Posted by BetsyMI on 4/5/06 3:14pm
Msg #111293
Signature Affidavit
I need some opinions on this. I have been a notary signing agent for 2 and 1/2 years but recently some instruction with a Signature Affidavit got me wondering.
Assume the borrowers name is John Smith (not his real name). His legal signatures include John Smith, John E. Smith and John Smith Jr. The documents are all imprinted with and signed as John Smith. On the Signature Affidavit I have him print his name on the left side and sign his name on the right side, like this:
John Smith (printed) John Smith (signed)
John E. Smith (printed) John E. Smith (signed)
John Smith Jr (printed) John Smith Jr (signed)
However the instructions from this one lender said this is incorrect, that they'd been getting many done incorrectly from notaries and closing agents, and that no matter what is printed on the left hand side, his signature on the right hand side should all be the same, and all be John Smith since that's how he's signing the docs. In other words he should have signed:
John Smith (printed) John Smith (signed)
John E. Smith (printed) John Smith (signed)
John Smith Jr (printed) John Smith (signed)
Do you feel the instructions were correct? I've never had any returned to me doing it the way it's shown in the first example.
Thanks
|
Reply by buylamb on 4/5/06 3:23pm
Msg #111297
Those instructions are correct. The signature affidavit is simply attesting to the fact that he is known by those other names. He actually may never have signed anything in those other names. e.g. He could be Morton Oliver Smith but actually have never signed any way but "Oliver Smith" One is his legal name the other his legal signature.
|
Reply by MelissaM_FL on 4/5/06 3:59pm
Msg #111311
John Smith (printed) John Smith (signed)
John E. Smith (printed) John E. Smith (signed)
John Smith Jr (printed) John Smith Jr (signed)
This is the format I use when I do signature affidavits. I've never had one returned, either as an NSA or as a real estate paralegal.
|
Reply by lulu on 4/5/06 7:34pm
Msg #111402
I know the NNA is not extremely popular on this site for certain reasons but my NSA Certification book reads as follows:
Signature Affidavit and AKA Statmenet
1. In "Signature Aff and AKA Statement" a borrower discloses any other names under which eh or she is known and writes signatures for each name.
2. The Signature Aff and AKA Statemen ensures signature verification and uniformity on all documentation. If a doc requires borrower to sign in a different name, the "Sign Aff and AKA Statement" validates that name and corresponding signature. So it would seem according to the NSA that name variations would have a corresponding signature to match the name variation.
|
Reply by lulu on 4/5/06 7:36pm
Msg #111405
Sorry for all the typos. 
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 4/5/06 7:40pm
Msg #111406
Ditto, Melissa...Interesting point to discuss.
|
Reply by BatmanWA on 4/5/06 8:19pm
Msg #111410
Instruction: "Do this or you'll be docked $25."
1. Borrowers must sign their names EXACTLY (bolded) as printed.
You're only following instruction.
|
Reply by Renee Kovacs on 4/6/06 5:07am
Msg #111461
The compliance requirements of every lender I worked for required the name to be signed to match the variant shown:
John L. Smith (sign: John L. Smith)
a/k/a John Smith (sign: John Smith)
etc.
The doc has two purposes - one is to attest that they are "one and the same as ..." The other purpose is to attest and provide a confirming example of the variant, in case the loan pkg or file contains a doc signed with that variant. Say he signs "John Smith" on everything and inadvertantly over-signs something "John L. Smith". You can use the Sign. Aff. to 'back up' the fact that HE attested it is HIM, and this is the 'mark' for that.
I'm not an atty, but it seems to me that what she's telling you to do (use one consistant signature regardless of printed variant) would NEGATE the use of the doc. for the very purpose it's designed. I mean - he affirms they're all one and the same person, but the 'mark' for each variant is the SAME? What ties him to a variant mark, then?
|
