Posted by Notarysigner on 7/21/11 1:56pm
Msg #390491

Karen Aldrich

Just got two emails from this person to signup with their SS; problem is I do not know them. never emailed someone with this name and yet listed as an "undisclosed recipient".

Where are these folks getting our email address from? Are they data mining the forums or what? I wish we could put a stop to this. I do NOT sign-up with anybody and won't!

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 7/21/11 1:59pm
Msg #390493

Me too

This is the third e-mail from them. They can get our e-mail addresses off our profiles. Karen Aldrich is probably a phony name anyway.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/21/11 2:07pm
Msg #390494

Re: Me too

I got it, too... and in reading the "termas and onditions"

"Notary agrees that any legal proceedings with SIGNING COMPANY for the collection of any balance(s) due under an assignment, the action shall be brought and tried solely in the courts of Sonoma County, California."

That's a good trick... don't fall for it. It means you would have to go to them to sue them when you may otherwise be able to argue venue belongs elsewhere.

"Never use white out, colored ink, or staples! These actions will void the documents."

Well, golly... I'm just plum out of invisible ink. Guess those pesky blue and black one will just have to void the documents.

And they cannot dictate how we attach loose forms, if need be.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 7/21/11 2:41pm
Msg #390500

That's a bad sign ....

... when they are already prepped for lawsuits!

Also, it's strange they can choose the venue for litigation brought against them ... isn't that a little out of their authority? I thought courts decided venue ... but whadda I know!


And beside the fact CA notaries are required to attach certificates to documents, how does stapling a loose leaf ack/jurat to a document void the document???

Geez.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 7/21/11 3:06pm
Msg #390503

NOT condoning it, but as I understand it, GG, parties to a

contract can "agree" that any potential litigation be filed in a specific, designated court.
I you read the fine print on your credit card agreements, you may find that you have
WAIVED your right to sue them and for a trial by jury, and that any action aganist the
credit card company be by arbitration.
As I recall, this (IMO, unfair) practice has been upheld by the courts.
Not legal advice, yada, yada

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 7/21/11 3:19pm
Msg #390505

Re: NOT condoning it, but as I understand it, GG, parties to a

I think you're right, Bob. It's confusing to me what rights we can sign away and what rights we can't - despite whatever restrictions employers/contractors/schools/etc. try to place on us ... but that's another post - probably in Just Politics.

Still I find it funny that Karen A. has already thought this through and is not traveling outside her county for any lawsuits against her! How many does she plan to have or has had? Maybe we should give her an award for good thinking! Still, it reeks of "Screw the notary. When I don't pay, I'm certainly not going out of my way for their lawsuit!"

Reply by bagger on 7/21/11 3:53pm
Msg #390518

BS

You CANNOT sign away your rights.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 7/21/11 4:12pm
Msg #390526

Re: BS "You CANNOT sign away your rights"

Actually, I believe that in many cases , you can. Happens every day.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 7/21/11 4:18pm
Msg #390528

Re: BS

Sure you can. People do it all the time. Do you have a credit card? As Bob said, the fine print in just about ALL of the agreements has you waiving your right to sue them in a dispute - all disputes go before an arbitrator. You're freely waiving your right to sue them in exchange for them extending you a line of credit - and that has stood up in court (obviously, otherwise the clause wouldn't be there in the first place...).

Reply by bagger on 7/21/11 4:27pm
Msg #390530

Re: BS

Yeah right.
OK, on EVERY ticket you buy to a sporting event it says you give up your right to sue due to an accident in the game. But people still sue in a BB game whne they are injured by a foul ball or broken bat.
That clause is noting but a scare tactic.
As for CCards - you are agreeing to abide by a binding deciscion from an INDEPENDANT arbitrator. That is different than signing your rights away.

e.g. Indentured servitude is illegal here in the US. When you leave a company and they have you sign a statement that you will not work for a competitor for x years, that is invalid. You can go work for anyone, you cannot sign away your right to seek employment.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 7/22/11 6:23pm
Msg #390729

Re: BS

I don't think you have a really good grasp on the subject - maybe you should do some research.

You CAN sign away specific rights as part of an agreement; it's done every day in contracts. In the case of credit cards, you are most definitely waiving your right to sue the company; that you're agreeing to submit to arbitration doesn't change the fact that you HAVE a right to sue and you're waiving it (signing it away).

And what do tickets for sporting events and unenforceable employment contracts have to do with anything?

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/21/11 5:20pm
Msg #390538

Re: BS

No, you can always sign away venue rights if both parties agree to it. In some business contracts, this is actually very good thinking. One of my VA clients does this in her contracts... but she added it only after suing somebody for failing to pay and had to travel quite a distance. It was the judge who gave her the idea, actually... he told her that if both parties agree to it in the contract, but the way they do it is , within the contract, they agree that the contract is being signed in a specific city.

