Posted by Merry_CA on 4/7/05 4:50pm
Msg #30236

Interesting Request

I just received the following email. It sounds fishy to me. Any advise?:


*I am hoping you can assist or at least guide me in the right direction. Our company received a mortgage for a that was rejected from recording. The mortgage is from December of 2000 and was only recently sent back to us from the recording office. It was rejected because it is missing the notary's stamp/seal. I checked the Alameda County notary directory and it does not show this notary is active any more. Is it possible to have this mortgage sent to someone who is an active notary in Alameda County and re-notarized? We are not sure what else to do in order to have the mortgage corrected and the borrowers are not going to want to resign since the loan closed almost 5 years ago. We are novices at some aspects regarding the recording of mortgages which is why I thought I would seek your assistance.

Please advise when you have the time to do so. I appreciate any assistance and advisement you can give.

Thank you!
GMAC Mortgage
Home Equity Funding Dept.*

Reply by Dogmonger, Ca on 4/7/05 5:20pm
Msg #30244

Obviously it cannot be re-notarized 5 years later

without the borrower reappearing before you and signing with the current date. I would look at it as a opportunity to fix a five year old diatech mistake at a reasonable profit. It could be a fishing expedition by some government entitiy to try and snag someone willing to do illegal notarizations. I would quote them a price to do it right and by the book only, and see where it leads you.

Reply by CaliNotary on 4/7/05 5:48pm
Msg #30248

Re: Obviously it cannot be re-notarized 5 years later

I agree. I don't know if they're just playing dumb with you, which would be my guess, but I would tell them that there is no legal way to get this document notarized without the borrower resigning it in the presence of a notary.

In the interest of "helping" them in their novice state and guiding them in the right direction as they asked, I would also advise them of this CA notary statute:

§ 8225. Improper notarial acts, solicitation, coercion or influence of performance; misdemeanor: Any person who solicits, coerces, or in any manner influences a notary public to perform an improper notarial act knowing such act to be an improper notarial act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

I'm guessing they're just hoping they can pay you to send a loose acknowledgement dated Dec. 2000, but don't have the balls to ask you outright.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 5:57pm
Msg #30249

Yes it can be done:)

Ok - this is a mortgage with an acknowledgment.
An acknowledgment does not have to be signed in front of the notary.
All that is required is for the borrower to appear before you and acknowledge they did sign the mortgage, then you can attach a certificate saying the signer appeared before you (on the date they appear before you) and acknowledged they signed the document.

If it was a jurat then they would have to re-sign. But not for an acknowledgment.

But they do have to personally appear before you and acknowledge that they signed it.

Reply by Jon on 4/7/05 6:23pm
Msg #30255

Re: Yes it can be done:)

I agree with Sylvia. As long as the borrowers are willing to appear before the notary, sign the journal, and acknowledge they signed it, I see no problem with notarizing it. Ca statute does not specify any length of time between signing and acknowledging a document.

Reply by CaliNotary on 4/7/05 6:50pm
Msg #30260

Re: Yes it can be done:)

Grrr, that's the second time I've done that in the past few weeks.

But you're right, they don't need to sign but they do need to appear. From the original post I surmised that the title company was trying to do this without actually contacting the borrowers. I would think that if they're willing to meet with the notary to correct it, they wouldn't have an issue with resigning anything if necessary.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 7:11pm
Msg #30265

Re: Yes it can be done:) - CaliNotary

Yes, I got the impression they wanted it done without the borrowers presence, but it, naturally cannot be done that way. The borrowers do have to appear before the notary and acknowledge they signed it.

I would call GMAC and say, "yes, I can notarize the mortgage, but the borrowers will have to appear before me and acknowledge that they did sign it"

And of course they will have to pay for the notary to go out and get this acknowledged and notarized.

Reply by Dogmonger, Ca on 4/7/05 6:25pm
Msg #30256

With all due respect to the great one with pretty pictures:-

1. California is a Deed of Trust State
2. It was my understanding Mery was not the original notary for this missing seal
3. I can't see how legally she could put her stamp on someone's elses work that says the borrower personally appeared before her on a date five years prior????

What am I missing????? Perhaps the signers sign a Jurat swearing that is their signature from years past??????

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 7:05pm
Msg #30264

Re: With all due respect to the great one with pretty pictures:-

Dogmonger
I said that the signer would have to personally appear before the current notary and acknowledge that they did sign the document five years before.

She would be putting her stamp on a notary certificate saying that the borrowers personally appeared before her on the current date they are appearing and acknowledging that they signed the document.

