← Back to bills and search results
2025 · Regular session · Senate bill
SB647
SB647 strengthens the process for handling suspected fraudulent property filings, including documents claiming an ownership interest rather than only a lien.
Official caption: Relating to the filing or recording of documents or instruments conveying or purporting to convey an interest in real or personal property.
Official report lists Senate author(s): West. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- SB647 strengthens the process for handling suspected fraudulent property filings, including documents claiming an ownership interest rather than only a lien.
- For a county clerk with a good-faith fraud concern, the law requires seeking county or district attorney assistance, requesting supporting documentation and forwarding what is received.
- For this section, a document is presumed not fraudulent if the filer provides supporting documentation of the described kind containing the owner’s signature, or is engaged solely in real-property closing, settlement or other transactional services, including the listed attorney, title and escrow businesses.
- County clerks acting in good faith are immune from liability and suit arising from filing, recording or refusing the described documents; commissioners courts may not discipline or otherwise take adverse employment action against them for that conduct.
What does it do?
SB647 strengthens the process for handling suspected fraudulent property filings, including documents claiming an ownership interest rather than only a lien. When a listed court or local clerk has a reasonable, good-faith basis to suspect fraud, the notice rule now expressly includes the named grantor and grantee and people named as owning or acquiring an interest. As applicable, notice also goes to the last known owner if that address differs from the named grantor, obligor or debtor’s address. The existing second-business-day notice deadlines remain. Section 51.901(a); Retained notice timing.
For a county clerk with a good-faith fraud concern, the law requires seeking county or district attorney assistance, requesting supporting documentation and forwarding what is received. The clerk must refuse a submitted filing if that attorney finds probable cause to believe it is fraudulent, or the filer does not provide the requested supporting material. This is not authority to reject every disputed document merely because someone objects. Section 51.901(d).
For this section, a document is presumed not fraudulent if the filer provides supporting documentation of the described kind containing the owner’s signature, or is engaged solely in real-property closing, settlement or other transactional services, including the listed attorney, title and escrow businesses. These are statutory presumptions, not guarantees of valid ownership. The additional supporting documentation is confidential under the Public Information Act and can be submitted without civil process; the act does not make all recorded deeds confidential. Sections 51.901(c-1) and (d-2).
County clerks acting in good faith are immune from liability and suit arising from filing, recording or refusing the described documents; commissioners courts may not discipline or otherwise take adverse employment action against them for that conduct. The act also updates the existing no-duty-to-disclose rule for the specified fraudulent real-property records in property transactions. Signed June 20, it took effect September 1, 2025, and applies to covered documents filed, recorded or offered on or after that date; earlier documents remain under former law. Sections 1–4; Earlier disclosure provision; History.
What changed along the way?
The introduced bill included a separate proposal requiring both two subscribing witnesses and an officer-certified oath to record a real-property conveyance. The Senate committee substitute removed that proposed Property Code amendment. It added the owner-signed-supporting-document presumption and confidentiality for additional materials. The Senate engrossed version retained those changes. SB647 as enacted does not impose the introduced two-witness requirement. Introduced proposal; Senate substitute.
The House substitute added the transactional-service-provider presumption and county-clerk good-faith immunity and employment protection. The House text and enrolled text match. The amendment index lists no separate floor amendments; the history’s House amendment and Senate concurrence refer to the chamber’s changed bill, not an additional indexed floor proposal. The Senate concurred May 26. House substitute; Version index; Amendment index; Actions.
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Owners and other affected parties may receive earlier warning of a suspicious ownership claim, and county clerks have explicit grounds to stop certain submissions before recording. Genuine filers may need to supply supporting material, while the presumptions help distinguish specified documented or professionally handled transactions. Confidentiality protects the additional records from public disclosure, and immunity protects good-faith clerk decisions; neither provision proves a transaction is legitimate or restores stolen title automatically. Notice, screening, presumptions and protections.
All three fiscal notes anticipate no significant state or local fiscal impact, with implementation costs absorbed using existing resources. The latest May 8 note covers the House substitute that matches the final law. No dollar value is assigned to prevented fraud, additional review work or delays; the act creates no new appropriation or criminal offense. Latest fiscal note; Complete act.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.