Posted by MB_in_MI on 10/6/05 8:20pm
Msg #69226

Nicknames

I've found a lot of information in this forum about maiden names and initials, but what about nick names. If the borrower's ID shows his/her full legal name (i.e. Johnathan B Smith), but the documents have a nickname (John Smith) can you legally notarize that? And if Johnathan/John is okay what about something less common like Tamika/Kiki?

Reply by Brasring_Ca on 10/6/05 9:00pm
Msg #69229

That is a really good question that I too would like some input on. Wish I could have helped but the night is young and maybe someone with more experience will pop on to the forum and shed some light!

Reply by LisaWI on 10/6/05 9:01pm
Msg #69231

OK, Im confused, since when did a shorter version of a name become a nickname, or did I miss something. I always thought a nickname was something like "HoneyBear". Just wondering. You could do a search on the "less but not more" subject and see what you come up with as far as the John thing goes, as far as the other one, dont have a clue. In my book, if you cant identify them as such, you dont notarize as such. Again, I am in Wisconsin, your laws be different.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 10/7/05 6:38am
Msg #69273

By definition, a nickname is:

1. A descriptive name added to or replacing the actual name of a person, place, or thing.
2. A familiar or shortened form of a proper name.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Reply by B__CA on 10/7/05 12:31pm
Msg #69332

Paul

How do you handle nicknames like Robert and Bob when notarizing documents?

Reply by PAW_Fl on 10/7/05 2:25pm
Msg #69387

Re: Paul

Typically, "Bob" is not their legal name and never used as their legal name, therefore, the docs need to be redrawn in their legal name. That being said, according to the FL SOS, if their "legal signature" is 'Bob Whatever', then as notaries, we must accept it. (Legal signature being whatever the signer says is their "normal and customary signature on legal documents.) Whether or not the lender accepts it is a different story. But, if the lender says "go ahead" and use Bob, then I have an ID issue that must be resolved. Often, if Bob has been used and there is evidence to show it's use, then "reasonable reliance on satisfactory evidence" comes into play. We don't want to make it steadfast that only the documents listed in the statute are what we can use to identify the signer, it is just that we must 'rely' on them as primary evidence. Florida also allows us some leeway in our certificates by using a syntax similar to, " acknowledged by Robert Whoever who represented to me that he is also known as Bob Whoever and has provided a driver's license in the name of Robert Whoever." When ever I use this form of certificate, I additionally annotate what other documents were used to positively identify the signer.

Reply by MelissaM_FL on 10/6/05 9:02pm
Msg #69232

Florida says that you can notarize less than the full name, but not more. So, I would be able to notarize John Smith with identification stating Jonathan Smith. I'd also do William as Bill or Robert as Bob, however, your example of a less common name, I might have a problem with because I've never heard of Tamika being shortened to Kiki.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 10/6/05 9:10pm
Msg #69234

Those were my thoughts on Tamika also. I've heard Tammy for Tamika, but not Kiki. I would not feel comfortable with that.

Reply by Blueink_CA on 10/6/05 9:18pm
Msg #69235

I had something similar come up recently. DL said Victoria Susan Smith. Docs all said Vicki S Smith.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 10/6/05 9:20pm
Msg #69237

Did you notarize?

Reply by Blueink_CA on 10/6/05 9:29pm
Msg #69241

After explaining to Mrs Smith that I wasn't able to notarize without proper ID, she whipped out a State of California ID card, complete with picture. She worked for the State and her ID read "Vicki S. Smith". I completed the signing.

Reply by B__CA on 10/7/05 1:24am
Msg #69268

Less than but not more, I would do John for Johnathan, Will for William, but I would not notarize Bill because it is not contained in the name. Same thing for Robert, I would notarize Rob, but not Bob. Bill and Bob are not contained in the ID.

Reply by Mira Betts on 10/7/05 6:16pm
Msg #69439

The concern I have is that as notaries we are not allowed to discriminate. Could I not be accused of discriminating if I accept a familiar nickname like Bill or Bob, but not an ethinc nickname just because "I've never heard of Wxyz being shortened to Yy"?

Reply by PAW_Fl on 10/7/05 7:41pm
Msg #69449

No, you would not be discriminating. Nicknames usually are not a persons 'legal' name unless it is used consistently for legal purposes (per FL SOS). Ex. William Smith is a legal, given name. Bill Smith is his familiar or nickname. If "Bill" was never used for legal purposes, then his nickname is not his legal name and should not be on the documents. Further, he probably wouldn't have any state acceptable ID for those states that mandate types of identification, such as state or federally issued identification cards (which are legal documents).

I've had a couple of signings where the mens names were "Tommy" and "Billy". When I saw the docs, I thought there was a mistake, but when I asked what name was on their driver's licenses, then it was okay because their licenses showed "Tommy" and "Billy" respectively. These names are their legal names.