Posted by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 12:30pm
Msg #369862

Signing tonight, concerned about borrower's name

Was looking over my docs for a signing tonight and on several docs the female borrower's maiden name is appearing - things like a quit claim - and all of those need to be notarized.

I've put a message in to the SS/TC and plan on calling the borrower, but should she not have ID in that name, do I cancel the signing or what could I do? Witnesses? Trying to get some thinking done ahead of time and appreciate the help.

Thanks!

Reply by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 12:45pm
Msg #369866

She does not have ID in that name, nearest witnesses would be her in-laws (so not good, according to WA law).

Running out of ideas - anyone have something for me?

Reply by PAW on 1/24/11 12:47pm
Msg #369868

Since WA does allow for inclusion of 'representative capacity' in notary certificates, it may be permissible to use WATA or WTTA statements. For example, "Jane Doe [name as shown on ID] who acquired title as Jane Smith [name as shown on existing title] ... " or "Jane Doe [name as shown on ID] who took title as Jane Smith [name as shown on existing title] ... "

Reply by PAW on 1/24/11 12:47pm
Msg #369870

Check with the WA SOS n/m

Reply by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 12:48pm
Msg #369871

Ooh, I like that a lot! Thanks so much!

Reply by John/CT on 1/24/11 12:47pm
Msg #369869

Re: Concerned about borrower's name

A staff attorney at our SOS office once advised me that I just need to be satisfied that the previously-named individual (i.e., maiden name) is one and the same as the person on their current gov't-issued picture ID. In this case, I've used an old passport or marriage license (not the "souvenier" kind issued by the church, etc) to establish the "bridge" between the two names. I also make an entry and notation in my journal for both names. Hopefully, that might work for you.

Reply by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 12:49pm
Msg #369874

Re: Concerned about borrower's name

She does have her marriage license, so that may work, too.

I've got a call into the SOS and SS. I just want this ironed out before I get there.

Thank you all for the help!

Reply by John/CT on 1/24/11 12:54pm
Msg #369877

Re: Marrige License

In my example, it would show Miss (maiden name) married to Mr. (married name ... matching current ID), date of birth (matches current ID) and signature (also close to matching current ID). The license should be issued by a "political subdivison", like a town or city. Hope this helps.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/24/11 12:48pm
Msg #369872

Can you use "who took title as" in your certificates? So if you can assure yourself that she was FORMERLY known as XX, you can state in your certs "sworn (or acknowledged) by Jane A. Doe, who took title as Jane A. Smith, and provided ID in the name of Jane A. Doe as ID.

Your handbook states "A notary public has satisfactory evidence that a person is the person described in a document if that person: (a) Is personally known to the notary public; (b) is identified upon the oath or affirmation of a credible witness personally known to the notary public; or (c) is identified on the basis of identification documents.

Can you satisfy (b)? - will you personally know the CW? Also, your CW will be taking an oath - what does that oath consist of -

Will title allow her to sign the docs needing notarization with a f/k/a or a/k/a?

Just some quick thoughts...good luck.

Reply by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 12:51pm
Msg #369875

This is why I value this board - thank you. I will bring this issues up with the SS/TC. I don't personally know her, but she will provide a marriage license plus her current DL so I think I can live with it if we have to do a fka or aka or option b.

Thank you!!

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/24/11 12:53pm
Msg #369876

Careful with Option B

YOU need to personally know the credible witness...

Reply by John/CT on 1/24/11 12:56pm
Msg #369878

My example = close to Option C n/m

Reply by Les_CO on 1/24/11 1:39pm
Msg #369883

Just Curious?


I feel for Shauna, having to jump through to get someone else’s mistake corrected at the last minute, but I think she’s got it covered now. But this happens every day!

And we see many/many complaints about the worthless, incompetent SS that hire us.

So is this the fault of the SS (that may have never seen the docs)?
Or is this the fault of Title that did not include the correct (current) name in the package.
Or the lenders that MUST know these borrowers are now married, and that the wife is now using her married name?
Or the LO that took the application, and has spoken with the borrowers at least several times, and probably has a copy of their ID’s?
Is this another case of where as someone on another board said: “TITLE knows exactly what needs to be done - and they know BEFORE the LO/Lender does - they've done the title search AND issued their title commitment well before the call goes out for a NSA so they know how title is held and who has to sign off on the docs”
If Title knows this why are the docs not in the correct name?
Does anybody record their marriage license/certificate?
I also wonder if the SS that hired Shauna has done anything to help her?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/24/11 2:44pm
Msg #369896

Re: Just Curious?

Interesting points, Les.

"If Title knows this why are the docs not in the correct name?"

This also reminds me of something I often wonder about. That is, why do the escrow docs so often have the borrower's name incorrect (as it was written on the loan application vs. how the vesting was last recorded), when the loan docs are correct. You'd think that they, of all people, would be paying attention to this. (It's usually a matter of a middle initial or a shortened version of a name, so IDing isn't an issue, but still...)

Reply by Les_CO on 1/24/11 2:58pm
Msg #369903

Re: Just Curious?

And why is it that the lender/LO that knows everything about the borrower from their credit score to their shoe size, and has been working on the file at least for weeks, maybe months, with all their talented people, and a legal dept. and that makes many thousands of dollars off each of these transactions, and the Title companies with all their knowledge, and experience of doing many thousands of transactions, upon which they too make many hundreds, some thousands of dollars…. leave it to the lowly Notary Signing Agent, that if she’s lucky makes a little over a hundred bucks, to go through all this trouble, last minute, to fix this stuff?

Reply by John/CT on 1/24/11 4:24pm
Msg #369918

Who can be blamed?

Nobody that I can think of. Everyone knew the borrower took title in her maiden name ... ergo, the QCD to set the record straight. Or, am I missing something here.

Reply by Les_CO on 1/25/11 11:32am
Msg #369999

Re: Who can be blamed?

Exactly John! An easy fix. A simple corrective deed. But not notary’s job to try and do the fix, or even have to tell someone about it. And someone, other than the Notary, knew about the ‘problem’ for quite a while. I have this mental picture of someone at Title blindly scanning in docs to send to the notary, without a care in the world. The package should not have contained any documents requiring the signature of the signer in her maiden name that she had no valid ID for. JMO

Reply by Ronnie_WA on 1/24/11 1:43pm
Msg #369885

Using a representative capacity acknowledgment would not work in WA, nor would prior identification as the regs specifically state that "satisfactory ID" must be a CURRENT government issued identification that contains the name, photo, physical description and signature of the affiant. You must show the name on the DL as the person that has appeared before you. The only way you could use the credible witness for the prior name is if that witness is personally known to both you and the affiant. The title company and lender need to collect whatever documents will satisfy themselves as to the prior identity of their customer.

Remember what our WA regulator counselled us in the bulletins:
"I would understand that notaries have been sued civilly and prosecuted criminally for everything from performing innocent-but-incorrect notary acts to actively participating in fraud with their notary stamps."

Reply by Shauna/WA on 1/24/11 4:31pm
Msg #369920

In the end, I could maybe make something work, but it was easier to have title redraw the pertinant pages so that it would work without me putting my behind on the line. So that's what we did. Crisis averted, I hope.