Posted by Anonymous on 5/27/04 4:00pm
Msg #2385

Emobilenotary

Just accepted 1st assignment from emobilenoarty. Believe there are comments here on them, but I do not have time to scroll through. Saw they were three stars on the company list. Are they a good company? We agreed on a fee, but the fee was not in the confirmation he sent. Any comments? Advice?

Thanks.

Reply by Lawrence Goodwin on 5/27/04 4:19pm
Msg #2388

He probably forgot to put it in the confirmation. any case, call him back and have him to send you a new confirmation with the fee stated on it.

Reply by Tammy Jurgens on 5/27/04 6:00pm
Msg #2396

I've been doing signings for them for over a year and have never had a problem with payment. Usually within 3 weeks.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/27/04 8:23pm
Msg #2405

I found them arrogant almost to the point of being abusive. I told them a year ago not to call me anymore.

Reply by Anonymous on 5/27/04 7:27pm
Msg #2398

Re: Emobilenotary--Thank you.

Thanks for the info. :)

Reply by sue on 5/27/04 8:20pm
Msg #2404

this company is my alltime number one that I would see run out of business if I had my way. I only ever did one job for them. they've received bad reviews all over these boards for years. their philosophy is that if they don't get paid, you don't get paid. the only job I ever did for them I had to call for months about payment. I never received any response until I sent my final demand letter to them. then, Tom called and he was the most obnoxious, unprofessional man I ever spoke with. if they're treating you right now, ask how they treated the notaries a year or so ago when they stiffed countless notaries in one shot.

Reply by teri on 5/27/04 8:41pm
Msg #2408

They stuck me for over $700 (never paid me a dime!) when one of their title companies was hit with an FBI investigation. Because they were not paid, I was not paid. I never signed a contract with them, and I have sued them. I've reported them to BBB with no response. I've had them in collections. The bottom line is they refuse to budge on their position that you get paid if and when they get paid....Unusual for signing companies and not worth the risk for the paltry pay. At least with title companies if its a no pay policy you know it and are well compensated for the occasional bad deal...But this was over 11 deals in a row (and the first 11 deals I ever did with them---and also the last!) Run. They are also extremely unprofessional and insulting to anyone who questions their judgment.

Reply by Renee on 5/27/04 10:46pm
Msg #2418

Because we like to monitor the boards, I find it interesting the "take" that Hugh Nations has on his relationship with us and also Terri. Sue, if you identify yourself as well, I am sure I can pull up your story. It's not that eMobileNotary is in the business of "stiffing" notaries. We are in the business of staying in business. If we aligned ourselves to pay no matter what, we would have quickly filed BK like KMS and a few other companies who paid without receiving payment.

It is my sole job to collect on signings that have not received payment. When you sign up on our website, it clearly states in our Payment Policy exactly how we pay out. I simply can't control how people will read a website. But please keep in mind, we employ schedulers who require a salary. It would not behove us not to collect on a signing because that would not allow us to pay our overhead costs.

To Annonymous, please call me direct tomorrow after 11:00a. PST. I would be more than happy to give you chapter and verse on Hugh and Terri. I would also give you a list of crediable notaries who have been with us for years. Because we document every file that runs through our office, I have substantial notes on these notaries. I don't really take issue with Terri. I feel bad for the loss of income to all of us. We all lost on the FBI situation. Again, Terri knows that I've asked her to contact me, without result. The reason she can't proceed in court with us, is because of our payment policy and it's posting. We've offered her advise on how to claim the loss on her taxes, but I guess she chose not to proceed.

The bottom line is that in the 12 years we've been in business, we've always run in the black and do collect on all outstanding debt that is not attached to a BK (which are not too frequent). We also process weekly ALL checks that are received. We don't hold onto any payments. We have a Board of Directors that we must report to and our books are extremely clean.

I certainly understand the frustration with payment. It is an on-going problem in this industry no matter if you are an independent notary or a notary that works with signing companies.

