Posted by EP_VA on 11/15/04 7:25am
Msg #11334

When documents go directly to Borrower . . .

and the lender/mortgage company only includes two copies of the Right to Cancel, what do you do then, especially considering the fact that the borrowers acknowledge that they received two copies of the form. Has anybody had this happen, and how did you resolve the situation? Thanks.

Reply by Loretta Reed on 11/15/04 7:40am
Msg #11335

This happens alot. I rarely ever seen a set of borrowers copies with 2 copies for each borrower. I always make sure that I take their right to cancel out of their package and sit it with the HUD on the top of their copies and then make them aware that their right to cancel is in their package. What else can you do, it's not your fault.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/15/04 10:18am
Msg #11341

There's not much you can do about it. I always inform the borrower what RESPA has to say and that if they need to complete an RTC, to make a copy first so they will have a copy for their files. I also make a note on my completion report that borrowers were not furnished the proper number of copies, but were informed of their rights.

This is one of the reasons I really detest having packages sent directly to the borrower. If I have the time, I like to desk-check the contents to ensure the proper number of RTC's, names on the mortgage/DOT (to verify proper ID will be available at the table), and if a check is due at the table. All too often, borrowers are not properly prepared for the signing, and we get the brunt of it since we're the ones that actually meet with them.

Reply by Ted_MI on 11/15/04 10:29am
Msg #11342

Paul,

I agree with you re your perspective on docs sent to the borrower. Recently I did a HELOC; the docs (both original set and borrowers' copies) were overningted to me. With respect to the RTC, the original set indicated that there were three copies of the RTC for the borrowers (actually six - three for each borrower). I checked the borrowers package and there were only two for each borrower. So I just made several additional copies and was all set. Obviously this would not have been possible if the docs had been sent to the borrowers.

Reply by Glena/NV on 11/15/04 12:18pm
Msg #11347

Normally if not enough copies are provided in the lender package, there would be enough on the borrower package to supply the missing. I would pull the ones from the borrower copies. If nothing else, there is really nothing you can do about it...just have them sign what you have and note it on your confirmation sheet.

Reply by CaliNotary on 11/15/04 12:31pm
Msg #11348

Am I reading this right? You take the borrower's copy out of their package, have them sign it, and return it with the signed documents? That seems very backwards to me. The important part is to try to leave the borrower with the appropriate number of copies, not return a certain number of signed copies to the lender.

Reply by EP_VA on 11/15/04 2:29pm
Msg #11354

I would only return one completely signed copy to the lender/mortgage company. My problem is if the lender/mortgage company only includes one copy to be signed and then there's only one copy in the borrower(s) package. I would be short one copy because the form specifically says that the borrower(s) acknowledge receipt of two copies.

Does anyone make a special trip to the copy store to make the required copies, or is that above & beyond the call of duty? Do you just leave the borrower(s) with only one copy?
Thanks in advance.

Reply by CarolynCO on 11/15/04 3:19pm
Msg #11356

**Does anyone make a special trip to the copy store to make the required copies, or is that above & beyond the call of duty?**

If the loan package was sent directly to the Borrower(s) with only one copy in each packet, then, yes, I would say it was above and beyond my call of duty to make a special trip to the copy store. I would simply make note of it in my journal and in the return package and advise Borrower(s) to be certain to make additional copies if they wished to cancel the loan during the 3-day period.

Reply by Loretta/Maryland on 11/15/04 3:40pm
Msg #11358

I do not make a special trip, that is beyond my call and not my problem.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/15/04 6:03pm
Msg #11365

>>>My problem is if the lender/mortgage company only includes one copy to be signed and then there's only one copy in the borrower(s) package. I would be short one copy because the form specifically says that the borrower(s) acknowledge receipt of two copies.<<<

That's fine if there's only ONE owner/borrower. The law states that EACH person with an interest in the property, receives TWO copies. Therefore, if there are two borrowers and both names appear on one RTC form, then the borrowers must receive FOUR copies, so each has two of their own. The reason is simple: Each borrower, independently and separately, has the right to cancel the transaction. Therefore, if a borrower needed to mail in a form , they would still need to have a copy available to them.

The exact wording is: "In any transaction or occurrence subject to rescission, a creditor shall deliver two copies of the notice of the right to rescind to each consumer entitled to rescind (one copy to each if the notice is delivered by electronic communication as provided in Sec. 226.36(b))."

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/15/04 7:08pm
Msg #11375

Your Rationale SOUNDS Plausible...

