INDUSTRY FIELD GUIDE
Title and settlement fee lineage data for AI
A title office may receive an estimate, a revised invoice and a final settlement disclosure containing similar charge descriptions.
NAICS 541191 · Title Abstract and Settlement Offices
A title office may receive an estimate, a revised invoice and a final settlement disclosure containing similar charge descriptions. The CFPB’s Closing Disclosure explainer shows how closing costs are organized. A fictional data sample can test reconciliation between the documents without handling a live transaction. CFPB Closing Disclosure explainer
Make a mock file with two similarly named charges from different providers. Revise one charge and supply matching evidence for just that revision. Ask which amount the disclosed line uses and flag the other fee as unresolved if its underlying source is absent. Have a settlement professional verify line mapping and version accuracy.
Use original documents and dummy amounts. Leave addresses, recorded instruments, signatures, wire instructions, buyer records and title opinions out of the package.
Describe a fictional closing-cost evidence sample
Original Fiund exercise
Similar fee names need provider and revision links to reconcile
A fictional closing-cost worksheet contains arbitrary practice amounts. It is not a real settlement disclosure and includes no property, borrower, wire instructions or title opinion.
| Record | Source | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| TS1 | Estimate E | Provider A document-preparation charge 120 units; Provider B document-preparation charge 80 units. Distinct fee references A-DOC and B-DOC. |
| TS2 | Revised invoice IA2 | Provider A, A-DOC, revised amount 135 units; explicitly supersedes A's 120-unit line. No revised B invoice supplied. |
| TS3 | Final mock worksheet | Line L1 maps A-DOC to 135 units and cites IA2. Line L2 maps B-DOC to 95 units but has no supporting invoice reference. |
Question for the model
Which final line has a documented revision basis, and can the other fee's changed amount be explained by the shared description?
Show the reference answer and checks
TS2 supports the A-DOC revision from 120 to 135 units, and TS3 ties L1 to that exact invoice. L2's 95 units differ from TS1's 80-unit B-DOC estimate without a supporting B invoice. The matching document-preparation wording does not merge the providers or justify moving A's revision to B. Report L1's supported lineage and flag L2's source gap for settlement-professional review.
- Joining fee lines by their descriptions while ignoring provider and fee references.
- Using one provider's revised invoice to justify another provider's changed charge.
Fields to preserve
- Provider and fee reference
- Disambiguates similar charge names.
- Invoice version and replacement link
- Shows which estimate changed.
- Final line and cited source
- Makes the reconciliation auditable.
Test another case
Add a B invoice for 95 units with a different fee reference. Require an unresolved mapping rather than accepting the matching amount as sufficient.
Use original mock records. Exclude transactions, legal instruments, personal details and wiring data; the exercise makes no legal fee or title determination.
Discuss a contribution
Describe the sources you control, the task they could support and what has already been checked. Use the existing-data assessment for an archive or the collection brief for a new recording project. The contributor agreement defines Fiund’s licensing authority and compensation. A guide or fictional exercise does not establish an accepted collection or a sale.