Posted by Paul2_FL on 9/16/05 11:25pm
Msg #65758

Sylvia your previous msg #65223

After reading your message re: witness signatures appearing on your docs, I went back and started looking at some of mine. Lo and behold I see the same thing! Apparently, some TC's must feel it's necessary and just add the names when they get the docs back because they certainly wern't with me during the signing!

Reply by TitleGalCA on 9/16/05 11:29pm
Msg #65759

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

Hi Paul, FYI - Sylvia informed me just recently that the culprit is a settlement company, not a title company.

Reply by Paul2_FL on 9/17/05 12:29am
Msg #65761

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

The ones I've checked so far have been TC's so it looks like the problem is more widespread.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 9/17/05 12:35am
Msg #65762

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

I'm sad to hear that. Frankly, most TC's don't operate with a lot of original thought; if they do something that raises eyebrows, it's (in my experience) because of pressure from lenders/agents, etc. or those that demand performance in one way or another.

Regardless, it's a problem that has to be addressed.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 9/17/05 7:49am
Msg #65778

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

I too have found the "culprit" to be both settlement and title companies. I've started compiling a list of the offenders that are (1) modifying the notary certificate and (2) adding witnesses to the mortgage. These are two separate and distinct problems that must be addressed. If anyone would like to add their information to our compilation, please email the following information to either Sylvia or myself (see our profiles for email addresses). Please include the following information and an image of the page, if possible:

Date of signing
Settlement/Title Company
Book and Page of recorded document (this should appear on the image as well)
Simple statement as to what was changed/added/removed.
Your name, commission number (if you have one) and expiration date.

Reply by BrendaTX on 9/17/05 7:56am
Msg #65779

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

Paul/Sylvia:

Who will you report this information to?

Just a guess, but it sounds to me like the offenders could have been avoiding paying extra for witnesses that were required by the lender for packaging loans to sell. Do you think this is a possibility?

Reply by PAW_Fl on 9/17/05 8:03am
Msg #65782

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

Sylvia is doing most of the legwork on this trying to determine the "who". We are submitting requests to various state officials and legal contacts to make that determination.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/17/05 8:37am
Msg #65795

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

Their reason why they did it does not matter. Whatever their reason it was illegal! Especially altering notary certificates, here in Florida, that is a third degree felony with a $5,000 fine.

Reply by BrendaTX on 9/17/05 9:53am
Msg #65806

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

**Their reason why they did it does not matter. Whatever their reason it was illegal!**

Sylvia,

I did not imply that any reason would change the crime. I feel that knowing the reason has value or I would not have asked the question.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/17/05 10:02am
Msg #65807

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC

It is a possibiity that the lender required witnesses. But in that case they only had to ask and witnesses would have been there.

But, a lender cannot determine what they want on a notary certificate - that is a state requirement not a lender requirement, and the additions to the certificates are contrary to the notary laws of Florida, They added what we are not allowed to put on our certificates.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 9/17/05 8:01am
Msg #65780

NOTE - DO NOT POST THE INFORMATION HERE

It is imperative that until the legal beagles look at our compilation, that the specific information not be posted on this or any other public access message board. ONLY EMAIL the info to Sylvia or myself. Your information will be held in strictness confidence.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/17/05 8:42am
Msg #65799

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC - Titlegal

It was a settlement company Titlegal, but going through the records, there are title companies adding witnesses and altering notary certificates as well. This appears to be widespread.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 9/17/05 11:04am
Msg #65809

Re: Sylvia your previous msg #65223 not a TC - to Sylvia

If it is widespread, again...I suspect a lender is behind it...I'll be curious to know (when you get to that place) if its pressure from certain lenders that is causing the closers to do this.

As I said in my post, most title companies want to accomodate - when they "do" something, it's because they've been asked/pressured to do so. Not an excuse, just an observation.

Reply by Cris_AR on 9/17/05 5:21am
Msg #65772

Years ago I worked at a local title company. Several times I had been asked to sign or initial a name other than my own. (saving the borrower a trip) I always refused. It just did not seem right, I have been told it is pretty standard in the industry.

Reply by Renee Kovacs on 9/17/05 6:07am
Msg #65774

Having been privy in the past to seeing the handiwork from across a few states, I know it is hugely wide-spread, and a bigger problem than one might think. On things I've questioned, title agents have responded with "...the Ltd. POA covers that, we can do (this/that)"

It's like a big assembly line, and the misinformation becomes like that party game where a story is told to you, and you tell the next person, and they tell the next person, and at the end the last person tells the story out-loud - and it's NOTHING like the original story.