In fact, we just severed ties with Stewart Title, because I had the President tell me that they only use notaries/signing companies that know if a signing doesn't close, the notary doesn't get paid. I quickly sent him the copy of our sign in registration for Escrow/Lender, where it states that if a signing doesn't close, our full fee is still owed. We promptly received payment.

I'd like to think that my job takes away from some of the stress that an individual notary must experience when persuing payments on signings that have not paid out, etc. My relationship with our notaries remains strong. Contrary to a few notaries, they are not always correct. We all make mistakes, but we work very hard on correcting them and will continue to do so.

But as I mentioned, anyone who has an issue that has not been resolved, I will welcome all calls at 425.646.4156 (my direct line) or you may email me at [e-mail address]

Thank you for allowing me to explain our policy.
Renee

Reply by HisHughness on 5/27/04 11:07pm
Msg #2421

I invite Renee to recite the "chapter and verse on Hugh" in the confines of this forum, rather than in a private telephone conversation that cannot be rebutted. I certainly did not hide behind either anonymity or a closed conversation when I tendered my evaluation of emobile.

The Book on Hugh -- not just an isolated chapter and verse -- is that on two occasions he was treated quite rudely by a member of the emobile staff. On the second occasion, he pointed out the staff member's attitude to a supervisor. That elicited no corrective response, so he opted out of the emobile database.

I do not tolerate discourtesy well. It isn't that I consider myself more deserving of polite interaction than others; it's just that at 67, with careers as an attorney, metropolitan journalist, college instructor, magazine publisher, and association executive behind me and a financially secure future in front of me, I can tell a snide and snotty scheduler to kiss off. Which is what I did, and what I'd suggest that any other signing agent who has had the misfortune to become ensnared in the emobile database do. As for those who have to date avoided that unacclaimed distinction, I'd suggest you just go on down the road without any layovers at emobile.

And Renee, if you'd like to give me a call tomorrow, I'd be happy to give YOU the chapter and verse on emobile.

Reply by Renee on 5/27/04 11:13pm
Msg #2422

I knew you'd respond Hugh...your ego does not allow you to do anything privately. I'd like to remind you that it was eMobilenotary who severed their relationship with you, not the ego driven other way around.

If you'd like to be embarassed amongst your peers, yes Hugh, they are your peers, I'd be happy to give chapter and verse. But, yet again, being the "attorney" you are, I am sure you'd find a way to sue me.

So, the ball is in your court, your "Hughness-less".

Reply by HisHughness on 5/27/04 11:26pm
Msg #2431

Thanks, Renee. From the months I have spent quietly monitoring this forum, I'm quite honored that you would judge me a peer of the fine folk who frequent it. That accolade certainly does a lot more for my enjoyment of my latest profession than my brief but distasteful affiliation with emobile ever did.

Reply by Renee on 5/27/04 11:32pm
Msg #2434

:)...so I guess this chapter is closed. Good luck in the future Hugh.

Reply by CA_Notary on 5/27/04 11:33pm
Msg #2435

Well THIS reply certainly convinces me that emobilenotary is nothing but professionals!

I don't think you're helping your own case too much Renee.

Reply by Lawrence Goodwin on 5/28/04 9:35am
Msg #2458

Renee, you just proved your unprofessionalism. LMAO

Reply by teri on 5/28/04 5:34am
Msg #2448

Renee
This is the first that anyone has ever asked me to call regarding the payment problems of 2001. Secondly, I need no advice on how to claim the loss on my taxes. I am an accountant- and the fees itself are not deductible(only the expenses) since I am not on accrual accounting, but rather on cash accounting. Certainly the deductibility is not at issue. Third, I never signed up with your company via the website- Your firm contacted me. Therefore, I had no preexisting knowledge of your payment policy. I never signed an agreement, merely had confirmations. Any notary who works with your firm needs to be aware of the policy - and in light of all of the problems in the industry, certainly needs to be cognizant of the increasing risk of not being paid.

