Posted by CaSigner on 7/18/05 2:56pm
Msg #52927

Notary error (perhaps)

Question: I received a call form an SS for a job I did earlier this month. She says she received notice from the lending company that I forgot to stamp the All purpose Ack I attached to a signature affidavit. When you come across erros such as this and others how do you know exactly that there ws an error. Especially when they are telling you that you have to go back out there to get a document signed that was supposedly in the documents. Now I have to fed ex (at my expense) another All Purpose Ack to the lender.

Reply by CarolynCO on 7/18/05 3:00pm
Msg #52929

Tell them to fax you a copy of the incorrect one you signed and supposedly didn't stamp. Whey you use all purpose acknowledgments, do you specifically state the name of the doc you are attaching it to?

Reply by CaSigner on 7/18/05 3:09pm
Msg #52932

I always fill out the bottom portion with thumbprint when possible.

Reply by Lee/AR on 7/18/05 3:53pm
Msg #52947

Have them fax the 'error' to you. This is often a ploy to get you to make another trip on your time/dime. If you made the error--you fix it, of course. And the above poster made a good point about adding the name of the document to which you are attaching the loose certificate. That way, it can't be used for any other reason. It's a CYA for you.

Reply by CaSigner on 7/18/05 3:58pm
Msg #52948

If the notary did forget to add their stamp/signature or attach correct wording. then they need to send out another form form in which the notary pays for it right?

Reply by Merry_CA on 7/18/05 4:14pm
Msg #52950

I had a similar situation a few weeks ago. Title said my stamp was unreadable and wanted me to fax a signed, dated (not backdated) and stamped ack!!!! Just remember that in CA we cannot simply provide a signed, dated and stamped ack or jurat (no way... no how!). The signer (borrower) must be present. If this was a signature "affidavit" it needs a jurat and I would not go unless the borrower is resigning a new sig. aff. and then you attach the loose jurat and indicate the document name you are attaching it to and perhaps a loan number or some other identifying number. What you do not want is to provide a loose notarization that could be attached to some other doc. Hope this helps! I went out to the borrower at my own expense because I had never worked for the SS before and the implication was made that my payment was in jeopardy... so I chose to go the extra mile at my own expense as "insurance"... for what it's worth.

Reply by JanetK/CA on 7/18/05 4:55pm
Msg #52957

I disagree...

Merry_CA, I have to disagree with you on two points.

First of all, I do agree that I would never just send a loose certificate unattached to a document. However, I don't believe CA notary law requires a second trip to the borrower. If they did, in fact, personally appear before the notary and sign the document on the given date and it's recorded in the journal as acknowledged on that date, it's my opinion that a corrected certificate could be attached - or stamp affixed if missed, after the fact, but only by the notary. The notary should pay for any necessary shipping costs, in my opinion, too.

Secondly, there is no law in CA that says if a document is called an affidavit that it should automatically have a jurat. I see documents all the time with ack wording that have "affidavit" in the title. If you do otherwise, you are guilty of UPL! We CANNOT make that determination for a client. It is not up to us!

Reply by Merry_CA on 7/18/05 5:23pm
Msg #52964

Re: I disagree...

Oh, Janet... I did not mean to imply that it is CA law that requires a second trip to the borrower. All I know is that I had a looooong conversation with the SOS office a couple of weeks ago I had it hammered into my head that an ack must not be signed and notarized without the borrower "personally appearing" before the notary. You cannot sign an ack based on the signer "personally appearing" before the notary yesterday or last week. Also, you must not back date an ack, therefore the signer must be present.

Reply by Merry_CA on 7/18/05 5:29pm
Msg #52966

Re: I disagree...

As far as the jurat/ack issue goes of the "Affirmation of Signature"... I am calling the CA SOS today to ask the question... "If I am notarizing a document called "Affirmation of Signature" and the lender/title has included ack wording on the doc, do I just go with that or attach a loose jurat?" I'll get back to you on what I find out.

Reply by Misi/Ca on 7/18/05 5:43pm
Msg #52967

Re: I disagree...

It is not our position to determine whether the document should be notarized with an ack or a jurat. that is up to whomever drew the docs up. if you have an affirmation of signature and there is an acknowledgment at the bottom , why would you attach a jurat? That is UPL.

Reply by WAF-CA on 7/18/05 5:58pm
Msg #52968

Re: I disagree...

Hi Misi/CA - I don't want to appear stupid, because I AM a newbie, but is there actually a loose jurat form? I have the new CA jurat stamp. Would I use it on a jurat form? TIA

Reply by JanetK/CA on 7/18/05 6:06pm
Msg #52970

Re: I disagree...

The required verbiage is listed in the Handbook and on the website. I've created my own in Word, so I can print them out whenever I need more. BTW, the loose certificate with jurat verbiage works the same way as a loose cert. for an ack. You won't be able to fit the stamp on all documents requiring a jurat, so you will likely need a good supply of them. I'm sure you can order preprinted ones, too, but I prefer to use my own.

Reply by CaSigner on 7/18/05 6:14pm
Msg #52976

jurat vs ack

I have always gone by the wording. If it says "subscribed and sworn" or some variation then I always attach a jurat. If it states "I acknowledge ..." then I attach an All-purpose Ack. No one as ever questioned me on it. That doesn't mean I am correct it's that I have never been called on it.

Reply by JanetK/CA on 7/18/05 6:13pm
Msg #52973

Re: I disagree...

In the example mentioned in the original post, the borrowers had already personally appeared, signed the document on that date and it was presumably entered (or should have been...) into the journal on that date. That's a different situation than if there was another document to be notarized later that was left out of the package. In that case, the previous personal appearance wouldn't count, since the borrowers didn't sign it on that day, etc. Does that help?

Reply by CaSigner on 7/18/05 6:18pm
Msg #52977

Correct, this ack without the stamp...

was attached to an original, and signed by the bowwer, Signature affifavit. The title company called to say that I did not stamp the All-Purpose Ack I attached to the document. I signed it but no stamp. Borrowers signed original.

Reply by Merry_CA on 7/18/05 6:49pm
Msg #52982

Re: Correct, this ack without the stamp...

My situation was almost the same as yours. Title said my notary stamp on a DOT was unreadable but would not provide any proof. As I would not send them a pre-signed, dated and stamped ack after confirming with the SOS that that would be illegal the TC (who told me they never had a problem with any other notary not agreeing to overnight a signed, dated and stamped ack) agreed to email another DOT... I took it out to the borrower and executed it the legal way.

Reply by CarolynCO on 7/18/05 7:20pm
Msg #52985

Re: Correct, this ack without the stamp...

But have you asked them to fax the *missing stamp* in question Signature Affidavit?

Reply by CarolynCO on 7/18/05 7:19pm
Msg #52984

Re: I disagree...

I don't remember what the subject of the thread was called, but about a month or so back a similar and very long thread covered the same thing -- *replacement* loose acknowledgments and whether or not it has to be done in front of the borrower. I think the consensus was that the borrower did not have to be present.

Reply by kwink/ca on 7/18/05 9:03pm
Msg #52995

I had a similar situation and called SOS office and was....

told it is okay to send a "revised" AcK/Jurat as l long as it is dated the day the BRW actually appeared and to be sure to note on the cert. what it is attached to. But, now I have a question, do many/any/all of you get the bottom portion of the certificates fingerprinted?

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 7/18/05 9:48pm
Msg #53002

Re: I had a similar situation and called SOS office and was.

My certs don't have optional information so no.