<<<It think you are stuck on the ONE cert for the two signatures.>>>
I said ONE cert for two NAMES....said nothing about signatures. Certs don't deal with signatures, they deal with NAMES. The client signs nothing in a notarial cert. Signatures in the doc, that's not my domain. NAMES in a cert are my domain. Please reread my posts, you're not comprehending what I wrote as is evidenced by this post to me.
<<<Sometimes, for discussion, you have to look at the bigger picture. I think the CA notaries that replied said they would have used TWO certs. >>>
Non sequitur and I was responding to VT and FL notaries public, not CA notaries.
<<<Discussions move along and don't get stuck beating one subject to death. You could have saved yourself a ton of key strokes by simply noticing the differences that were posted that you agreed with.>>>
Yes, I am exhausted trying to get the concept through. When some don't understand that 5 + 5 = 10 then I must rewrite the post to say 8 + 2 = 10 and if that isn't clear, then 16 - 6 = 10, 20 - 10= 10, etc., etc., and so forth. As far as noticing the differences that were posted - have you noticed that the folks I agreed with I didn't respond to? Did you notice that the FL and VT notaries are the one's I had dialogue with? As far as saving keystrokes, I'm certainly wasting them NOW!
|
| Messages in this Thread |
|  Something new for me. - Belinda/CA on 1/7/17 11:32am |
|  Re: Something new for me. n/m - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 11:59am |
| This is very common for me in commercial loan signings - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:06pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 12:08pm |
|  You are over thinking it. It's not uncommon for one document - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:10pm |
|  Re: You are over thinking it. It - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 12:26pm |
|  Got it. I would have provided two so I guess we agree. n/m - ananotary on 1/7/17 12:49pm |
|  Yes, agreed...separate certs in CA n/m - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 1:48pm |
| LKT , what CA code states that? - rengel/CA on 1/8/17 1:30pm |
| Re: LKT , what CA code states that? - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 1:54pm |
| Re: LKT , what CA code states that? -  VT_Syrup on 1/8/17 2:45pm |
| Brilliant, VT Syrup!! - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 3:33pm |
| Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - BobbiCT on 1/7/17 12:55pm |
| Very common in CA also. n/m - ananotary on 1/7/17 1:25pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 6:21pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - VT_Syrup on 1/7/17 6:33pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 8:58pm |
| Re: Very common in Trusts & Estates world .. - LKT/CA on 1/7/17 9:23pm |
| I'm sorry, but I agree with what VT was getting at - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 8:05am |
|  Re: I - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 9:44am |
| Re: Something new for me. - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 12:02am |
| Wait - I have a question... - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 9:48am |
| Yep, Linda is correct - Blueink_TN on 1/8/17 9:55am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 10:41am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 10:44am |
| One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 10:58am |
| Re: One FINAL thought - ananotary on 1/8/17 11:26am |
 | Re: One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 12:32pm |
| Re: One FINAL thought - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 11:43am |
| Re: One FINAL thought - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 12:35pm |
| Oh Lordy. n/m - ananotary on 1/8/17 12:52pm |
| Re: I agree we have agreed the whole time-lol n/m - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 1:04pm |
|  Right? I even have a post above saying that. I guess the - ananotary on 1/8/17 1:09pm |
|  Again, where is the CA code that you are talking about? - rengel/CA on 1/8/17 1:47pm |
|  Re: Again, where is the CA code that you are talking about? - LKT/CA on 1/8/17 1:57pm |
| Re: Ca code section 1193 - Laurie Manzanares on 1/8/17 9:01pm |
|  Re: Ca code section 1193 - VT_Syrup on 1/9/17 8:58am |
| Re: Wait - I have a question... - linda/ca on 1/9/17 6:21pm |
| Re:Correction...should have spelled separate, not seperate. n/m - linda/ca on 1/9/17 6:24pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - Donna LaBelle on 1/8/17 2:37pm |
| Surprised how many notaries are not commenting. - Belinda/CA on 1/8/17 5:36pm |
| Well, I've been pretty busy filling sandbags and putting - Cheryl Elliott on 1/9/17 8:18am |
| Re: Well, I*ve been pretty busy filling sandbags and puttin - VT_Syrup on 1/9/17 9:07am |
| Re: Well, I*ve been pretty busy filling sandbags and puttin - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 4:47am |
| I do exactly as Cheryl. One acknowledgement - garland/CA on 1/10/17 1:50pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - jojo_MN on 1/8/17 7:20pm |
| Me too JoJo, but they can't use the capacity in CA.. n/m - Linda_H/FL on 1/8/17 7:48pm |
| Re: Something new for me. - JanetK_CA on 1/9/17 1:50am |
| Here's the California SOS language from handbook - Cheryl Elliott on 1/9/17 8:53am |
| It is very common in commercial loan signings for one person - ananotary on 1/9/17 11:03am |
| Re: It is very common in commercial loan signings for one person - JanetK_CA on 1/9/17 3:02pm |
| Thanks all. - Belinda/CA on 1/9/17 9:43pm |
| Re: Thanks all. - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 7:45am |
| Irrelevent - ananotary on 1/10/17 10:08am |
| Bingo! - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 11:59am |
| Yikes, we are all speaking to our experience - ananotary on 1/10/17 12:02pm |
| Re: Yikes, we are all speaking to our experience - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 12:51pm |
| It is common in commerical loans. It doesn't mean - ananotary on 1/10/17 1:23pm |
| Nope, won't accept as rhetorical.... - LKT/CA on 1/10/17 8:02pm |
| OK, you win. I should have stopped a LONG time ago. - ananotary on 1/10/17 11:16pm |