Reply by Anonymous on 5/28/04 4:21pm
Msg #2482

In Renee's defense:

1) I have no problem being paid if the transaction does not close. I use to work in sales on commission. Sometimes we shipped to the client and it seemed great, but the client shipped it back. The commission I has counting on went "poof." Emn's agreement says it pays when it gets paid. Thus, if they don't get paid you don't get paid. I understand the nature of the relationship. If you don't want the work, then turn it down.

2) I work for other signing companies in my metro area that have the same policy. One gives me lots of volume, their reject rate runs about 3 to 5%. I would hope for good communication on those transactions that rescind.

3) Several here forget that Emn has also incurred expenses in setting up the signing, opening a file, contacting the notary, tracking the documents. Emn has uncovered costs when a transaction does not pay. If you think it is something different, then you have a fraud claim, but I do not think that is what is going on here. Emn seems to point to a couple cases where fraud and bankruptcy were invovled. I have had clients and vendors go broke on me, been issued bad checks, all screwing up sales and relationships. It happens.

-A

Reply by HisHughness on 5/28/04 4:30pm
Msg #2483

There is a fundamental difference. The salesman has a direct relationship with his customer; the notary does not have a direct relationship with the title company. A correct analogy would be if the salesman refused to pay his gasoline credit card bill because the customer on whose behalf he incurred the expenses did not pay. Or try not paying the rent on your auto repair shop because the company whose fleet you maintained went bankrupt.

It needs to be repeated, though: If a notary is willing, as you apparently are, to accept those conditions as part of his contract, then he has no legitimate complaint.

Reply by ej1 on 5/28/04 6:21pm
Msg #2487

Very interesting reading on this thread!!!

Let me see if I get the story straight. Because Lender/Title companies sign contract with SS and signing services get paid by them no matter if loan closes or not then agents get paid no matter if loan closes or not. Hmmm, why are many SS then stating that because the loan didn't close they got nothing so I would not get anything?? I have not signed any contracts or agreed to any contract as of yet so therefore, they still owe me! (I knew this already.)
Now here we are, SS and Agent agree to a $$$ amount and it is confirmed. Solicitation is made by SS to Agent over phone. SS does not state any stipulations on being paid on confirmation call. So, should be paid.
Now, this other scenario comes into play.. Bk.. hmmm, SS has the contract with the ones that file BK. They lose their money or depending on how the BK was filed, they can recuperate maybe part of the loss through filing with the BK court when the notices are sent out to creditors. I don't know where to look but by just logical sense, just because SS loses a certain amount of funds from this BK doesn't mean that they are the ones that filed BK and they are still responsible for their debts and agreed upon fees! When a confimation letter is recieved by an agent from the SS that is an agreement to get paid for services rendered and since that be the case and SS is not the one that filed BK.. they are still responsible to pay their debts. I mean, in any other case scenario (in other businesses) the loss does not trickle down to them cutting off who they owe for a job that was completed. With the fraud cases or BK! We have bills to pay just as any other person/business and since the SS is still in operation and not the one to file BK.. give up what is due to the Agent! You write it off on your taxes instead of telling us to write it off on ours because when we try to do something like that it may have to be proven as to why that write off is there. And we may have to show that we were directly involved with the company that filed the BK or was involved with the fraud. We weren't, the SS was! So, any SS should never tell an Agent that is contracting through them that they have to write it off especially when the matter at hand is not between us and the company that stiffed the SS!

Reply by CA_Notary on 5/28/04 6:47pm
Msg #2489

ej1, my eyes hurt from trying to read your one huge paragraph!!

I've only been stiffed in this fashion once. It turns out that it was in the agent agreement that non funded loans wouldn't be paid to the notary. I was annoyed, but I did agree to it, albeit unknowingly. I've sent so many of those agreements out to various companies it's hard to keep track.

