Posted by Christy/Ca on 10/21/05 8:40pm
Msg #71806

Please Help! Two BRW's and NO ID's!

Today, I got loan docs for a signing I have to do tomorrow. So, I called today to make an appt. with the BRW's and they told me that they do not have current ID'S or passport's!! YIKES! I know that I can use credible witnesses BUT should there be 2 credible witnesses for each one? or can I use 2 witnesses for both if they all know eachother? I would appreciate any advise that you can give me.

Thanks in Advance! :o)

Reply by Art_MD on 10/21/05 9:03pm
Msg #71809

You treat each borrowers as a seperate verification of ID. Do one, with 2 creditable witnesses. Do the other with two creditable witnesses. If the creditables are the same, it doesn't matter.

JMHO

Art

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/21/05 9:11pm
Msg #71811

I agree, except for spelling... ;>) In CA, they are referred to as "Credible" witnesses, and for the record, it s/b "sepArate". Both common spelling errors, especially the latter. I see it misspelled frequently on DOTs and it makes me cringe. (That's the teacher in me coming out again, I guess.)

Reply by Art_MD on 10/21/05 9:22pm
Msg #71813

Re:Thanks janet

I admit, I am a poor speller, and almost as bad a typist. AND, I take you comments as an attempt to help, not criticize !!!!

Art

Reply by Christy/Ca on 10/21/05 9:25pm
Msg #71814

Ok...so, let's say they have 2 credible witnesses that can identify them both. That means that when I record the witnesses onto my book there will be 4 recording for them...for BRW#1 and for BRW#2. correct? I'm sorry for all the questions...I just want to do this right.

Thank you soo much for your help!

Reply by Brenda_CO on 10/21/05 9:32pm
Msg #71816

I just posted a similar question. I have never done one of these either, so do we use a different certificate? After viewing the docs, I am so unsure because there are so many affidavits that I need to notarize that say I used current DL to identify them. HELP!! Believe it or not, after two years of in this business, this is the first time I have come across this.

Reply by Christy/Ca on 10/21/05 9:46pm
Msg #71817

YES! Please Help!

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/21/05 11:49pm
Msg #71829

I wouldn't do the signing

While opinions about this vary, my interpretation of CA law is that credible witnesses are only to be used in rare situations, not simply as a replacement for a driver license or passport. I just can't imagine that the law is written with the wording (paraphrased) "it would be very difficult or impossible to obtain another form of ID" if it really meant "can be used anytime another form of ID isn't available"

Not to mention, it strikes me as highly suspicious that neither borrower has an ID. At the very least I'd find out why that is so. That raises a huge red flag for possible fraud in my mind. In most cases getting a California ID is a very easy process, it just takes a couple of weeks to receive it. That neither has bothered to get around to do it yet wouldn't strike me as appropriate criteria to allow the use of credible witnesses.

Ultimately, I don't want to be the notary on a several hundred thousand dollar loan that is later found out to be fraudulent and have to explain what I considered to be "very difficult or impossible" enough about the situation to warrant using credible witnesses as acceptable ID. And, greedy loan reps aside, I really can't imagine that there are lenders out there who really DO want to lend huge amounts of money to somebody who can't provide a valid ID.

To me, in these types of situations, it is MUCH better to err on the side of caution and interpret the law in it's strictest form. Better for me personally and better for the banks who are putting their faith in me to do my job correctly.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/21/05 11:56pm
Msg #71831

Re: I wouldn't do the signing

Very good points. In this situation, I think I'd be asking lots of questions as to why they both don't have IDs and would have some serious doubts. It would have to be a pretty good story!

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/21/05 11:56pm
Msg #71832

And if anyone thinks I'm being unreasonable...

just take a look at the thread 2 threads below this one. Illegal stuff happens in this business, I'll do everything I can do to minimize my involvement in it.

Reply by Nd_WA on 10/22/05 6:26am
Msg #71849

Re: And if anyone thinks I'm being unreasonable...

