I agree with the others that the word that goes in the blank is "their".
But Karla's post prompted me to see what changes I'll have to make in using loose certificates for some acknowledgements.
More likely than not in a little over a year I'll be operating under the same law that Karla does, the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts. The way I read it, in most situations, I can do one of two things: either use the exact short form that is contained in the law, or make sure all the required elements are present. The required elements are that the individual acknowledges to me, that I verify that the individual has the identity claimed, that I verify the signature is the signature of the individual, and the individual appear in person before me to give the acknowledgement.
Maybe Karla left out some words that didn't matter for her question, but if the original post contains the entire acknowledgement, it sees to be missing some elements. It doesn't say that the notary verified the identity of the signer, nor does it say that the notary verified that the signature on the document is the signature of the signer. So beginning in July 2016 (if the law passes) I would use a loose certificate in this case.
It's also possible that this form of acknowledgement is an extra short form that OR has authorized, in addition to the uniform acknowledgements allowed in all the states that have passed RULONA. |