So I'm out 90 bucks, and there's no way I'll do another signing for this service (Notary on Demand). He told me that this is only the third time it's ever happened to him. He also told me that afer my signing (which the borrowers refused to sign) HE went out a second time for a signing, where they also refused to sign. That he's willing to eat 2 signings because of somebody else's screw ups tells me that he's not among our greatest business minds, and he'll end up running himself out of business eventually anyway.

My thinking is that if it happens so rarely, the signing service should eat the cost to show good faith to his notaries. But apparently the $90 is more important to him than a good notary is, so it's his loss. Companies like that are ultimately going to get stuck with the worst notaries, becuse those of us who know better won't work for them.

Reply by Curious in Seattle on 5/28/04 12:42pm
Msg #2468

Re: Emobilenotary's payment policy question for Renee

Renee
I just copy-pasted your payment policy below from your website. I don't see any statements regarding instances in which a notary would not be paid. Late payment is listed as a possibility. But not no payment. Would you clarify?


EMN Policies:
Payment:
Notary commission statements are prepared weekly. Payment of Notary Commissions are made as soon as the file closes. Files are considered closed when payment is disbursed and received by eMN;

Files are considered delinquent 30 days after the signing date.

Experience has shown that signing fees are typically the last payments disbursed by escrow, and that a 3 to 4 week turnaround is usual. eMN office staff follows up on payments or the updated status on all delinquent files.

Payment delays can be caused by redraw of the loan documents to correct errors. In some instances the escrow officer or the loan agent is waiting for the new documents, in which case a new signing schedule will be arranged, as soon as they are ready.

In some cases the file may have cancelled. eMN is paid on all files, regardless of cancel status. In those instances when the file has been cancelled and eMN has begun collection efforts, payment is usually delayed, but is always collected.

In rare instances, where fraud or bankruptcy affects the payout of the notary fees, eMN will protect the notary and itself by filing the necessary paperwork with the courts as the situation is adjudicated. Fraud and bankruptcy are risks that are taken when conducting business, and, unfortunately, disbursement of unsecured claims is minimal, if received at all.

Reply by Tammy Jurgens on 5/28/04 12:53pm
Msg #2469

Re: Emobilenotary's payment policy question for Renee

The last paragraph states that "disbursement of unsecured claims is minimal, if received at all." I believe they mean that to include payment to the notary as well. It is a little vague and could be stated more clearly. I read it to mean that we notaries will be paid on all signings (closed or not) except those that may end up being litigated and become unpayable due to fraud or bankruptcy.

I have received payment on signings that did not close before and yes, those payments were a lot later than the ones that did close, but in Renee's defense, she has always kept me apprised of the situation and the responses she has received from the escrow companies. I have never been treated rudely by any of the employees either. Frankly, I feel like we are talking about two totally different companies here.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/28/04 1:01pm
Msg #2471

Re: Emobilenotary's payment policy question for Renee

If you have a good relationship with a company or with an individual, you probably should treat the experience of others only as advisory, not as an impetus to action by you. eMobile could not stay in business if they treated everyone as they treated me -- and apparently a few others on this board. So, rely on your own experience. Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then.

Reply by Renee on 5/28/04 1:32pm
Msg #2474

Re: Emobilenotary's payment policy question for Renee

Hugh, thank you for being fair. Tammy is correct in the reading of the last paragraph on our Payment Procedures. We do file all of the necessary legal documents when a company goes down the BK path. In the 12 years we've been in business, we have had 1 BK and 1 Fraud occur.

The BK was pretty self explanatory and occurred in 1998. The Fraud was a different experience all together. We were contacted by an FBI agent from Washington D.C. who told us that the owner of FNT embezzeled $6 million and the FBI came in and froze all of the accounts.

Borrower's were left legally holding 2 mortgages. It was a well thought out scam that FNT had devised...not paying off the old loan, doctoring paperwork and placing the borrower's into new loans. Unfortunately FNT went after C and D credit borrower's who were desperate for loans.