Reply by HisHughness on 7/21/11 9:12pm
Msg #390553

Re: BS

The BS is not being distributed by this SS; it is being spread around by this poster in this and subsequent posts about this subject.

It is fairly routine for contracts or agreements to stipulate the laws of the jurisdiction that will apply to the transaction, and the venue where any disputes will be litigated.

Such stipulations, of course, are sought by the party to the transaction with the strongest position for its convenience.

Reply by Teresa/FL on 7/22/11 12:27am
Msg #390590

If you bring suit in their jurisdiction, per the contract,

and win the suit, can't you claim your travel expenses as part of the suit (in addition to any monies you are suing for)?

It might not be easy to actually collect the money owed once the judgement is made in your favor, but I used this logic once to scare Dynamic Field Solutions into paying me all monies owed for three closings I performed for them more than 2 years ago.

Reply by Notarysigner on 7/21/11 2:16pm
Msg #390495

Re: Me too

Google says she's a notary in Petaluma

Reply by Alz on 7/21/11 2:30pm
Msg #390498

Well you know, there are a plethora of Notaries these days

that are jumping into the SS business.... My question is WHY?

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 7/21/11 3:34pm
Msg #390512

Re: Why did you jump into the SS business? Just curious.... n/m

Reply by Alz on 7/21/11 4:29pm
Msg #390531

Me? I'm not in the SS business? It's only me, myself & I n/m

Reply by CopperheadVA on 7/21/11 6:02pm
Msg #390540

Re: Well you know, there are a plethora of Notaries these days

I have one in my area who has done this. She has figured out a way to scam the coffee site listings and route calls to her SS phone number. She networks with a few notaries in key areas and they all list her phone SS numbers on their listings. They list themselves with names that begin with A or B so they are listed first on the list. One of her cohorts is located 40 miles away from me, but shows up first in my zip code.

Problem is, they bid their loan signing jobs at $115 or $125 and there is no way they can take a cut and still pay the notary a decent fee. Very frustrating that they can scam the listings on that site.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 7/21/11 7:19pm
Msg #390547

Linda, if you're sure of that you should let them

know..

Reply by CopperheadVA on 7/21/11 7:34pm
Msg #390549

Re: Linda, if you're sure of that you should let them

I did let the coffee site know. Sent them proof. They have not responded except that they "will look into it". They have been looking into it for quite some time with no response.... I am disgusted.

This same SS continues to call me for jobs. They called yesterday evening at 4 PM for a same day closing. When I saw it was them calling, I just sent it to VM - I will not work for them.

Reply by topflyt on 7/21/11 7:22pm
Msg #390548

Re: Well you know, there are a plethora of Notaries these days

Because NNA told them they could really make some $$ !!

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 7/21/11 10:12pm
Msg #390557

I got this also. She contacted me in June via a PM, after I posted asking about her company. She wrote fees start at $50 for a modification. She is also known as Karen Lee- and is listed as Aldrich in the find a notary section. I would like to know if anyone has really worked with her ..could be a VERY new SS just trying to get started? Kinda leary of new companies these days.

Reply by LKT/CA on 7/21/11 11:35pm
Msg #390566

<<<I did let the coffee site know. Sent them proof. They have not responded except that they "will look into it". They have been looking into it for quite some time with no response.... I am disgusted.>>>

I'm sure "somewhere", there's a way to program a site so that a person could only list an address and phone number once so that different people cannot list a SS number as "their" number, or use multiple alias listings just so they can list a SS number. I think as part of the registration process, Notaries must list their commission # - it wouldn't be displayed with the listing but for the site's record keeping purposes.

For example:

Jane M Jones,
Commission #222333444
1234 Main Street
Goofytown, NY 00000
Cell: 987-654-3210
Home: 123-456-7890
Fax: 888-777-6655

If ANY part of the above info were entered in field for a different listing, the site would reject it with a message "This_____________ has already been used, it is connected to another registration, please choose another <cell #, address.....whatever> ." There'd be no way Suzie Q Muffinhead could not use any part of the above info when she registers because that info belongs to Jane M. Jones. This would eliminate aliases and other fake listings. Each commission number is connected to ONE listing.

If you have a SS that is willing to pay for 10 listings - their own plus 9 other individuals they've recruited just so the SS can list their own phone numbers on those individual's listings.....well, that will probably win over only allowing the SS their one listing - those other 9 people probably aren't going to pay for a listing. Unfortunately, $$$ wins out over ethics.