...but could you quote us any case law where it's been established beyond a shadow of a doubt that an RTC form with both borrowers signatures on the same page mandates FOUR copies to be given to both borrowers? Or is this simply an offered opinion on your part? I'm not trying to be argumentative...I've just never seen this argument postulated before. If it's an established fact then I'll need to revise my handling of RTC's in the future.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/15/04 8:12pm
Msg #11383

Re: Your Rationale SOUNDS Plausible...

[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 12, Volume 3]
[Revised as of January 1, 2002]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 12CFR226.15]

Sec. 226.15 Right of rescission.

[[Page 249]]

(b) Notice of right to rescind. In any transaction or occurrence
subject to rescission, a creditor shall deliver two copies of the notice
of the right to rescind to each consumer entitled to rescind (one copy
to each if the notice is delivered by electronic communication as
provided in Sec. 226.36(b)). The notice shall identify the transaction
or occurrence and clearly and conspicuously disclose the following:
(1) The retention or acquisition of a security interest in the
consumer's principal dwelling.
(2) The consumer's right to rescind, as described in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section.
(3) How to exercise the right to rescind, with a form for that
purpose, designating the address of the creditor's place of business.
(4) The effects of rescission, as described in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(5) The date the rescission period expires.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/15/04 8:17pm
Msg #11385

Re: Your Rationale SOUNDS Plausible...

I didn't say that both borrowers receive four copies, I said, "if there are two borrowers and both names appear on one RTC form, then the borrowers must receive FOUR copies, so each has two of their own." IOW, there would be a need for FOUR copies so each borrower can receive TWO. Two borrowers times two copies each equals four copies for the borrowers. (I didn't say "both borrowers" or "each borrower", just "borrowers".)

I'm sure you're doing it right, as most of us are.

Reply by Loretta Reed on 11/15/04 8:35pm
Msg #11388

Re: Your Rationale SOUNDS Plausible...

It sounds to me like the lenders or title companies are not giving the borrowers the required amount of RTC in their (borrowers) docs. If I do not have access to a copier during the closing, it is not my problem.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/15/04 9:43pm
Msg #11393

I Understood Your Rationale Perfectly...

...but I remain unsure as to your interpretation. In every signing I do for one particular lender the # of RTC's in the package totals 3...1 in the borrowers set & 2 in the original set. Both borrowers names are on each of the RTC's & they both sign the two originals with one then being returned to the borrowers set for their TWO copies. There has never been a time I've considered (till now) that they needed TWO more as you're stating. What you quoted in your other reply to my initial inquiry is still your offered "opinion" of the federal code which you're interpreting to mean 4 copies are to be left with the borrowers if both names are on the same RTC. I'm not sure that's as black & white as you make it out to be. This may have to once again be one of those times when we'll have to agree to disagree. Until I'm shown something in greater detail than what you've shown so far, I'm not inclined to be in agreement with your assessment. JMHO.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/15/04 9:53pm
Msg #11396

Re: I Understood Your Rationale Perfectly...

My previous post was a direct quote from the code. Not my interpretation. To me, it is pretty clear when it says, and I quote, "two copies of the notice of the right to rescind to each consumer". Now, for my interpretation of that quote: Consumer A gets two copies and consumer B gets two copies (assuming both consumer A and consumer B are each entitled to rescind the transaction).

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/15/04 10:09pm
Msg #11397

I'll Pass Your "Interpretation" of the Federal Code Along...

...to the lender I referenced previously for their "take". I believe their response will be along the lines that the borrowers "share" the copy of the RTC with both names being on the same form. We'll see what they say as this dialogue has certainly peaked my interest.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/16/04 7:54am
Msg #11411

Re: I'll Pass Your "Interpretation" of the Federal Code Alon

Please let me (us) know what the lender has to say about it.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/16/04 7:58am
Msg #11412

Re: I'll Pass Your "Interpretation" of the Federal Code Alon

The problem with the "share the RTC" is that the consumer doesn't share the right, responsibility or requirement to rescind. The right of rescission is an individual, separate and independent action by any and each consumer, not in concert with anyone else.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/16/04 8:37am
Msg #11414

Which They're NOT Giving Up...

...by "sharing" the document. I'll let you know what they say if I can obtain a definitive response. They're not open until later in the day.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/16/04 9:29am
Msg #11415

As a "Heads Up"...

...I've made my initial contact with the lender & will be speaking with a supervisor later today. I'm scheduled to receive one of their doc packages this AM & the supervisor wants to go over it with me when it arrives. I'll keep you posted.

Reply by CarolynCO on 11/16/04 10:05am
Msg #11418

Re: Dennis & Paul - you've missed the ...

point of the thread -- "what to do?" Docs didn't come to us -- they went directly to borrower(s).