The long and short of it was that we were all left with FNT owing us money. We had to handle the loss as the cost of doing business.

Hugh, I'd like to think that my "unprofessional" comments to you were dictated out of being tired....it just get's exasperating when we ALL work so hard and I'd like to think that we work as a team, not against one another. So, please accept my apologies.

Renee

Reply by sue on 5/28/04 1:59pm
Msg #2475

Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

I truly cannot believe you find notaries who are willing to work for your company and are willing to bear all of your risk. I do not know of any other business in the world where a company would pass their direct losses on to their vendors.

Very simplistic example:
WalMart = Stewart Title
Pepsi = E-Mobile
Domino Sugar = Nancy Notary

Walmart obtains Pepsi products but fails to pay. Pepsi in turn refuses to pay their main ingredient supplier. How long do you think Domino would be supplying sugar? not very long at all. you are able to do this because you are quite aware that notaries are not united and never will be. your business model/plan places all of your risk squarely on the shoulders of others. WE COULD CARE LESS IF YOU COLLECT FROM YOUR CLIENT. That's your problem and should never be ours.

To those of you who think they won't stiff you on the first chance they get, read the post below showing their policy. They are telling you in writing that they will stiff you. If they get you to agree with this ridiculous policy in writing, then good for them and too bad for you but if someone doesn't agree to this up front, in writing, you should pay your bills as every other legitimate company out there. WE COULD CARE LESS IF YOU END UP LIKE KMC. It's not our problem for you to pay your phone bill and staff employees. Why aren't the phone company and the staff employees being asked to share in your business losses? oh, I know, because they won't.

Reply by Renee on 5/28/04 2:20pm
Msg #2476

Re: Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

Sue, if you do a direrct signing for Stewart Title (who's President told me they will not pay notaries on files that don't close), how do you collect? What if it's more than one Title company that has this agreement?

Our policy is NOT to stiff notaries. Again, you must read our policy. The only time that a notary and US, will not get paid is when a BK or Fraud occurs.

We've placed into system an iron-clad agreement with all Escrow and Broker agents, where they MUST pay our fee whether a signing closes or not. I don't understand how we as a company are held liable for another companies BK or Fraud.

Please help me understand this. I truly would like to know your thoughts. We have never not paid on a signing UNLESS it fell under the BK/Fraud.

We have a phenomenal notary database. We have professional notaries who work very hard and we acknowledge this with us working equally as hard in collecting for fees that have not been paid.

But even more simple is, if you agree to the terms we have set forth, you work with us; if you do not, you simply don't take the job.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/28/04 3:14pm
Msg #2477

Re: Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

Thanks for the apology, Renee. It surely is accepted. I wish that sort of attitude had been evident when I first encountered my problem with eMobile.

The notary's contract is with the signing agency. If the signing agency has a problem collecting from ITS principal, that is not the concern of the notary. If I am sub-contracted to plumb a house, and the developer refuses to pay the builder, the builder is still responsible for paying my contract.

As you pointed out, there is an additional factor in the eMobile relationship: the contract that eMobile employs. However, if I as a notary have not agreed to that contract -- whether I am aware of what eMobile attempts to impose through its website or not -- then I'm not bound by any such unilateral restriction on my right to collect. Especially is that true if the signing company has initially contacted me, instead of me soliciting work from the signing company.

You put your finger on the ultimate solution: If a notary doesn't want to accept the eMobile requirements, then the notary shouldn't work for eMobile. However, if the notary is >>unaware<< of the eMobile requirements, I'm hard-pressed to understand why you think eMobile should not pay. Or, even if a notary was aware of the requirement, but did not consent to it, why you should not cut her a check. eMobile's misfortune should not be the notary's misfortune. And, as a previous poster noted, it's a lead-pipe cinch that eMobile staffers on salary didn't take a cut in pay. Do you have a written agreement with them that if a title company renegs, they won't get a check that week?

