Posted by Roger/OH on 5/29/04 11:34am
Msg #2502

Renee, here's the flaw in your policy.

My understanding is you only pay the notary when and if YOU get paid. This results in the notary being put in the difficult (and unethical) position of having a financial interest in the outcome of the loan. The notary is there on behalf of the state to confirm ID, witness signatures per state law, and return the docs; after they have done their job, they have no control over what happens to the loan. Like an appraiser, they are a contracted service and should be a fixed cost of doing business. I doubt that your plumber or dentist would settle for a partial payment based on what happens after they are done with you; they want payment for services rendered, and so do notaries. Notaries are NOT part of the loan!

Reply by Renee on 5/29/04 12:34pm
Msg #2503

I absolutely agree with you Roger. That is why we have in place a collections department that is committed to past due accounts. It's not IF we get paid, but when. Which is a common problem in this industry whether you are an independent notary or SS.

I know this string of comments could go on forever. I appreciate the constructive critism given by a few. I'd like to think that we work with the notaries not against them. We all have a vested interest in getting paid.

On that note, I bow out. I know a few of you could beat this dead horse, but at this stage I humbly will go back to my office and work on any collection issues we have.

Thank you.
R

Reply by HisHughness on 5/29/04 12:47pm
Msg #2505

Renee, I share with you the desire to avoid pummeling dead horses. However, you either missed or ignored the point made by a couple of posters. With them, it was not a matter of >>when<< they got paid, but >>whether<<. One, if you recall, had been denied $700 in payments she had earned. That was the point Roger made: The notary acquired a vested interest in funding the loans in question.

As distasteful as it is to signing agents, I think most would at least reluctantly go along with reasonable delays in payment occasioned by a title company's laggardness. Non-payment is a horse of a different color; it is also a horse that is very much alive -- and kicking signing agents right in the wallet.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/29/04 12:37pm
Msg #2504

You raise a critical point, Roger, when you contend that requiring funding of the loan before paying a notary renders the notary a party at interest in the loan. It is a direct conflict of interest.

It is easy to postulate a case wherein either a document is backdated, or a loan will not fund. In that case, the notary, who by law should be a totally disinterested and objective official performing only a ministerial function, is placed in the position of either violating his oath, or foregoing compensation which by all rights he has earned.

I am continually impressed by the depth of insights I encounter on this board.

Reply by Brenda Stone on 5/29/04 12:52pm
Msg #2506

Policy flaws

I have worked for eMn and have no complaints and have only good things to say about my experience with them.

Nonetheless, I appreciate Roger/OH's statements because I had not thought of the problem that this type of arrangement could present in the view of paid vs not paid. It is interesting grist for the brain mill.

With gratetful thoughts and prayers for our military and vets,

Brenda

Reply by NewNotary on 5/29/04 6:53pm
Msg #2510

Re: Emobilenotary Thanks Brenda

Thanks Brenda. I value your comments. I see you post here frequently. Thanks for speaking up on this hotly debated issue.

Reply by Brenda Stone on 5/30/04 8:29pm
Msg #2523

Re: Emobilenotary-- for New Notary

New Notary - Sure thing. My experience was good and my check came almost immediately. I would not propose, however, that my statement should be in argument with anyone on this board or their experiences. I was not sharing an opinion in this case. What I stated was fact.

Since I was commenting on their policy as discussed by Roger/OH, I felt it was appropriate to include my own experience with the company in the comment. As things stand now for me, I will gladly work for them again if they call me.

Sincerely, Brenda

Reply by Anonymous on 5/29/04 6:48pm
Msg #2509

I disagree. In fact, no conflict.

I disagree. In fact, you could look at the notary sign as just the opposite from a vested interest in the loan. The deal could be that if the borrow changes their mind or some other flaw is found in the loan, the notary does not get paid, in otherwords, the notary is not pressuring the loan to go close and has agreed to walk away from the fee, unlike the appraiser, who gets paid regardless. It is perfectly legal for the signing service to contract for business in this matter and it does. Furthermore, it is perfectly legal for them to add a clause stating if they do not get paid you do not get paid. If you have agree to this, then that is the contract.

The extrapolation could get rather wild, doesn't child services have a conflict in taking possession of children from their parents? They more children they take, the more employed they are etc, etc. More strange examples could be created. You could be asked to notarize a 1000 page document. Who knows what it says? Who cares? That is not your job. You job is to verify identify and notarize as your state requires. That is all.