Reply by CarolynCO on 11/16/04 10:10am
Msg #11420

Re: Dennis & Paul - you've missed the ...

I apologize. In going back I see that Paul did address the initial post. However, with what you both have going on back and forth now, I think a new thread should be started.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/16/04 5:41pm
Msg #11459

Re: Dennis & Paul - you've missed the ...

I too apologize for jumping the gun. I didn't read all the posts and answered that I had answered. Oh well, that's the way things go some times.

Reply by PAW Notary Services on 11/16/04 5:20pm
Msg #11458

Re: Dennis & Paul - you've missed the ...

No I didn't miss the point. I answered it in Msg #11341. But Dennis and I did go off on a tangent about how many copies is needed. Of course, threads have a habit of changing course once in a while.

Just for the record, here's what I said in message 11341:

"There's not much you can do about it. I always inform the borrower what RESPA has to say and that if they need to complete an RTC, to make a copy first so they will have a copy for their files. I also make a note on my completion report that borrowers were not furnished the proper number of copies, but were informed of their rights."

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 11/16/04 10:32am
Msg #11423

What an Interesting Turn of Events...

When I posed my question to the supervisor as to how many RTC's should be given to a husband & wife for their records his initial response was 2 copies TOTAL. After explaining Paul's rationale for providing 4 copies & NOT just 2, he put me on hold to ask a VP of the company what he thought. When he came back he agreed there should be FOUR copies total given according to the instructions on the RTC form itself. In other words they weren't basing their opinon on the federal code, but rather what was printed on the RTC form. He went on to say he'd "not given any thought" to this previously. I then asked him just WHO is responsible for making sure there are the correct # of RTC's in the package & he said he "assumed" it was the Notary's. Here we have the supervisor of a company whose primary duties are to issue the document package & he's never "given any thought" as to the correct # of RTC's which should be included in the package for the borrowers. I know now from this point forward I'll include 4 copies of their RTC for husband & wife borrowers for this particular lender.

Having related all this, I also don't know that this little snippet of dialogue & discussion is the 100% ironclad answer to this question. It remains as clear as mud in my opinion & won't be settled definitively until a court rules on it. There may already be some case law out there, but I'm done researching the subject. It's almost always better to do more than less & that'll be my guide in this situation. Thanks, Paul, for starting the discussion.

Reply by CaliNotary on 11/16/04 12:32pm
Msg #11429

Clear as mud?

I think "two copies of the notice of the right to rescind to each consumer" is pretty darn clear and specific. 2 copies EACH is not the same as 2 copies TOTAL. Just because a person has the word "supervisor" in their job title hardly makes them any sort of authority on these laws, and his lack of knowledge doesn't overrule what the law says.

Why you're choosing to make something complicated out of something so clear is baffling to me.

Reply by BrendaTX on 11/16/04 2:00pm
Msg #11434

Re: Clear as mud?

I believe 2 copies to each person signing the docs is correct. Here's why:

Perhaps during day one of the 3 RTC days, a new milkman has taken the route belonging to Mr. & Mrs. Borrower.

The house in the loan docs is Mrs. Borrower's from one of her seven previous marriages. However, in order to refi at a lower rate, she needs Mr. Borrower's income to refinance the house. In fact, let's just say that is why she married him...simply for his credit rating and refi-ability. She has no problem allowing him an interest in the house at the refi because her divorce lawyer and she are still in constant contact and she knows she'll get it back if things don't work out...in Texas anyhow. Probably. Maybe.

So, our wiley Mrs. B starts up a heated affair at milk delivery on day two of the RTC period.

On day three this becomes apparent to Mr. B and he decides he's been had. But, he remembers his RTC! So he laughs, "Ha Ha Ha!" and cancels the loan when he gets to work that day with one of his copies. (First he faxes it, then he sends it off via FEDEX - good thing there is another copy for his lawyer's file.)

After work, he packs his clothes and moves out. Mrs. B is left with a poor credit-bearing milkman (albeit a very hunky and attractive one) PLUS a high interest rate on her mortgage.

Mr. B's lawyer has one fully signed copy of the RTC for use in divorce court as a start on the character assassination of the evil Mrs. B, plus Mr. B gets the closing costs back, plus the dog, BMW, and the engagement ring that was his mother's.

This should clear things right up.

Reply by Jon on 11/16/04 2:11pm
Msg #11438

Re: Clear as mud?

I saw that same program on network TV last night!!!

Reply by Jon on 11/16/04 2:13pm
Msg #11440

PS....Re: Clear as mud?

