Posted by Susan in CA on 5/13/05 5:20pm
Msg #37606

Need some advice

I am second guessing myself on a Owners Affidavit and Indemnification Agreement. The first page start out like this:
The undersigned duly sworn on oath deposes and says: blah blah ....so I would assume I would have to add a jurat to it since it saying "sworn on oath"

On the notarized page it states: On the______ ____________day of _________, in the year 20__, before me personally came______________________________ to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledgement that ________ ________ executed the same. Now its an acknowledgement?

I should know this... I have to do this signing in 2 hours.. I have done a search but I am still unsure which way to go.
(Either way it is not the correct wording for CA)

Thanks for any help..
Susan

Reply by Cherilyn in CO on 5/13/05 5:39pm
Msg #37610

13
May
2005
John Doe
he/she or they

Reply by Susan in CA on 5/13/05 5:48pm
Msg #37613

Thanks Cherilyn for your help.. I guess I am not really asking the question right. I have to attach a loose certificate to this, what I am not sure of is it a acknowledgement or a jurat? What is cofusing me is in one place it says they are duly sworn under oath and the other says acknowledgement

Reply by MaggieMae_CA on 5/13/05 5:54pm
Msg #37616

I don't know if I'm right or not... I go by what the notary lingo starts with. If that doesn't start with a "sworn by" I use an acknowledgment. If it starts with "sworn by" I go with the jurat. I know you're questioning it because the doc itself starts with an oath type lingo.

Don't know if I've helped. I haven't had any sent back todate. What lender is it?

Reply by ColleenCA on 5/13/05 5:54pm
Msg #37617

Is it two seperate documents or one doc with the jurat wording on one page and the ack. on the 2nd page? It sounds like that to me, so in my humble opinion, I would attach a ca jurat to the 1st part and ca ack to the 2nd part.

Reply by MaggieMae_CA on 5/13/05 6:07pm
Msg #37619

If it's what I'm thinking of, it's two pages. First page the borrower signs (the paragraph starts off saying that the borrowers are swearing to something). The second page is just a notary acknowledgement/jurat attesting to the fact that the borrowers signed the doc.

Reply by Sam I am on 5/13/05 6:12pm
Msg #37621

Re: Need some advice - be careful of UPL

Your post practically mirrors a situation I had a few day ago. Check out this great reply from Terri...

Re: They can be so tricky - but I caught them!
Posted by Terri - CA on 5/11/05 11:12am
Msg #37095 from 63.16.181.132

Regardless of the wording in the body of the document; and regardless of the title of the document. If the verbiage in the certificate indicates that it's an acknowledgment, that's what you provide. It is UPL for a California notary to determine what type of certificate is to be used. It's up to the signer or preparer of the document to make that determination. If the notary cannot make a clear determination based on the wording in the certificate provided then they should contact the document preparer.

While we learn from experience what should be used, California Notaries still cannot make that call. You must used what is presented, or ask what should be used. Don't decide for yourself.

Terri
Lancaster, CA

Reply by Susan in CA on 5/13/05 6:49pm
Msg #37627

Replying to all...

Thank you all so much for all your help. It is a very tricky document, I agree! It is two pages, the first page is all the blah, blah, blah, three paragraphs long but it has on the 1st line "oath". That is what confused me. The second page has the wording (which is not correct for CA) and that had the word acknowledgement in it.
After I stepped away I went back and re-read the 2nd page again. It is a acknowledgement, just like Teri said. I wish I would of found the post from Teri before I panicked.
Again, Thanks a million!!
Colleen, Did a SS call you about a hour ago for a quickie in Oxnard. It was for 5pm, I didn't know weather you could do it or not but I gave her you number. That's the 3rd call in two days, I must be on a roll.............or not

Reply by ColleenCA on 5/13/05 7:53pm
Msg #37650

Re: Replying to all...

Hi Susan, I thought it might be you. No, I didn't get the call for Oxnard, they probably found someone closer. Thanks for giving my info. though!! Glad it's all working out for you. Talk with you soon. Colleen

Reply by ERNA_CA on 5/14/05 3:28am
Msg #37727

I had exactly same one few weeks back.....confused the heck out of me too. I attached an acknowledgment, as thee other wording was on page one. But it looks like they want both, very confusing. Hope you figured it out.

Reply by Susan in CA on 5/15/05 12:29am
Msg #37884

Thanks Erna...I attached an acknowledgement, same as you. If I am wrong I am sure I will here soon enough.