As for contracted terms of payment. Most courts would apply a degree of reasonableness and I believe it is reasonable for notaries to be paid on this basis. Lawyers take all sorts of cases on contingency. TV stations can run ads on certain percentage over viewership and if it doesn't happen they don't get paid etc, etc etc.

If you want guaranteed business, then work for those that will provide it and pass on these types of clients. Have the SAs sign your contract. If you think you have a fraud claim then press it. Part of small and big business is uncollectable receiveables, it happens.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/29/04 10:18pm
Msg #2511

Re: I disagree. In fact, no conflict.

To the extent that I was able to follow the argument in the previous posting, I'll attempt to respond:
1. I have no idea why the poster contends an appraiser would be entitled to payment upon the failure of loan to close, but a notary would not be. The appraiser -- or the surveyor, or the inspector, or any other professional -- who is confronted with payment only if the loan closes is exposed to the possibility of being influenced, just as is the notary. Perhaps that is >>why<< the appraiser gets paid regardless.
2. Children's protective services personnel don't get paid by piecework --seize one child, get $X, seize 2 children, get $XX. A social services worker will draw his salary regardless of how many children he removes from homes. In fact, it would immediately be recognized as a conflict if the social services worker was placed in the same position as the notary, where he would not draw his paycheck that week if an adoption failed to go through.
3. Lawyers do not "take all kinds of cases" on contingencies; in fact, they are ethically prohibited from taking most types of cases on contingency. Lawyers take cases which have the potential for generating what is called a "res" -- a fund created by a court award from which they can draw their fee. That is award, and its size, is either given or withheld by a third party trier of fact. In other words, the attorney's fee from a case, and its magnitude, is always, always at risk. That is why contingency fees are regarded as appropriate for lawyers in tort cases. Home loans after the involvement of the notary are not presented to a third party for adjudication; all of that presumably is done beforehand. It is strictly a business proposition: Party A. the signing service, hires Party B, the notary, to perform services so that Party C, the homeowner, can benefit. Whether Party A gets paid is academic to the rights of either Parties B or C.
4. Lastly, the point has been made and made again that if the notary doesn't want to risk a fee on a loan not closing, the notary should not take on such signings. The instances cited here involved notaries who had not consented to -- and in one case did not even know of -- eMobile's non-payment clause.

Reply by Lawrence Goodwin on 5/31/04 10:58am
Msg #2524

Re: I disagree. In fact, no conflict.

I agree with Hugh, As a retired appraiser, it is against USPAP rules and regulations to accept such an assignment. an appraiser MUST form an unbiased and uninfluenced market valuation.
NOW lets get technical. Signing agents perform a service as a Notary Public, period. We are there soley to identify the person(s) signing, and to witness the signing only. If the loan does not close, it is of no fault to us.
I would also like to add, When did it become our responsibility as Notary Publics to assure quality control with the Documents. There are 4 other parties involved in this procedure. By the time we receive the docs, there should not be any problems with them. Is it our job to make sure the loan officer has filled in all required borrower info, (no) is it our job to make sure the title company has accuratley researched the title or deed, (no) are we the lenders underwriters, (no) are we the Appraiser, (no) dont ask us to take photos or inspect the property for you. I WILL take photos for you at an extra charge. THANKS for letting me vent on this area, Boy that felt good

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 5/31/04 5:52pm
Msg #2533

Re: I disagree

Previously, Lawrence Goodwin stated: "NOW lets get technical. Signing agents perform a service as a Notary Public, period. We are there solely to identify the person(s) signing, and to witness the signing only. If the loan does not close, it is of no fault to us."

I disagree with this. Technically, as a signing agent you are requested, in most cases by contract, to explain the process and purpose of the documents and answer the questions the borrowers may have, within you knowledge and without UPL. A signing agent does a whole lot more than simply identifying the signers, notarizing the documents and witnessing them signing. A signing agent needs to be able to explain what the documents are for (why is there a mortgage and not a deed, or why does my wife have to sign just some of the documents, for example), answer specific questions that do not pertain to the "how or why" certain numbers are what they are, except for the ever burning question, "I thought my interest rate was xx%, but here (referring to the TIL) is says it is yy%".

We perform a small segment of what a typical closing agent and/or settlement agent does, since we meet face-to-face with the borrowers. These are the things we are responsible for. I do agree that we are not responsible for QC checks, completeness of any document (except those to be notarized), ensuring the vesting is correct, etc.