I think it was a Divorce Court rerun. Or maybe one of the new reality shows.

Reply by BrendaTX on 11/16/04 2:21pm
Msg #11441

Re: PS....Re: Clear as mud?

It's the old Story Problem Concept we used to hate in 7th grade.

Whether it's signing agent rules or higher math...if I can put a story with it, I have "got it."

If I have to memorize it or remember it, gimme an "F."

Reply by BrendaTX on 11/16/04 2:27pm
Msg #11442

Re: Clear as mud?

Oh no! Someone already got my plot!?!

I was going to reverse the Mr. & Mrs., and submit it to Lifetime! (My son says "Lifetime: for women who hate men" thus the reversal. Apparently he sees a message of "women are for good and men are for evil" on Lifetime.)

Joking aside, I think sending one of the RTCs off to cancel the loan, and having one to retain by the cancelling party is the purpose of the 2 per bwr.

(Notice, I said "think" not "know.")

Reply by Arthur on 11/16/04 3:09pm
Msg #11445

Re: Clear as mud?

For some reason, the phrase, "He or she would argue with a signpost", comes to mind. It is entertaining, nonetheless. Behold! The clash of the Notaries Public!!!

Reply by CaliNotary on 11/17/04 3:43am
Msg #11480

Re: Clear as mud?

It is quite amusing, isn't it? That somebody feels that it needs to be decided in a court of law whether the word "each" really means each, or whether it really means "in total".

I'm picturing Halloween at the Broadbooks house. A group of kids on the porch, Dennis at the door with a tray of candy saying "you can take one each". The first kid takes one, the second tries to take one only to get his hand smacked away by Dennis saying "I said one EACH! Bobby got one, so that means you've each gotten one". Which would then be followed by a 45 minute lecture on the sinful Pagan origins of Halloween and whether the Supreme Court would consider "trick or treat" to be a binding oral contract.

Reply by BrendaTX on 11/17/04 7:45am
Msg #11488

Re: Clear as mud?

Cali,

I'll have my people get in touch with your people. Perhaps if we hook up, you and I have a future in dark comedy.

You've got me laughing out loud first thing this morning with your vivid imagination.

I do enjoy reading Dennis's slant on things and like his input. I always look for yours, as well.

Reply by CaliNotary on 11/18/04 12:34am
Msg #11565

Re: Clear as mud?

Awww, thanks Brenda. It's nice to know that some people appreciate my sense of humor. It's definitely not to everybody's taste. But I like it so screw 'em!

My people will anxiously be awaiting your call. I'll put the entire staff on notice.

Reply by Jon on 11/16/04 11:10am
Msg #11424

Interesting dialogue below. My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the law states(according to PAW's post) that the "CREDITOR" needs to deliver to the consumer, not the notary. It is not my job to make sure that the lender complies with federal law, it is their job. With this said, I will add additional copies if I happen to notice that the lender did not send enough, however I usually don't look at the borrower's copies unless I'm doing e-docs. If the docs were sent to the borrower, that is completely out of my hands, and not my responsibility.

Reply by Glena/NV on 11/15/04 10:33pm
Msg #11400

CaliNotary...I did not say to send it all back!

If only two copies were provided on the Lender's package, you pull the borrowers copies and have the borrowers sign them. Return only one to the lender and give the rest to the borrowers. If it is not clear to you, the borrowers need to receive executed copies also. Two for each of the borrowers. You are putting words in my mouth.

You said, "The important part is to try to leave the borrower with the appropriate number of copies, not return a certain number of signed copies to the lender."

The answer is: If there is not enough pages provided, it is more important to me to provide on executed copy to the lender for the loans to fund. It is not my problem if not enough RTC's were provided, it is the lender's or title company's. Since the package did not come to me. I would also send a note in the package to let the receiver know about it.

Reply by CaliNotary on 11/16/04 12:26pm
Msg #11427

Re: CaliNotary...I did not say to send it all back!

I'm not putting words in your mouth. You said "Normally if not enough copies are provided in the lender package, there would be enough on the borrower package to supply the missing. I would pull the ones from the borrower copies."

To me that sounded like you were saying to include the borrower's copies with the lender's documents.

Anyway, I agree with you in the end. It's not our problem, it's not our fault. Our job is to get signed whatever they send to us and make sure the borrower understands their RTC, it's the lenders job to make sure they send the correct documents.

Reply by EP_VA on 11/16/04 3:18pm
Msg #11446

When Documents go directly to Borrowers . . .

Thanks for all who responded. I get the picture as to how most would respond in this situation. Thanks again.