Posted by kathy/ca on 4/3/10 10:36am
Msg #330202

My tax man said "what could a Notary possibly be sued for?"

when discussing my work and the expenses such as insurance involved. He said he has never heard of such a thing except of course where fraud would be involved and it made me wonder if we overthink and concern ourselves too much about the remote possibiilty of being sued. What are your thoughts......and Happy Easter everyone!

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 4/3/10 11:24am
Msg #330204

It doesn't take much research to find that answer. Notaries are sued all the time, often as part of a group of parties.

Anyone can be sued for anything... whether or not there is merit to the case is another matter. Even still, somebody will have to foot the legal bills, and insurance helps to pay for your defense.

Often, notaries are sued by someone claiming the notary applied their seal to a fradulant signature. But... that's why our journals are so important.


Here's a good example:

http://www.wvrecord.com/news/176644-secretary-sued-over-notary-responsibilities

I'm not sure what the result of that case was, but it was in 2006. Anyone care to look it up?



And what if a signature really *is* a fraud, but just a good one, with someone presenting fake documents? For example, here in CA we are now allowed to accept certain kinds of employee ID cards from state, county and city agencies. Well, crap... how am I supposed to know if that ID card from Shasta County is legit? The knuckleheads who passed that law are responsible for that, not me.

Once again, though... the journal can serve as key evidence. In that case of false ID where the notary did everything correct, the notary might not be held responsible -- yet a claim could still be filed and legal fees still need to be paid.

Reply by Rani Sampson on 4/3/10 12:26pm
Msg #330209

Re: Secretary/Notary pressured by boss

As long as we're not 1) committing fraud or 2) offering opinions or comments about the documents, I don't think notaries have to worry much about being sued.

The secretary in the story provided by Marian_in_CA probably succumbed to pressure by her boss, the lawyer. I wouldn't be surprised if the lawyer handed the signed document to her and ordered her to notarize it. I bet she had to choose between her job and notarizing the document.

Did you notice the lawyer went bankrupt? He may have sought protection of the bankruptcy court because his shady business practices lead to lots of lawsuits against him. (Or, he might have fallen on hard times. I have no idea about the competency or ethics of the attorney in this story.)

Reply by Roger_OH on 4/3/10 12:37pm
Msg #330210

Show him the E&O thread from 4/1...

and the FedEx notary that settled for $30K!

Reply by Rani Sampson on 4/3/10 12:47pm
Msg #330212

Re: Best Practice: Separate Journal Entry

Did you see this thoughtful comment in a nearby message thread:

Message # 330189 by Robert/FL
http://www.notaryrotary.com/forums/forumsbody.asp?id=SNT71V19&forumid=1AAA00000003&messageid=848425&code=&smsg=&requestid=&action=view&format=threaded

Even though his state does not require him to, Robert follows the California practice of creating a separate notary journal entry for each notarial act performed. He convinced me to do the same!

Reply by LynnNC on 4/3/10 2:03pm
Msg #330219

Re: Best Practice: Separate Journal Entry

I am glad that we don't have to keep a separate journal entry for each document in NC. I use the NR journal and just check whether A or J or each document listed, and write down those that aren't listed. I just use separate entries for each borrower. Actually, in NC we aren't required to keep a journal, but it is 'recommended'.

Reply by BrendaTx on 4/3/10 4:03pm
Msg #330227

*What are your thoughts......and Happy Easter everyone! *

My thoughts are that you've been reading the boards long enough to know he's off base on this one...and that your tax man's remarks should be ignored. There are lots of blowhards in this world. They always know better than anyone, although they are uninformed about the opinions they make. Sounds like his comment was to show how knowledgeable he is (not).

E&O (at least mine) is one of the most inexpensive types of insurance that there is. It's so cheap that it makes no sense not to have it. As we all know, it's practically a requirement if you want to work...whether or not it's necessary for the purposes it is required, it is on the list of things that hiring entities want.

