Posted by janCA on 8/22/05 8:17pm
Msg #60908

CA notaries

I can't find it in the handbook, but I'm pretty sure that you cannot accept a temporary license as ID even though the original is not expired. The original has the maiden name and the temporary has the married name. Just need clarification. TIA

Reply by BarbaraL/CA on 8/22/05 8:30pm
Msg #60916

As I recall, the temporary license does not contain a picture, therefore can not be used. You might want to call the Secretary of State Notary Division and ask them, or send them an email.
Phone number: (916) 653-3595
email: [e-mail address]

Reply by NorCalDar on 8/22/05 8:31pm
Msg #60917

If you look on the temp itself, it will tell you that:

This license is issued solely as a license to drive a motor vehicle; it does not establish eligability for employment, voter registration or public benefits.

Personally, I would not accept it. Is getting a couple of credable witnesses a possibility?

Reply by janCA on 8/22/05 8:35pm
Msg #60918

Not really, since she actually does have a current driver's license but it's in her maiden name.

Reply by janCA on 8/22/05 8:37pm
Msg #60919

I've been running into these types of problems lately. If the lender or title would request a copy of the ID before drawing up docs this problem would be eliminated before we got to the borrowers.

Reply by JanetK/CA on 8/22/05 9:07pm
Msg #60925

Yes! Wouldn't that be nice! BTW, I have checked (twice, to be sure) with the CA SOS, and they said the same as everyone above. It is NOT acceptable as ID because it is a separate document, therefore doesn't have all the required elements outlined in the handbook.

Reply by Sheila in San Jose CA on 8/22/05 10:08pm
Msg #60943

(Unless they are willing to wait for rates to climb while she is waiting for her new license in married name,) You should be able to use to credible witnesses, that know her in her married name. There is nothing wrong with using credible witnesses (check with the lender first-in case they do have an issue with it- but it is mostly for your use- your ability to identify her via her living breathing ID- credible witnesses who will vouch for her.

Reply by janCA on 8/22/05 10:42pm
Msg #60950

Thanks for all the replies but the interpretation I get from the handbook on credible witnesses is if there is no available ID such as DL or passport or military ID with a description, that yes, credible witnesses can be used, but there is ID, her driver's license is current, it just has the wrong name on it, therefore, it is unacceptable and CW's shouldn't be used. Does anyone else interpret the law this way? I would think that the docs could be drawn up in her maiden name since that is what is on her ID but that the DOT could say "who acquired title as her 'married name'".

Reply by Hampton/CA on 8/22/05 10:59pm
Msg #60957

CA code 1185 paragraph 4 says the reliance on any of the following... etc. You all know that the types of ID follows.

CA code 1185 paragraph c says "satisfactory evidence" (not ID. Evidence) means the absence of anything that would make you doubt that the person is who they say they are.

The ID shows the maiden name. Evidence of a name change would be a marriage certificate. Absence of a marriage certificate would cause you to doubt that she had a new name.

Ask this question to the SOS and they'll tell you to consult an attorney. I did. The wife/secretary of the lawyer and a 20 year notary says that a marriage license showing the maiden name and the new married name, coupled with the ID in the maiden name, is the evidence that the signer is who she says she is.

Gray area? You bet. But the SOS agrees loosely with this, but won't commit because "we can't interpet the code. Call an attorney." That means the notary has to make the decision, as each of us does in a case like this.

Carefully read the CA code 1185. It is crystal clear and it is open to interpetation, which is why the question got asked in the first place.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 8/22/05 11:16pm
Msg #60961

Re: CA notaries - Hampton

***That means the notary has to make the decision, as each of us does in a case like this.***


VERY well said, Hampton. Some notaries don't AT ALL like it that there is not a hard and fast rule for every single situation, and I agree with you that this is one example of 'gray areas' in our commission. It's my personal opinion that in some areas (like this one) the state give us "some" decision making, and trusts that we understand the responsibility of our commission.

Reply by Hampton/CA n/m on 8/22/05 11:56pm
Msg #60964

I meant it is "not" crystal clear...

Reply by janCA on 8/23/05 12:09am
Msg #60965

I agree

No, it is not crystal clear and I do agree we have to use our own judgement in many cases because many of the notary laws "ARE" left to interpretation, and hopefully what we decide will not come back and bite us in the butt. And because there is a lot of mortgage fraud out there now I have become a real stickler in what I interpret is acceptable as "satisfactory evidence".