But the assembly line is so large, the hands are many, and the problems are so wide-spread. Some of it, honestly, is truly harmless and just keeping the machine going. Some of it, though, carries a huge potential for harm - and perhaps that's what we need to concentrate on.

I am NOT AN ATTORNEY - here are my questions:

1. If false witnesses are added after-the-fact, obviously they will not be in the Notary log. Would this negate the Notary's liability? DOES the Ltd. POA legally cover these actions by others (as I've been told by title agents so often, but that's NOT my determination to make!)
2. Do we NSA's need to also be logging "removed capacity from Ack", or adding some verbiage to our ack's that conveys "signatures only and not capacity or marital status..."

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/17/05 8:40am
Msg #65798

Renee
The Limited POA is to cover typographical errors, it wouldn't cover adding witnesses who did not witness the signing, and it wouldn't cover altering the notary certificate.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 9/17/05 11:28am
Msg #65810

Thanks Renee

***Some of it, honestly, is truly harmless and just keeping the machine going***

I can't stress enough how true that statement is, and how NEEDED with the garbage that comes in to the title company from other real estate "professionals".

***Some of it, though, carries a huge potential for harm and perhaps that's what we need to concentrate***

Your post perfectly sets out what I tried to convey two days ago in my discertation of "life as a title officer". It's the stuff that doesn't just try to make the loan close - the truly illegal acts (for what reason?) that needs to addressed by the appropriate authorities.

I can say one thing without a shadow of a doubt - without the title company and their expertise in their field, a large percentage of loans would not close in the time frame set out by lender. Lenders mess up also, but this should be important to all of you AS NOTARIES - because that's where most of the errors are!

I'm getting off my "devil's advocate" soapbox now. I just hope the problems that are addressed in your state doesn't create a backlash of consequences to the industry. Make sure some HARM has been done, and don't bite the hand that protected you from getting embarrassed for not doing your job right.

I've chatted with Sylvia briefly offline on this - not directed especially to her - just a general statement on my part. As far as I can tell, there's no title company "voice" in this other than some who have said "oh yes, I was told to sign other people's names when I worked at a title company". Not during my watch.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 9/17/05 12:35pm
Msg #65819

Re: Thanks Renee

Unfortunately I have seen this to be SOP at too many different title companies. They are getting witnesses after the fact, when the closer doesn't have the witness at the table. I also know, that there are title companies who routinely notarize the signatures of company officials that are not even in the same state, much less in the same office or present when the notary notarizes their signature. I've actually seen a document where the notary had placed their seal and completed the certificate BEFORE the signer signed the document. I know you're not going to like what I have to say, but there are too many title companies that know what needs to be done, but they go about it the wrong way. These title companies think the ends justify the means. They simply do not follow the proper procedures and protocols.

This isn't cutting off our noses to spite our face, and the ramifications and consequences may be widespread and bitter. Either the law needs to be changed or the procedures and protocols need to be changed. (Or both.)

Reply by Renee Kovacs on 9/18/05 4:56am
Msg #65893

Back at you, TitleGal

You said: "I just hope the problems that are addressed in your state doesn't create a backlash of consequences to the industry. Make sure some HARM has been done, and don't bite the hand that protected you from getting embarrassed for not doing your job right."

This is a very real risk, and something to bear in mind. Watch what you wish for?

I am NOT trying to imply that the issues being discussed should be over-looked, absolutely not. We would be wise though, to pursue the issues very carefully, without projecting into it, compiling facts first, then taking the facts somewhere where they can be analyzed for legal opinions. I am not an attorney but IMHO - part of the law being quoted says, effectively, 'where there is intent to harm'. I don't believe that what we're discussing includes intent - and what effect will that have on the outcome of this?

Paul & Sylvia - w/o providing anything but numbers, is the list of offending entities growing? Is it looking as wide-spread as I'm thinking you'll find it?

TitleGal - being on the inside, do you think the place to go with this might be the title underwriter? For one thing, it places it in a position of some power & control, as well as cutting way down on the sheer number of places where it will need to be addressed. It also would seem to lessen the risks of backlash.