Is your tax man also a business adviser? Maybe he is more than a tax man...but before giving out such grand information to a notary professional he needs to bone up on his knowledge about your field.

Reply by Lavergne Manuel on 4/3/10 4:37pm
Msg #330230

As some one mentioned above, you can be sued for anything if you did it or not. I am being sued now because I did a signing. The borrower is suing the Lender, Title Company and My Self, the signing agent. I am being charged with the same thing as the Lender and Title Company, Fraud, Misrepresentation, Giving Legal Advice, Giving Financial Advice, Lying about the Terms of the Loan and everything they could think of. My E & O Insurance will not pay because it was not a notarial error so I'm have to pay an attorney myself. I'm told that I will eventually get out of it whenever the Judge finds out what Signing Agents do and someone will probably have to pay my attorney but in the meantime I am waiting to see if it goes to trial or not and I still have an attorney retained. So, yes your tax man is very wrong.

Reply by jba/fl on 4/3/10 4:43pm
Msg #330232

LM: please keep us posted as I know we are all

curious as to the outcome. Things like this make us feel vulnerable and we are concerned for you as well.

Reply by kathy/ca on 4/3/10 7:10pm
Msg #330258

Good luck Lavergne and please let us know the outcome! n/m

Reply by Rani Sampson on 4/4/10 12:53pm
Msg #330305

Lavergne's lawsuit

Lavergne - I'm sorry that you got swept up in this lawsuit. Assuming you performed your services as we always do (Check ID, confirm to self that signer is competent, "sign here," and otherwise offer no comments) I would expect you to be dismissed from the case.

Unfortunately, civil lawsuits take years. This lawsuit will weigh on your mind for a while, and no one will take your deposition for a long time. Be sure to keep asking your attorney friends for pro-bono and "low-bono" help. Attorneys frequently help people for free when they are wrongly involved in a lawsuit.

Reply by kathy/ca on 4/3/10 7:08pm
Msg #330257

Brenda, my tax man never suggested E & O insurance wasnt a

good idea, he just made the comment in response to my expressed need for it in the amount that I carry. I have never been without it and will never be without it because I would not chance anything happening that I would need it. His comment just got me to thinking about whether we worry more about it than we should is all.

I am very meticulous about my work as I know most of you are but as has been stated in other posts, anyone can sue for anything and none of us would want to be caught in the cross fine without protection.

Reply by Lavergne Manuel on 4/3/10 9:50pm
Msg #330271

Re: Brenda, my tax man never suggested E & O insurance wasnt a

The attorneys were supposed to have a conference in January but it was canceled for some reason and I haven't heard anything else. I am not in direct contact with my attorney.

I have an attorney friend where I live at who did not take my case because she is running for District Attorney next year and she was afraid if it went to trial it could be when she needed to be campaigning and it would take her away from her campaigning so she arranged the attorney for me and she is the point person and she is not charging me anything.

So far it has worked well because there has been no need for correspondence as of yet. Hopefully it will continue to work well.

The trial if they have one and if it is not moved will be 90 miles away from where I live. And yes I will keep you informed when something happens.

Reply by BrendaTx on 4/4/10 5:41am
Msg #330282

Oh, Okay. Kathy...Sorry that I assumed that your

tax man was the one who seemed out of touch. The conversation seemed to be between the two of you and it never occurred to me that you'd be the one to come up with that question.

While I agree that E&O is only going to cover errors of the notary certificate and nothing more, I carry it because it's cheap enough for a reasonable amount and companies seem to want it.

Recently, I have been made aware of a case where even the employer is being sued for a notary error. There are now policies to protect the employer from a notary error. I don't have all the particulars, haven't researched it, but I know the door has been opened. Watch for others to go through it. E&O is just one of those costs of doing business for us, whether it makes sense or not, it's there.

Reply by kathy/ca on 4/4/10 11:42am
Msg #330300

No one was "out of touch" in the conversation between myself

and my tax man. It was simply a comment mentioned by my tax man ("What could a notary possibly be sued for?" in discussing the need for E & O insurance in the amount I have.