In this case, the cost to eMobile has been far greater than the roughly $1,000 it would have cost to take care of your notaries. You have lost the goodwill of many of the very group of people eMobile needs to stay in business. Not the best outcome of an already bad situation.

Reply by CA_Notary on 5/28/04 6:55pm
Msg #2491

Re: Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

It truly amazes me that so many signing services really don't seem to care about their reputations among the notaries that they use. I wonder if they realize how many good notaries they've lost because of it, and how much extra they end up spening on corrections due to having to use a pool of lesser notaries?

There is more to running a business then the immediate, obvious dollar cost. And there is also a reason why so many companies are willing to pay their notaries well - because they know it's cheaper in the long run, and it keeps their clients happy.

Reply by teri on 5/28/04 7:03pm
Msg #2493

Re: Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

The bottom line is that the risk is with the notary....Personally I do not mind sharing the risk when the fee is $150-200- but for signing companies this is a highly unusual policy and why I refuse to work for any signing company that does not pay in full upon completion of a job. I refuse to put myself at financial risk anymore for $60 (or whatever emobile pays nowadays)....Signing companies typically pay far less than title companies...and those reputable companies (even $50 companies such as At-Home Signings, Leading Edge- pay no matter what upon successful completion of the job). They understand they are paying far less than what a seasoned notary can garner in the marketplace, and thus eliminate the risk for things that are outside the notary's control. To my knowledge, emobilenotary is the only signing company asked to bear the full risk (some ask for 50% of the risk to be shared or a similar percentage)....Many title companies ask for all to be shared)....All notaries should be highly knowledgeable about the payment practices and risks associated with undertaking any assignment with the potential of a no-pay outside of their control.

Reply by Anonymous on 5/28/04 7:09pm
Msg #2494

Re: Renee, you people are the smartest business owners out there

I agree with you. I only notarize for Title companies. I'm not risking anything for $50 or $60.

Reply by sue on 5/28/04 7:19pm
Msg #2495

my final response -

I work mainly for title companies and I share the risk. While in theory I want to be paid in full every time I get in the car it doesn't work that way. Teri is correct about the way title company's work and if E-Mobile only works w/companies that pay every time good for them. I am not so fortunate but I receive $125-$250 for the majority of my assignments so I can take the risk with companies that I earn a lot of money from. I did well over 100 assignments in 2003 for a certain title company that pays me nothing if the loan doesn't fund. I probably had 4 or 5 all year that I didn't receive compensation for. was that risk worth it for me, certainly.

Renee, who was your bankruptcy in 1998? I'm guessing First Plus Direct since they were the only one I know of to go bankrupt that year. (although I never did see your company name on any of the claimant lists). They owe me too - $175 for one assignment. so, while you were paying your notaries probably $50 for the jobs, you received $175 - you should have been reaping huge profits. one little ole' me was getting 10 jobs a week - a signing service should have been getting hundreds because back then they were the 'Ditech' with volume. do you think Dan Marino didn't pay his bills because he didn't get paid? Call up Pam Butcher and ask if she paid her notaries - I'm betting the answer is yes.

as you can see, except for I believe one poster, the majority of us are telling you to take a hike. if I were Teri, I'd see you in a court room face to face and have you explain your business practices to a judge. her plane ticket is tax deductible. in my state, you'd be writing a check very quickly unless she agreed, IN WRITING (YOU KNOW, A CONTRACT) to have your problems become hers

Reply by anonymous on 5/28/04 7:33pm
Msg #2497

Re: my final response -

Wow! Right about now, BrianLA must be awfully grateful that Renee came along and took everybody's eyes off him.

Reply by SimpleNotary on 5/28/04 8:33pm
Msg #2498

Re: my final response -

This started as a simple question and look at the trail. Wow! Talk about pulling your finger out of the dike.