On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 21:26:30 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

You brought that up before. I don't see the title company even knowing
about the tank It is not real property so it would not be covered. Same
category as the paint can left in the garage. Unless there was a previous
dispute, no lien would exist.

I had a long conversation with the "advisor" at the title company.
He was strong about it. It's real property.
I too thought it might be personal property, but his point was that it is
clearly attached as a fixture to the house. And, it is.

Of course, it matters not what anyone "thinks"; what matters is how
case law in California treats a propane tank.

Googling for "Propane tank, California, real property or personal property"
I find this PDF which implies the industry wants propane tanks to be
considered "personal property", but that the state disagrees.

http://www.boe.ca.gov/proptaxes/pdf/ip99052.pdf
"Industry, the Western Propane Gas Association, disagrees with staff's
recommendation. Industry believes butane and propane tanks should be
classified as personal property."
[versus being classified as "improvements" by the state]

And, we know that improvements are, by definition, real property in
California (but not in other states).

For exampnle, here's a NJ lawyer saying it's real property (in NJ):
http://www.lawrenceyerkes.com/html/r...l-property.htm

Yet, here's a CA site which clearly mimics what we found in the tax document:
http://www.calproptax.com/1proprty.html

REAL PROPERTY in CALIFORNIA:
"Tanks, butane, propane and water softener, unburied but which remain in place,
except household"

So, it's pretty clear. The "industry" feels that propane tanks in California
are "personal property" (and so do some states, such as NJ); but the state
of California is pretty clear that it's "real property" (and they tax it
accordingly, as improvements).