Reply by NorCalDar on 8/23/05 12:31am
Msg #60971

If her "current" Driver's License does not include her "current " name, then in the absence of a marriage certificate, her current license is not valid ID of her married name. I don't know why you jump to the conclusion that it would be improper for her to have two credible witnesses who know about the name change (marriage) to satisfy the requirements of satisfactory evidence. Read 1185(c) and tell me where the fact that she has a Driver's License with her maiden name, a Temp showing she went to the DMV to change to her married name, and two people willing to verify that they have personal knowledge that she is now known by her married name, excludes her the opportunity to use credible witnesses. I just don't see it. Reasonable reliance of the Driver's License is out the window the second someone hands me ID and say's "well it's current but that's not my real name."

That said it is a judgment call that you will need to make. After all, it is your Commission not mine.

Reply by JanetK/CA on 8/23/05 1:18am
Msg #60975

Re: Use of credible witnesses

Re: use of credible witnesses: She may be referring to 1185 (c)(1)(C) where it says that each credible witness must swear that "it is the reasonable belief of the witness that the circumstances of the person making the acknowledgment are such that it would be very difficult or impossible for that person to obtain another form of identification" and that (1185 (c)(1)(D)) "the person making the acknowledgment does not possess any of the identification documents named in paragraphs (3) and (4)." In this case, it appears that this person DOES have one of the documents named in paragraph (3) - it just doesn't have the correct name on it.

Reply by NorCalDar on 8/23/05 6:19am
Msg #60984

Re: Use of credible witnesses


This raises a couple of interesting points.

1- A person who comes before a notary and claims to be Jane Doe but presents identification that says she is J. Doe. Jane Doe has not provided satisfactory evidence. Jane Doe is the person named in the document. Is J. Doe is therefore irrelevant? How about as in this case, Jane Smith?

Jane Doe became a person once Jane Smith said, 'I do." Although one might argue that an AKA/Name Affidavit might establish that Jane Smith and Jane Doe are one in the same person, the person who came before the notary is allegedly coming before the notary in the capacity of Jane Doe, not J. Doe, or Jane Smith, and the person whose name is on the documents is Jane Doe.

The way this has been presented, Jane Doe has come before the notary without satisfactory evidence that she is the individual named in the document. "Jane Doe" does not possess any of the documents named in 1185(c) 3 and 4. Again, once the borrower informs the notary that the name on the DL is wrong, no matter what the circumstances, how can the notary reasonably rely on the validity of the DL to establish identity as Jane Doe. It would be the same as Jane Doe handing a license to a notary that said J. Doe. Sure the license might be valid but it would not be satisfactory evidence to setablish the identity of Jane Doe.



2- What criteria would the credible witness have to use to come to the conclusion that it would be very difficult or impossible for the person to obtain another form of ID? Does the criteria assume that it would be difficult to obtain ID at the present time (as in while the Notary is present and the DMV is closed), or in the future (as in the person is severely handicapped or bed ridden and can't go to the DMV)? 1185(c) (1) (C) places the burden of reasonable belief to the discretion of the credible witness not the Notary. As such I would not put my neck on the line to make that determination.

Reply by Kath_CA on 8/23/05 9:39am
Msg #61013

Re: Use of credible witnesses

Just had a recent situation like this. The SS gave me the borrowers name as Jane Doe, but after downloading and printing the docs, I noticed the name on all the documents was "Smith-Doe". The borrower stated she had never legally used that combined name. The lender combined her maiden name "Smith" with her married name "Doe". Her DL had "Smith" her maiden name, her marriage license had "Doe", but she also stated she was recently divorced. Then she explained that the divorce wasn't quite final. (hence a possible spouse still in the picture). The SS said that this should be no problem to sign this borrower. At this point I said NO to the whole thing, didn't even feel that credible witnesses could take care of this situation.

Reply by Renee/MI on 8/23/05 4:06am
Msg #60979

Lenders getting ID up-front

What a logical solution to this problem, eh? One lender I know of DOES require a faxed copy of current & valid ID as an underwriting requirement - before they'll even issue final approval! Maybe it's the beginning of a trend that will spread to the rest??

We can only hope ...