For an acknowledgement they do not have to re-sign in front of a notary, they just have to acknowledge that they did sign it, whether the document was signed that day , five months ago, or even five years ago.

Only jurats have to be signed in front of the notary.

Did I put it better this time???

Reply by Dogmonger, Ca on 4/7/05 7:12pm
Msg #30266

I concur

both with what you say, I thought you meant on the origninal acknowlegement with the orignal date, and the orginal notaries signature. I should have know better. I agree with Cali that somebody is fishing, because the last thing they want is to inform one of their borrowers that their current loan is unsecured:-)

PS I still can't believe it took five years for a County Recorder to record a refi:-o

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 4/7/05 9:24pm
Msg #30284

I can't believe it took 5 years to record a DOT...

Do you think the mortgage is being serviced to another mortgage co and that is when it was discovered?

By the way, if you do as others suggest and have the borrower(s) appear before you and acknowledge they signed it 5 years ago - remember that there is a place at the bottom of the CA all-purpose acknowledgement where you can specify that the document acknowledged is a DOT with a date of mm/dd/2000 and is xx pages. Be sure you put the acknowledgement date as the actual date you adknowledge/notarize it in 2005.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 4/7/05 10:10pm
Msg #30291

Re: I concur

I doubt the loan would have been unsecured. The lack of a notarized signature, or an invalid notarization, usually does not invalidate the document. Some states, such as FL, actually put that wording in their statutes.

Reply by Jon on 4/7/05 11:53pm
Msg #30316

Re: I concur

Ca has similar wording also. Lack of a notary stamp does not invalidate the document.

Reply by HisHughness on 4/7/05 7:13pm
Msg #30267

Re: I would have said to the pretty one with great pictures

NM

Reply by Dogmonger, Ca on 4/7/05 8:10pm
Msg #30272

You're the editor

I'm just a hack:-o

Reply by L.A./NSA on 4/7/05 10:53pm
Msg #30301

Re: With all due respect***Thank You Sylvia****

You get my "three candle" (the Rotary Logo) award for your continued excellence in clarifying questions, no matter what they may be. Kudos to you.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 11:04pm
Msg #30308

Re: With all due respect***Thank You Sylvia****

Thank you

Reply by John_NorCal on 4/7/05 10:49pm
Msg #30298

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

Personally, I think this is bogus. Come on, would any company pretending to be a GMAC mortgage really find this kind of mistake 5 years down the road??? Doesn't make sense to me. I can't figure out their motivation for this request, what can they really gain? Wouldn't doubt if there's some kind of fraud going on here. I would really watch out.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 10:54pm
Msg #30302

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

Stranger things have happened in this business.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 4/7/05 11:03pm
Msg #30307

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

Bogus situation, probably not. Maybe they just bought the mortgage and are auditing it and found the notarization to be missing. Not an unusual set of circumstances.

Bogus question, probably. I don't think that someone from GMAC would be asking the question on a public message board. They would more than likely refer the question to their legal department.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 4/7/05 11:05pm
Msg #30309

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

Paul
GMAC didn't ask the question on the message board. Merry posted the message she got from GMAC

Reply by PAW_Fl on 4/7/05 11:41pm
Msg #30313

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

I didn't mean to say what I wrote since it is written rotten. I meant to say that I don't even think GMAC would ask a notary public but would ask their legal department.

Reply by Reggie on 4/8/05 12:05am
Msg #30318

Re: Interesting Request -(I don't believe them!)

Paw

I think you are rignt as usual and this has been a very interesting discussion so far. My comment is maybe one of the ss are trying to test their NSA and this is their way of doing it.

Does anyone ever remember a quality control test from any where?

Reggie
Kansas

Reply by Merry_CA on 4/8/05 10:46am
Msg #30381

Interesting Request - The continuing saga

Thank you all for chiming in on this. Here is the email I received today:

*Merry,
I thank you so very much for getting back to me. I did read your other email and I certainly do not want to do anything to compromise this situation. What I will do is actually have a meeting next week with one of my supervisors here to see what we can do on this matter. If we need to have the borrowers resign and have the mortgage notarized, I will let you know. I appreciate your help and will keep you posted if we need your services.

Cynthia A. Jay-Scarcia
GMAC Mortgage
Home Equity Funding Dept.
4 Walnut Grove Drive
Horsham, PA 19044
Ph.: 215-682-3028
Bizcom Fax: 972-538-1763*

Reply by Merry_CA on 4/8/05 10:49am
Msg #30384

Re: Interesting Request - The continuing saga

I posted this as a new message today so it would be easier to follow.