My guess would be that the lender get audited, and they are trying to blame it on the borrowers as an excuse for their dirty work. The original poster mentioned this loan was signed 2 months ago which is right in the limitation time frame of most LPOA/4506 form.

Reply by Kelly M Robertson on 10/22/05 7:10am
Msg #71855

It is Illegal in CA to deny a LAWFUL Request

I see everyone's point, but remember that turning down a lawful request for notarial services is subject to criminal prosecution, personal liability, revocation or suspension of your comission and the possibility of jail or prison. I, too, have spoken to the SOS AND to the investigators at the SOS and I have been told that asking for CW's are our duty when ID does not match OR when ID is not present. I would not mind testifying that I am a Notary PUBLIC abiding by what our governing body has told us (rather than a personal interpretation of our laws and nothing else).

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/22/05 2:43pm
Msg #71908

Re: It is Illegal in CA to deny a LAWFUL Request

But a signing is not only providing notarial services. We are under no legal obligation to accept or complete a loan signing, nor are we under any legal obligation to travel to perform notarial services.

We can refuse to do a loan signing for any reason we choose and aren't breaking any laws.

Reply by BrendaTX on 10/22/05 6:44pm
Msg #71934

Re: It is Illegal in CA to deny a LAWFUL Request

**I have been told that asking for CW's are our duty when ID does not match OR when ID is not present. **

The way this sounds makes me glad I am not a California notary. Sounds more like enslavement to a whimsical public than being a public servant.

I mean, if the CWs are not immediately produced, does that mean the notary is obligated to hang around for half a day waiting for the group to come together?

Not looking for a personal interpretation...just whatever is on the books.

And, I always wonder...in the final analysis, does anyone at the any state's SOS really care enough to follow through on a complaint that a notary refused to do a notarization because of no ID, and the CWs were going to be available only after an afternoon at the spa? Maybe the notary was going to work a shift ringing the Salvation Army bell later when the CWs were available.

I know what the law says...I am just asking if any SOS ever backs it up with consequences where a notarization is refused.

Reply by ChristoferIL on 10/22/05 9:08am
Msg #71870

Re: YES! Please Help!

If you decide to do the signing, just remember that the credible witnesses has to produce photo I.D's and I think this is where finger printing comes in to the picture. I would inform the borrower's that you would like to fingerprint them. This procedure is to protect them and yourself from freud. If they refuse the fingerprinting, personally, I would remove myself from the signing.

Reply by MBCA on 10/22/05 10:36am
Msg #71879

Re: Seems rather strange

that neither one of these people would have a driver's license! It's very hard to get around in California without one! Have you spoken to the people who called you for this signing? Are they one of your regulars? Whatever fee you get will it be worth having to get a lawyer to defend yourself. Even if you're innocent the lawyer must be paid! Some SS just want the fee but I don't think they are liable for any fraud! As for refusing to perform a notary service, well, maybe it's better to err on the side of caution. I believe that the state is talking about prejudice matters (race, religion, life style) and not possible fraud.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 10/22/05 12:22pm
Msg #71888

Re: YES! Please Help!

>>> If they refuse the fingerprinting, personally, I would remove myself from the signing. <<<

Be aware that this may not be an option in all states. Unless a fingerprint is **required** by statute, you may not be able to require a signer to provide a fingerprint. In FL, for example, we are told (explicitly in the Florida Governor's Reference Manual for Notaries, 2001) that fingerprints are not required and cannot be demanded. If a signer refuses to furnish a fingerprint, that's that. There's nothing we can do about it. It's their right.

Reply by Art_MD on 10/22/05 12:33pm
Msg #71889

Re: YES! Please Help!

If you carry a camera, (which a lot of SA do in case they have to photograph the ID since the borrower wasn't informed they had to have a copy), take a picture of the borrowers and the witnesses in one picture. If they refuse, more grounds to question everything.

JMHO

Art