Posted by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 6:31pm
Msg #25649

Conflicting Signing Instructions

I accepted a signing from a new SS. Instructions throughout the package are contradictory not only between SS and Title Company, but they each contradict themself -- i.e., Title Company instructs checks to be made to such and such in their closer instructions -- later in the package, there is a page that simply says "make checks payable to such and such" -- the second such and such company is different than the first such and such company. Original confirmation from SS says "call Borrower to introduce yourself; confirm date, time and location of closing; inform them of the necessary photocopies of ID, certified funds, etc." Title Company instructions say "We do not provide you with Borrower's number ... it is our policy that you not contact the Borrower."

Title Company has a page with the only thing on it: "All documents are to be signed in BLUE ink." Before leaving for the signing, I recieved an e-mail from SS reminding me to have all docs signed in BLACK ink." When I wrote back that Title Company was specifically stating Blue ink, I get a response from SS "Please do not use blue. IT MUST BE BLACK."

Title Company instructs : "Include your invoice in with the return package." SS instructs "Did you make sure your invoice WAS NOT included with the mortgage docs going back to the Title Company?" SS instructs: "Complete and fax Closing Request Form (which is also your invoice) along with the HUD, TIL, RTC, 4506 and ALL notarized documents BEFORE mailing them and wait for approval."

Including the 18 docs that I notarized, my "fax back" consisted of 40 pages including my Notary Skill Test, Sign up Form, W9, copy of my SOS Notary Certificate, copy drivers license (with number blackened), copy of E&O Insurance, NA Qualification Sheet, and IC Agreement. After 4-1/2 hrs., I still haven't gotten approval to ship the docs, so I took it upon myself to ship it because I'm down FedEx's zero hour, and just returned from FedEx and still haven't received a "go ahead" call.

It's also quite ironic that I'm on a point system with this new SS -- after losing 3 points, I can no longer sign for them. If I were using my own point system with this particular SS and Title Company, they've both used MORE than their 3 points each.

Reply by Ernest_CT on 3/15/05 6:39pm
Msg #25653

Please help everyone by posting the name of the signing service.

Reply by twil4/wi on 3/15/05 7:01pm
Msg #25661

this HAS to be century, because i had the exacr same miserable experience last week. i had already called the borrower as the signing co.s instructions, then when docs came, they said you wont get paid if you contact them, the addresses to send docs were conflicting, the way to accept funds were conflicting, AND every page i was meant to notarize contained huge amounts of blanks, that definitely should have been filled in, on and on. I finally canceled and said I cannot notarize any of this. every other part of the experience was the same, right down to the 18 pages to send in.

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 7:03pm
Msg #25662

Re: You've missed the point

Ernest, at this point, it doesn't matter who the SS is. Besides, it wasn't "just" the SS contradicting themself -- go back and note all the Title Company contradictions in my original post.

The purpose of my post was not to drag any particular SS or Title Company through the mud, but instead make us all aware that there can be different SA instructions in one packet.

Now in 30-45 days if I haven't gotten paid, or points were deducted, or I'm paid less than the agreed-upon price, then I will be more than happy to name the SS and/or Title Company.

Reply by Ernest_CT on 3/15/05 7:04pm
Msg #25664

Thank you. n/m

Reply by Ted_MI on 3/15/05 8:33pm
Msg #25674

Re: You've missed the point

Carolyn,

Maybe it's time to move on to a new signing company.

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 10:45pm
Msg #25697

Re: You've missed the point

Ted, I agree. However, this was a brand new signing company who contacted me -- I didn't contact them. I guess the point I was trying to make was for all of us to remember to ask all the what, whys and wherefore questions before accepting the signing, which is something I guess I have gotten spoiled with anf forget to do because the majorty of my signing services don't babysit me -- I don't have to call from the signing table to advise that I'm finished -- I don't have to fax back umpteen copies for approval, only to never get approval -- I'm not rated on a point system -- and the signing services and title companies are on the same page.