I would think the U/W's legal eagles would be all over it, and they could remedy these issues.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 9/18/05 12:03pm
Msg #65912

Re: Back at you, TitleGal

***TitleGal - being on the inside, do you think the place to go with this might be the title underwriter? For one thing, it places it in a position of some power & control, as well as cutting way down on the sheer number of places where it will need to be addressed. It also would seem to lessen the risks of backlash.***

Maybe. But understand that title companies large corporations now...small title companies simply don't have the financial backing to operate on their own, and are underwritten by the big guys. Or in the case of the company I work for, we are under a large umbrella corporation that owns many medium sized companies...making the parent corporation "bigger and stronger" than the big guys. Big corporations, big business.

So, as in any corporation...will underwriting chastise an escrow officer who notarizes a corporate official located in another state, when he's not present at a closing table (using a scenario that's been put forward as wrong)? I seriously doubt it. First, that notary knows she's doing something to facilitate the business of the company who writes her paycheck and well knows that the signature she's notarizing is who he says he is...I worked for a corporation of 60 employees and notarized signatures of my very absent boss...all the time. It was my job and my employer paid for my notary commission. Will an underwriter even bother with the time to "investigate" that at a title company? I think not. It's the way it is.

Has there been any "harm"? No. Is it technically incorrect procedure, by the book? Yes. But, who cares? There's no harm to anyone...except to that escrow officer who didn't follow procedure by the "book", and her company is protecting her.

At first, this seemed like a real problem to me....until it was stated that title companies are at fault...and that's where I say, good luck. If you go after the machine that makes the industry move, with all it's lack of "perfection", I'm NOT reminded of David and Goliath. In this case, Goliath is a big benign entity that writes all our paychecks, and I just think it's a waste of time to nip at Goliath's toes.

Reply by PAW_Fl on 9/19/05 9:16am
Msg #65998

Re: Back at you, TitleGal

>>> Has there been any "harm"? No. Is it technically incorrect procedure, by the book? Yes. But, who cares? There's no harm to anyone...except to that escrow officer who didn't follow procedure by the "book", and her company is protecting her. <<<

I have no idea if anyone else has been "harmed" by this lack of following procedure and protocol or not. However, I can say that "I" personally have been harmed by the addition of anything after I return the documents. My integrity as a state official has been impugned and may be brought into question. So, I do care. The procedures are there for a purpose and it is not up to us, the title company or lender to make the determination that the procedure doesn't need to be followed.

Susan, please do not take this personally as it is not a witch hunt against title companies. The investigation may be very limited in scope and only apply to a very few agencies, be them settlement companies, title companies, lenders or whoever. There are thousands of title companies. This whole issue may be focused on one or two. We won't know until the investigation is completed. The determination may take quite a while as well.

Reply by BrendaTX on 9/18/05 12:30pm
Msg #65913

Re: Back at you, TitleGal - why do it?

Renee, Why do you think they do this? Do some states certify capacity?

Reply by Renee Kovacs on 9/18/05 5:16pm
Msg #65960

Brenda - possible reasons for them doing this

Brenda, this is what I suspect - that title/settlement post-closers are making these changes because at one point in their life, someone somewhere said "oh - if there's no signature on the witness lines, just sign it yourself and get another one from someone else here if you need it, or it won't record." I further suspect they were/are told the same thing I've been told by settlement/title employees "the Ltd. POA will cover that" (or Compliance Aff, or whatever.)

I don't really think people are doing this with any intent to harm or defraud anyone (doesn't mean they should still continue or that it's not wrong). I think it's more a lack of training and information.

As for the ack - I think again it's that they once were told "front and back of mtg must match" and took that literally.

There is no shortage of misinformation being fed into The Machine, and there is no shortage of new employees, bad management, inept or (my personal nemesis) those 'righteous' types who simply say "well, that's just how I've always done it." Those same types of people will often follow that with "... and nothing's ever happened." As if THAT in itself means it must be correct!

I think in order to fix The Machine, the correct information has to be provided - somehow - and that might prove daunting, given the wide-spread practice of these alterations. That's why I thought going to the u/w might be easier - just on sheer numbers. One U/W might be able to give this information to hundreds, if not thousands of agencies.

As far as the Lender putting the heat on the T/C to do this - that's probably another additional source. One misinformed person at Lender level can easily spread this request to hundreds of agents.

It's definitely this - a serious headache.