Posted by Sharon Taylor on 5/14/13 12:46pm
Msg #469861

"perjury laws of..." phrase if signing in a different state

I did a split signing this morning in Tennessee on property located in California. The second party will be signing later in California. I used the notarization sections, changing the venue and lining out the second party's name. Some of the notarization sections end with the phrase "I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct."
I changed California to Tennessee since the signing took place in Tennessee, but now I'm having doubts if that was correct. I haven't dropped the package yet, so there's still time to change it to "California and Tennessee".
I'll call the agency, but advice from here would also be much appreciated, please.

Reply by jba/fl on 5/14/13 1:07pm
Msg #469863

I would have left the certificates for the CA notary, attaching my own states cert. Just easier to deal with for me anyway.

You are correct to change the venue for your location, also to strike State of CA verbiage.. I think I might have stricken the whole statement regarding perjury. Since I'm not looking at it, no further comment.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 5/14/13 1:28pm
Msg #469866

I was told by a signing company owner that one of the biggest reasons for acknowledgements being rejected by California recorders is strikeouts in the perjury clause. Also, Msg #469346 , Notarysigner reported that Alameda, Contra Costa, Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties will reject certificates that have any strikeouts at all. It wasn't clear if this prohibition applied to changing the venue, or striking out the inapplicable words in things like "he/she/they".

I seem to remember reading that Florida notaries are not allowed to prepare notarial certificates outside the presence of the signer; you should check on that before you attempt to make any correction. Even if it is allowed, if the notarial certificate is on the same page as the signature, your pretty much stuck with what you've done.

Glancing at the Florida notary manual, it appears that like my state, you don't have to word your certificates in a particular way. So could certifying under penalty of perjury be construed as a solemn affirmation? If so, wouldn't you be administering an affirmation to yourself? That wouldn't be allowed. That's why I always use loose certificate whenever I come across a California or California-inspired certificate that has the perjury wording in it.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 5/14/13 1:30pm
Msg #469867

Sorry, for a moment I thought original poster was in FL n/m

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 5/14/13 1:14pm
Msg #469864

See message # 469263 from May 8 n/m

Reply by Notarysigner on 5/14/13 1:26pm
Msg #469865

IMO you were in Tenn, it would have been alright to attach YOUR Ack and leave the Ca Ack alone. I do it all the time because other state's Ack don't have it and I am in Ca.

You will not be able to record Docs in Ca. if you're lining out the prejury wording on a Ca. Doc. because it is required here.

Reply by Lee/AR on 5/14/13 1:33pm
Msg #469868

Here's CA own law about it

California’s own Law on the subject of out-of-state notarization.
(Note: (2) (b) - I included this note for clarification)
Civil Code § 1189.
(a) (1) Any certificate of acknowledgment taken within this state shall be in the following form:

State of California
County of __________

On ______________________________________________ before me,
(here insert name and title of the officer) ,
personally appeared __________________________________ _ , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ____________________________________________ (Seal)

(2) A notary public who willfully states as true any material fact that he or she knows to be false shall be subject to a civil penalty not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000). An action to impose a civil penalty under this subdivision may be brought by the Secretary of State in an administrative proceeding or any public prosecutor in superior court, and shall be enforced as a civil judgment. A public prosecutor shall inform the secretary of any civil penalty imposed under this section.

(b) Any certificate of acknowledgment taken in another place shall be sufficient in this state if it is taken in accordance with the laws of the place where the acknowledgment is made.

(c) On documents to be filed in another state or jurisdiction of the United States, a California notary public may complete any acknowledgment form as may be required in that other state or jurisdiction on a document, provided the form does not require the notary to determine or certify that the signer holds a particular representative capacity or to make other determinations and certifications not allowed by California law.

(d) An acknowledgment provided prior to January 1, 1993, and conforming to applicable provisions of former Sections 1189, 1190, 1190a, 1190.1, 1191, and 1192, as repealed by Chapter 335 of the Statutes of 1990, shall have the same force and effect as if those sections had not been repealed.

Reply by desktopfull on 5/14/13 2:13pm
Msg #469874

Re: Here's CA own law about it

In dealing with CA properties I attach my own ack. or jurat, I don't fill in the CA aff. I struck the verbiage once and got it kicked back over recording, so now I use FL compliant certificates and haven't had a problem.

I will not sign acknowledging this statement: I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

I am not a resident nor a notary for CA & by signing I am acknowledging that CA has jurisdiction over my notarization, I don't think FL would appreciate that at all.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 5/14/13 1:34pm
Msg #469869

I agree with Notarysigner's result, but not the reason: "You will not be able to record Docs in Ca. if you're lining out the prejury wording on a Ca. Doc. because it is required here." California only requires that notarizations performed outside the state comply with the place where the notarization was done. Some California recorders have taken it upon themselves to reject certificates with strikeouts, but there is no obvious authority for them to do so. Essentially their authority is that nobody wants to spend the time or money to sue them, so they get away with making up arbitrary rules.