Reply by Joan-OH on 3/15/05 10:13pm
Msg #25689

The funny thing is I know exactly which companies you are referring to & why all the conflicting instructions. Without me naming the signing company, let me guess is was a Watermark through Transcon.

Transcon wants everything signed in black irregardless of what the lender says & Watermark does say blue. WaterMark was recently absorbed by MIC which forbids you from contacting the borrower to confirm. Sounds like Watermark hasn't updated their instructions regarding contacting the borrower. I haven't taken one since the new policy.

This signing company is a good signing company. I'm sure had you called the owner, he/she would have clarified the instructions. Everyone is a little messed up with this recent merger with MIC. Too bad too, because I LOVED doing Watermarks. MIC says notaries were losing their loans. I don't see how any notary could lose a watermark for them. The borrowers always got EXACTLY what was expected and nothing I could tell the borrower over the phone while I'm getting directions would cause them to cancel.

Joan-OH

Reply by jj/ca on 3/15/05 10:31pm
Msg #25693

Carolyn,

If you would name the companies it would save someone else the headache. That is how these companies keep getting away with this type of crap. Why protect them? They have enough things going their way without your help to keep them annonymous so they can screw another hard working notary SA.

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 11:14pm
Msg #25705

While I agree that it would save a headache or two if I posted names, as I said in an earlier post, I will wait the 30-45 days to see if or how many points will be deducted, or how much money I will be docked because of the conflicting instructions. I have kept copies of e-mails and instructions to cover my rear and fight my case if this should happen.

As it stands now, I have posted enough info for anyone accepting a signing from this unnamed signing service and title company to recognize them from the signing instructions they will receive.

Reply by BrendaTX on 3/16/05 10:17am
Msg #25782

JJ:

It is seldom you will see me name a company here. There are reasons why.

One is because, like Carolyn, I tie all my posts to a profile or an email and people know who I am, what region I cover and other information about me.

Two is they read these boards and I don't want to get myself into hot water with them over a $100 fee, or less until I know they are scum.

Three is because if I change my view on them, I want to be able to continue to work for them and not hand them over to my competiiton. (This has happened.)

By the time I post something negative about a company by name it is because I feel that they have had ample opportunity to right themselves with me and chose to try to treat me unfairly on purpose. At that point, I believe I have factual evidence to support that they are a menace to notaries.

Since I do post with my profile link on, if someone really wants to know about the company they email me.

It's nice to share privately, but it is unwise to hand over clientele information on a public board if you want to keep their business. I know. When I was a wee signing agent, I lost business by saying too much online.

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 10:22pm
Msg #25917

Thanks, Brenda -- you said it better than I could. The initial purpose of my thread wasn't to bad mouth or drag the SS and TC through the mud -- instead it was to vent about conflicting/contradictory instructions.

And on another note, working with a new SS or TC is somewhat like a blind date.

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/15/05 10:59pm
Msg #25702

Joan,
You win the prize. It just seems to me that the two hands are fighting against each other. I included all the emails from the SS in my package back to show the inconsistencies.

I hate not being able to contact the borrower. I was to collect roughly $2,600. Of course, he had no certified funds -- he was only told late yesterday of my coming this morning and given the figures -- nothing was mentioned about him needing certified funds. He wasn't even given a name of the person who called him. He had made no copy of his drivers license -- he wasn't told. Additionally, the title company instructions said that I was being paid to thoroughly explain the docs. When does thoroughly cross the line and become UPL? I'm supposed to thoroughly explain the docs, but I'm not allowed to call borrower before the signing?

I don't know if I'm more disturbed with the signing service or the title company.

Thanks for letting me know that it wasn't just me.

Reply by Joan-OH on 3/15/05 11:39pm
Msg #25709

In all the Watermarks I have done, I have never had to collect CERTIFIED funds. I sometimes have to collect 2 postdated checks, but never certified. Truthfully, when I did these, the borrowers were so well informed, they would practically hand me copies of ID and checks before I even got my coat off.

