Join  |  Login  |   Cart    

Notary Rotary
Just PoliticsLeisure
Welcome to the Notary Talk General Discussion Forum. Before posting, please read the


Marian, this brings us back to the original issue I raised
Posted by FlaNotary2 of FL on 7/27/11 8:15am Msg #391516
in our last thread on the subject... Isn't it one of the notary's basic duties to prevent fraud? How can a notary perform this duty if he/she notarizes a statement that he/she knows to be fraudulent?

Good practices have to pick up where the laws leave a "gray area"... and there is no question, in my mind, that a Credible Witness should not even be OFFERED to a client that has an ID but doesn't have it with them at the moment (or the ID contains errors, etc.). If the person tells me "Yes, I have an ID but I don't have it with me, so I would like to use a Credible Witness", then I would KNOW that the statements the CWs are swearing to are FALSE, and it is my duty to prevent this fraud.

This is, again, related to how the California SOS makes assertions that have no legal basis - especially the SOS's claim that the notary's function relates only to the signature. This is simply incorrect and there is no California law which backs this claim up. Yes, in most circumstances the contents of a sworn statement are not the notary's concern, but if the notary KNOWS that the sworn statement is false, the notary is a perpetrator of the crime as well by notarizing that statement.

Picture yourself in front of a judge over this - I doubt that the judge will be impressed by your "I can't refuse a lawful request!" assertion. He will probably be much more concerned that you notarized a statement you knew to be false. Using the "UPL" excuse is another cop-out. People are way too paranoid about UPL. The instances in which a state bar association will actually prosecute UPL are for extreme circumstances, not "I determined that the person before me was the person named in the document".

The California SOS has tried to way oversimplify a notary's duties. I understand your dilemma, Marian - you feel like you must follow the handbook because that is what you are given. I would argue that, unless your oath of office required you to read the handbook (and our oath in Florida does not), you are bound by the LAWS themselves, and not the handbook. The handbook is a GUIDE - it is not intended to be a supplement to professional legal advice. The SOS herself does not write your handbook - the handbook is written by people who likely have no legal education. Their handbook is only one person's interpretation of the actual laws.

When a law is confusing to the notary, the notary must make his/her own interpretation of the law and put it into practice, unless a legal opinion to the contrary is made by an attorney, a court, or the attorney general.

Thank God that I am not in California.
PrevNextReturn to General Discussion    Post a Public Reply to this MessageSend Author a Private Message


Messages in this Thread
 Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 7:29pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  jba/fl on 7/26/11 7:35pm
 LOL! Technicalities! n/m -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 7:36pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  Notarysigner on 7/26/11 8:12pm
 correction.. -  Notarysigner on 7/26/11 8:14pm
 Re: correction.. -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 8:17pm
 Re: correction.. -  Notarysigner on 7/26/11 8:22pm
 Re: correction.. -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 8:28pm
 First of all, this circumstance is extremely unlikely - FlaNotary2 on 7/26/11 8:19pm
 Re: First of all, this circumstance is extremely unlikely -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 8:26pm
 To add to that... -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 8:38pm
 I could easily justify the refusal - FlaNotary2 on 7/26/11 8:46pm
 Re: I could easily justify the refusal -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 8:54pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... - Lee/AR on 7/26/11 8:20pm
 PLEASE continue I believe you. LOL n/m -  Notarysigner on 7/26/11 8:24pm
 It's also obvious that the writer failed to mention taht - FlaNotary2 on 7/26/11 8:27pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  MW/VA on 7/26/11 8:44pm
 Hence, the "gray area" I mentioned. You guys are funny! n/m - Jules/CA on 7/26/11 9:16pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  JanetK_CA on 7/27/11 11:51pm
 On another note - FlaNotary2 on 7/26/11 8:47pm
 Re: On another note - Sylvia_FL on 7/26/11 9:25pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... - Jules/CA on 7/26/11 9:11pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 9:40pm
 How did Irene get to CA? -  jba/fl on 7/26/11 10:06pm
 Re: How did Irene get to CA? - Lee/AR on 7/26/11 10:12pm
 Re: How did Irene get to CA? -  jba/fl on 7/26/11 10:13pm
 You guys are too funny. n/m -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 10:17pm
 Re: How did Irene get to CA? - Jules/CA on 7/26/11 10:48pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... - Jules/CA on 7/26/11 10:45pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  LKT/CA on 7/26/11 11:11pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  Marian_in_CA on 7/26/11 11:28pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  LKT/CA on 7/26/11 11:38pm
 Re: Interesting information from CA SoS's office... -  Marian_in_CA on 7/27/11 12:09am
 Marian, this brings us back to the original issue I raised - FlaNotary2 on 7/27/11 8:15am
 Re: Marian, this brings us back to the original issue I raised -  Marian_in_CA on 7/27/11 10:56am
 You're comparing apples to oranges - FlaNotary2 on 7/27/11 11:46am
 Re: You're comparing apples to oranges -  Marian_in_CA on 7/27/11 1:09pm
 Re: You're comparing apples to oranges - Jules/CA on 8/2/11 8:59pm



 
Find a Notary   Notary Supplies   Terms   Privacy Statement   Help/FAQ   About   Contact Us   Archive  
 
Notary Rotary™ is a trademark of Notary Rotary. Copyright © 2002-2024, Notary Rotary, Inc.  All rights reserved.
500 New York Ave, Des Moines, IA 50313.