Reply by John Tennant on 5/14/13 2:14pm
Msg #469875

Whether it is an arbitrary rule or not, does any reliable notary want it to be kicked back? Not me, I am there for the signor and do what it legally, and/or arbitrarily, takes.

Reply by desktopfull on 5/14/13 2:22pm
Msg #469878

Given you live in CA of course you would sign that ack., I would also expect you to attach that same certificate to any document on a property in another state that was notarized in CA because that is the law in your state. But notaries outside of the state of CA need to follow their state's regulations for notarial wording too.

Reply by John Tennant on 5/14/13 2:30pm
Msg #469881

I totally agree that notaries need to follow their state's laws. In absence of anything requiring otherwise I would use whatever would be acceptable in the state that it is going to be recorded in. I responded to the comment regarding "an arbitrary decision" that sometimes crops up here in CA. I would do what ever is legal, within my states laws, to avoid that type of decision.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 5/14/13 3:24pm
Msg #469894

Agree with John Tennant

As I indicated in my earlier post, I use a loose certificate for CA properties so I don't have to strike anything out and thus I avoid the risk that a California recorder will arbitrarily reject the certificate.

Reply by LKT/CA on 5/14/13 6:05pm
Msg #469921

I really don't see what the big deal is

If your state HAS specific wording, by all means - follow your state's rule. Attach *your* state's compliant acknowledgement....CA is supposed to accept your state's compliant certificate.

If your state does NOT have specific wording, and you're allowed to complete ANY worded acknowledgement, if the "penalty of perjury" sentence is there, just change the state - CA to *your* state. I've seen docs notarized from other states and the notary did exactly that. I've also seen the "penalty of perjury" sentence with a blank line - so the notary can write in their state. This means you're now on the hot seat under the laws of *your* state.

Therefore, what's the big deal???

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 5/14/13 7:16pm
Msg #469935

Re: I really don't see what the big deal is


The deal is that many NRers have posted that (overzealous) county recorders in CA are rejecting acks where they have crossed out CA and put in the name of their state, causing TCs to make the NSA redo these.

Reply by LKT/CA on 5/14/13 7:49pm
Msg #469951

Re: I really don't see what the big deal is

Except for the OP, the main theme I'm reading is that the entire "penalty of perjury" sentence is being struck out and initialed, which is getting rejected, not a change in just the state initials. I guess the county recorders have an aversion to strike outs and only like "clean" paperwork. <<shrug>>

Reply by Sandra G Holland on 5/14/13 10:25pm
Msg #469988

Re: I really don't see what the big deal is

I have read several times about the "loose ack", which I've never used. In my general notary work for years before I became a signing agent, I just changed the wording where needed. I understand that many use the loose ack to save time. In my general notary work, I have many times written out the words when the preparer did not provide anything. Overall, are there any other advantages to using the loose ack other than time/accuracy or perhaps a recorder preferring clean work? There is no problem with my handwriting. I have not had to do this in signing work and so far changes have not been a big deal. Thanks.

Reply by LKT/CA on 5/14/13 11:10pm
Msg #469996

Re: I really don't see what the big deal is

<<< In my general notary work, I have many times written out the words when the preparer did not provide anything. Overall, are there any other advantages to using the loose ack other than time/accuracy or perhaps a recorder preferring clean work?>>>

Not really - I think those two reasons (clean page and saves time) sum up why most use pre-printed certs. CA acknowledgments are too wordy and time consuming to hand write. Most docs don't have the space to hand write a CA ack....maybe a jurat.

Reply by Sharon Taylor on 5/15/13 12:13am
Msg #469999

Thanks for all the input n/m

Reply by Sharon Taylor on 5/15/13 12:21am
Msg #470000

Thanks for all the input

Oops, the other post with this title should not have been an N/M, but I accidentally hit the wrong key and it posted before I could type the message to go with it.
Anyway, I did call the title company and was told that it was OK to change the state from California to Tennessee since I couldn't be expected to be familiar with California's perjury laws, only those of Tennessee where the signing took place. I did not cross out any other part of the perjury clause, only changed the state.
The title company agent also advised me to initial the change and also initial where I had changed "State of California" to "State of Tennessee" in the venue. Since no county had been preprinted, I merely entered the county where the signing took place, no change needed there.
In future, I believe I will follow the suggestion of some here who say they use loose acknowledgments instead, leaving the preprinted California one for the notary who will be handling the signing by the second party in California.
Thanks, everyone.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 5/15/13 1:43am
Msg #470002

Re: Thanks for all the input

I agree with your decision about certificates in a split signing. Leaving the provided certificate for the 2nd notary when it's correct for that state is not only a matter of courtesy, it also make sense. Otherwise, you end up with two modified or corrected certificates when the one provided could have been used by one of you. But if I'm notarizing the first signer and the provided certificate IS correct for my state, I'll go ahead and use it.