Showing up to uninformed borrowers is a MIC thing from what I have read. I have never personally done one of these, but that is probably because I refuse any work where I cannot contact the borrowers so they know I am coming & to get directions. Sounds like MIC has "infected" Watermark. That's too bad.

As for the blank forms, this is a TCT thing. Anyone who has ever done one knows that they send out 28 pages whether they are needed or not including MD affidavits, close credit line letters (whether there is a credit line or not) Marital affidavits when there is no spouse, etc. And the worst part is with the exception of the survey affidavit and HUD, they will close a loan without them & I have gone on many signings without all the junk docs w/o a problem.

If you would like to discuss further, [e-mail address]

Reply by Becca/FL on 3/15/05 10:46pm
Msg #25698

This does really suck!

My rule of thumb is that the Lenders instructions are for the TC and I am not the settlement agent or TC. I follow the instructions from the Co that hires me. If instructions conflict, I let the Co that hired me know, fax them the TC/SA instructions and wait to proceed OR, if I do not hear from the hiring Co, just follow the instructions sent by the Co contracting my services.

ALWAYS keep a copy of the hiring Cos instructions for CYA. You are contracted by, working for and being paid by the SS and should follow the instructions that the SS sent you, unless otherwise directed by the SS. Also, be sure to get the change in writing from the hiring Co and keep a copy for your records.

JM2C

Reply by Bernice on 3/16/05 7:25am
Msg #25741

There's more than one SS out there with funky instructions. When you have 5 pages of instructions from an SS, and it contradicts itself and another set of instructions from the Title / Lender that contradicts previous instructions, it sure does put us in a pickle.
Then you check deeper into the SS, and find out that they aren't even a Notary.... so why should we even listen to them - (i.e. please sign as a Settlement Agent..... what?)
Stand firm, and know your State Notary Laws.

Keep good records -- and keep the instructions that they have given you, so you can refer back to them if anything comes down the road later on (it may be years down the road).

Reply by Cherilyn Clark on 3/16/05 9:15am
Msg #25758

Carolyn! We signed for the same company yesterday!

and I am so glad that I wasn't the only one confused! I called her and asked about the blue and black ink. I also called about the funds due at closing. Instructions said two different things!

I ended up following the insturctions from the title company. And I didn't fax back everything. Also, did you get the instructions that you were not to call the borrower? Well, when I got there the borrower told me that the time was totally inconvienient as the husband had to take time off of work! Grrrr! If they would have let me call them, I could have scheduled for later in the day!

I'm filling out all 16 pages of their notary packet as we speak! A little late now to inquire about my skills as I did a signing for them yesterday!

Reply by CarolynCO on 3/16/05 10:49am
Msg #25794

Re: Carolyn! We signed for the same company yesterday!

Cherilyn,
I faxed the notary signup package back at the same time I faxed the docs (20 minutes to a non-toll free number) for approval -- although here it is, 24 hours since I did the signing, and I still have not received the go ahead to ship the package. I guess it was a good thing I took it upon myself last night and got it to FedEx for their last pickup.

You did read that points or money are deducted if you don't fax back the required docs? Yes, I got the instructions from the TC not to call Borrower. As Joan stated, I'm making it a new policy not to do signings where I can't contact Borrower(s) first.

I don't have a problem if a new SS *initially* requests a *few* pages faxed back to verify that I know what I'm doing -- however, 18 notarizations plus the HUD, TIL, RTC (for every signing) is going a little overboard, I think.

Reply by Cherilyn in CO on 3/16/05 11:39am
Msg #25805

I didn't even see the point system until this morning

They sent me their notary packet after I did the signing. So, if they dock me, I'll claim ignorance :-)

I have a copy of both closing instructions, showing the conflicting information if I need proof later on down the line.

I'm with you! I'm not doing any more closing where I cannot contact the borrower. In this instance, it would have been better for both if we could have rescheduled for later. I have a feeling, though, (from what the borrower said) that the TC wanted the package in yesterday's fed ex.