Posted by MelissaM_FL on 12/1/05 2:35pm
Msg #79634

Mistake or???

Had a call from a signing I did Thanksgiving Eve three days after the fact. The LO said that I "neglected to have the borrowers sign six pages". Since I use e-fax, I checked the packages. The six pages were not sent to me with the original package. Worked out a fee with the SS, had the docs signed, all was fine.

Yesterday I get a call from the SS saying that I "neglected to notarize the Continuous Marriage Affidavit". While on the phone with them I checked my mojo...no CMA included in the docs. Sorry, fax me the doc in question and I'll review the error.

When the doc arrived, not only was there no notarization wording on it (I always pre-fill any information necessary except for my stamp and signature before going to the signing), the signatures on the CMA didn't match the signatures in my mojo. The signatures weren't even close to what is in my journal, matter of fact, they looked like they were signed by the same person for both hubby and wife.

SS now says that "title will handle the issue". I'm definitely ticked that someone thought I would be stupid enough just to send a loose acknowledgement for a document because they told me to do so. I'm also angry that they assumed I'm too stupid to look back at my documentation and verify what they are trying to tell me.

Has anyone else ever run into this kind of craziness? How do I prevent idiocy like this. The title company is a well-known company, although the SS and lender were both new to me.

Reply by Anonymous on 12/1/05 2:57pm
Msg #79640

who was the title co? Save EVERYTHING! If you have anymore problems, contact your Dept of State or Atty Gen. Someone is cooking up something bad there.

Reply by MelissaM_FL on 12/1/05 3:05pm
Msg #79642

I have definitely saved all correspondence, including printing an extra copy of the (unsigned) docs which came via doc magic. Doc Magic deletes the package after 7 days, so I put those in the file cabinet with the order paperwork.

I'm actually wondering if I have any obligation to report this to the DOS or SOS already with the documentation I have about the CMA.

Reply by Anonymous on 12/1/05 3:06pm
Msg #79645

You might. More informed people than me will see this post and weigh in I'm sure.

Reply by celeste/ca on 12/1/05 3:15pm
Msg #79651

I just had a similar experience. Mine was on the deed of trust, there were two acknowledgements, page 8 of 9 and page 9 of 9. I filled out the one on page 8 of 9 and did not send back page 9 of 9 since I already acknowledged their signature. I get a call today saying that it was rejected at the county because page 9 of 9 was missing. I explained that I already notarized page8 and couldn't send a blank acknowledgement back. Well, he had to go back to mortgage company to get that page 9 of 9 so it would close today. Was I wrong in not sending it back with the package? I wonder if they will use me again.

Reply by Nd_WA on 12/1/05 3:26pm
Msg #79655

Yes, page 9/9 complete the package...n/m

Reply by celeste pafford on 12/1/05 3:27pm
Msg #79656

Re: Yes, page 9/9 complete the package...n/m

Even if page 9 of 9 is a loose acknowledgement certificate?

Reply by Nd_WA on 12/1/05 3:31pm
Msg #79657

Re: Yes, page 9/9 complete the package...n/m

I doesn't matter even if it's a blank page as long as it denote 9/9. The recording office do not know/care what's on page 9. All they know there is a page missing and would not record the deed.

Reply by CaliNotary on 12/2/05 12:32am
Msg #79752

"Was I wrong in not sending it back with the package? I wonder if they will use me again."

Yes you were wrong. It is not our place to decide which documents should and should not be returned. You didn't have to complete it, but you shouldn't have taken it upon yourself to throw it away.

Whatever they send you is what you should send back to them.

Reply by celeste/ca on 12/2/05 9:45am
Msg #79814

I understand Cali but....

What threw me off was it was an extra acknowledgement , yes my mistake. I sat and debated it and should have just sent it back not filled out in the first place.

Reply by Tina_MA on 12/1/05 3:17pm
Msg #79652

Funny, I just had the same thing happen to me. I save all e-docs until I am paid. So I looked through the email attachments I had and could not find the two docs they said I missed -- they never sent them. I then asked if they would like me to forward their emails back to them with the attachments so that they could check for themselves, they declined.

I was then told that they would just fax me a blank acknowledgment and that I should fill that out and send it back. I explained to them that that is illegal and that I would not be able to do that. I was then informed that it is LEGAL in California and that's why they suggested it. Yeah right.

Anyway, they ended up faxing the docs to me and I informed the SS that I needed to make a second trip due to TC's error.

Reply by MelissaM_FL on 12/1/05 3:33pm
Msg #79660

They told you that a blank ack is legal in CA? So, you, as a Mass notary are supposed to follow CA's laws (which I highly doubt say that a blank ack is legal) and disregard your own state's rules? Interesting.

I'm amazed by some of the crap that lender's, tc's and ss will ask us to do, even when they know it's wrong. I don't want to be in an adversarial relationship with them, but I do value my commission enough to do things legally.

Reply by MaggieMae_CA on 12/1/05 3:46pm
Msg #79665

celeste/ca

Regarding the issue about page 9 not being included. Most DOTs are numbered Page 1 of 9, Page 2 of 9, etc. If page 9 is not included, the Clerk may indeed return the document and refuse to record it.

One of the "screwy" things I've noticed on some of the DOT forms is the "Default" clause which gets signed and notarized in the event of a default. Sometimes the acknowledgement for the "default" appears before the signature line of the borrower. I always notarize the acknowledgement appearing "after" the signature line of the borrower and leave the other one blank and send the entire document back to title.

I'm not sure what others do, but I haven't had any kicked back to me.

Reply by celeste/ca on 12/1/05 3:56pm
Msg #79671

Re: celeste/ca

So what you are saying is you filled out page nine, and left ack. on page 8 blank. I am still confused why they had the ackknowlegement form below their names on page 8 and then another acknowledgement form on page 9. This was a first for me to see that.

Reply by MaggieMae_CA on 12/1/05 4:07pm
Msg #79674

If the signature line was on page 8 and the ack...

followed the signature line on page 8, I would complete that acknowledgment and leave page 9 blank.

I was referring to the situations where there is a Default clause within the DOT doc and citing an example.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 12/1/05 4:12pm
Msg #79677

Re: celeste/ca

Sometimes they just do things screwy! I usually do the same as MaggieMae. As long as you don't complete the blank acknowledgment, it doesn't do any harm to include it. In fact, there is at least one lender who routinely includes a second acknowledgment section on DOTs in case of a split signing. I just ignore it. (And at least they have enough sense to put it after the signature lines!)