Reply by Sam Eary on 6/2/04 12:04pm
Msg #2591

some fresh air

I think this whole string of responses began last Thursday (May 27) as a result of 'anonymous' requesting information about Emobilenotary, and I am shocked by some of the venomous comments. I have been a NSA for about 2 years, with approximately 1,500 signings under my belt (over 500 of those for emobile), for over 50 different lenders, title companies, and signing agencies. Emobilenotary has stood head and shoulders over all the rest from the begnning, their staff always displaying the highest level of competence and professionalism.
If anyone else out there wants more info about emobile feel free to email me at [e-mail address]. and I will keep on telling you about my favorite signing agency in the country.
Sincerely,
Sam

Reply by HisHughness on 6/2/04 12:20pm
Msg #2592

Re: some fresh air

My guess, Sam, is that you were recruited by eMobile to do this posting. Which is fine: A business should do what it reasonably can to protect its reputation.
The complaints abut eMobile were twofold: 1) They do not pay when a loan does not close; and 2) They are arrogant and abusive toward signing agents.
My suspicion is that eMobile has learned from this episode, and will mind its manners in the future. And, if they're smart, they also will reexamine their no close-no pay policy. I'd like to point out that in none of its responses did eMobile say, "Gee! Maybe we have a couple of problems. We're gonna take a close look at those. Thanks for sharing your frustrations. Give us another chance, and I guarantee we'll do better." Instead, all we got was denial and defense of the no close-no pay policy.
Meanwhile, if you've been able to function well with eMobile, there's no reason you shouldn't continue: I don't think any of the other posters would want you to foul your own pristine nest.

Reply by Tammy Jurgens on 6/2/04 12:50pm
Msg #2593

Re: some fresh air - disagree

I have to disagree with the part about emobile not paying when loan does not close. I did an edoc for them which the signer refused to sign when I arrived. They still paid me the entire fee - not a "discounted" fee like most SS would. I believe the only time emobile states that they can't pay is if the title co. or lender goes bankrupt and the fee is not collectable.

Reply by HisHughness on 6/2/04 12:56pm
Msg #2594

Re: some fresh air - disagree

Sorry; you are absolutely right. The two instances cited on this board pertained to a bankruptcy and a massive fraud.

Reply by Sam Eary on 6/3/04 12:07pm
Msg #2650

Re: some fresh air

I'm guessing, especially from the number of responses you have in this stream, that you've really got your teeth set in this issue to the point that the only reason you can imagine anyone having a good thing to say about emobile is that they must have been recruited.
Truth is, I don't have a pristine nest with any signing agency. What I have is many good relationships with agencies that have developed through hard work and appreciation. Whenever one of those relationships goes sour I try to learn from that experience, and then I move on.
And that's exactly what Im doing now......movin' on.
Good luck to you in the future.

Reply by anonymous on 6/2/04 1:00pm
Msg #2595

Re: some fresh air

Sam, that's an amazing accomplishment: 1,500 signings in two years starting from scratch. That's two and a half signings a day from the very day you started, six days a week, with only eight holidays off. And as far as I can tell you don't even have a web site. I'm not doing nearly as well. How about some pointers for those of us who are less successful? What listing services do you use? What kind of marketing do you do?

Reply by Sam Eary on 6/3/04 12:53pm
Msg #2653

Re: some fresh air

Timing was very important. I entered this industry when it was much stronger than it is now, and developed strong working relationships with many signing agencies that are ongoing to date.
1500 signings over 2 years may seem a large number, but it actually averages out to about 15 signings a week. The busiest week I've had was 36 signings, and the slowest was 4 signings. As I'm sure you already realize, the first week of every month is usually pretty slow and each week gets busier.
I started out by joining National Notary Association, became certified, and utilized their large listing of lenders, title companies and signing agencies. In the first month I contated over 300 (mostly signing agencies) to find out if they had work in my area and to let them know I was eager to be their go-to guy. By the second month I was so busy I only had time to contact another 50 (again mostly signing agencies) and I have tried to contact 20 - 30 every month since. Early on I took anything offered to me within a 100 mile radius and I didn't dicker much about fees. As time past the area I covered shrank and I firmed up my fees. I also realized early on that it is important to be edoc capable so I invested in a quality laser printer that has paid for itself many times.
The best advice I can give you, anonymous, is to pursue every opportunity aggresively and alway be optimistic. There are a ton of good signing agencies out there, and only a few bad (it won't take you long to figure out who they are), but find out who they are on your own. If I had consulted this forum 2 years ago and become disheartened by the less than optimistic statements about emobile I would be more than 500 signings poorer.
I'm glad I didn't.