers.

Supporters said enhanced penalties would deter organized fraud rings and create a fund to help victims cover relocation and litigation costs; critics asked for careful drafting to avoid penalizing innocent transactions and urged faster task‑force reporting. Lawmakers asked clerks and title representatives about technical prevention steps, such as basing notifications on new recordings and exploring secure record‑keeping options (including digital/immutable ledgers). The bill drew broad cross‑sector support with amendments under discussion.