SD does NOT REQUIRE enough info to be included in their e-mail blasts for a notary to be able to quote a fair fee that includes all that is wanted by hiring co., which, apparently annoys both parties.
Also texts and e-mails seem to not go out thru SD in a timely manner, which created the situation described by OP.
Hiring party: Not telling a notary that edocs are part of the job is not cool...whether it's 10 or 200 pages...it's time, resources and expense and should be disclosed at the start. Ditto faxbacks, split pkgs, RM applications or final, Trust signings, package size, must drop same day ARE factors that a notary needs to take into consideration when quoting.
Also, 20+ years experience talking...insisting upon 'immediate B contact & confirmation of same to hiring party' is...well...laughable. Hiring party may be sitting at computer, right next to phone, but same cannot be said of either a notary or a borrower. Plus a 'confirmation of appt. w/B' too early almost guarantees they'll forget. Anything over 2 days is 'too early', sorry to say. |
| Messages in this Thread |
|  JB Signing Services g/b/u ? - KentCan on 5/31/16 9:39am |
|  do you have more details for us, like city, state, phone -  Cheryl Elliott on 5/31/16 9:45am |
| A Louisiana notary listed in snap docs - Cheryl Elliott on 5/31/16 9:48am |
|  oh my! - Cheryl Elliott on 5/31/16 9:50am |
|  RUN! n/m - Ernest__CT on 5/31/16 9:51am |
| Must be an older listing...she was commissioned 6/2015 - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 9:59am |
|  And this.. - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 10:02am |
|  Thank you! Filing says a lot.... n/m - Ernest__CT on 5/31/16 10:07am |
| Thanks, Linda. - Cheryl Elliott on 5/31/16 10:22am |
|  Re: Thanks, Linda. - SteveS/CA on 5/31/16 3:15pm |
|  You may have more recourse since she IS out - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 3:41pm |
| I'd do the closing if she agreed to my fee. Then give her - Cari on 5/31/16 10:58am |
| <<But then there is NOTHING online about them>> - Cari on 5/31/16 11:18am |
| Call ME a skeptic...but....I find this really hard to - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 11:38am |
| Re: Call ME a skeptic...but....I find this really hard to - Cheryl Elliott on 5/31/16 12:26pm |
| Disagree, its not like she subcontracting others with no - Cari on 5/31/16 12:54pm |
| Re: Disagree, its not like she subcontracting others with no - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 1:09pm |
| Exactly. n/m - KentCan on 5/31/16 2:27pm |
| All I'm saying by that is she is taking a risk by working in - Cari on 5/31/16 8:23pm |
| Re: Disagree, its not like she subcontracting others with no - JanetK_CA on 5/31/16 5:20pm |
| Must agree with JanetK_CA and heed Sylvia-FL wisdom - Lee/AR on 5/31/16 6:54pm |
| I understand Lee, thanks for your honesty. n/m - Cari on 6/1/16 9:24am |
| <<but I suspect she's biting off too much too soon>> - Cari on 6/1/16 8:26am |
| the contracts used by the companies on SD are standard - Cari on 5/31/16 1:10pm |
| Why is SD.....a signing "platform" only...a conduit if you - Linda_H/FL on 5/31/16 1:25pm |
| Linda, you have their email, ask them. n/m - Cari on 5/31/16 8:23pm |
| that line about the 40,000 signers is from the SD platform.. - Cari on 5/31/16 12:45pm |
| Re: <<But then there is NOTHING online about them>> - KentCan on 5/31/16 11:54am |
| correction: constructive criticism. :) n/m - Cari on 5/31/16 1:07pm |
| CONCLUSION (I wanted this to work...I really did.) - KentCan on 6/1/16 12:33pm |
| Re: CONCLUSION (I wanted this to work...I really did.) - Julia Delcambre on 6/1/16 1:05pm |
| Re: CONCLUSION (I wanted this to work...I really did.) - KentCan on 6/1/16 6:37pm |
| Re: CONCLUSION (I wanted this to work...I really did.) - Felicia on 6/1/16 9:01pm |
 | What this thread says to me is SD isn't 'all that' - Lee/AR on 6/1/16 2:04pm |
| Good answer, Lee n/m - Stoli on 6/1/16 2:10pm |
| Re: What this thread says to me is SD isn - NVLSlady/VA on 6/1/16 6:09pm |
| Re: What this thread says to me is SD isn - KentCan on 6/1/16 6:30pm |
| Agreed, Lee. :) n/m - Christine/OK on 6/2/16 9:34am |
| Re: JB Signing Services g/b/u ? - Joe Ewing on 6/1/16 4:08pm |
