Posted by Salvador Avalos on 8/27/06 11:32pm
Msg #141381

Does this consititue advising during the signing

I was asked to do a signing for a spanish speaking client. Naturally the borrowers do not know how to read and write in English. They informed me that their loan officer indicated there would be no pre-payment on the loan. The borrower asked me to pin point where it stated that there was no pre-pay penality. I simply indicated that according to the loan documents there is a pre-pay penalty. I did not make any other comments other than state there is a pre-pay. Naturally, they did not want to sign the documents after that. The loan officer seem upset and specifically asked me how did they know there was a pre-pay if they did not know how to read and write in English. I indicated to them that they asked and I simply pointed out to where it states that there is a pre-pay. Also I cound not use the 3 day residual because it was an investment property. When doing a signing in another language I make sure I do not advice but simply give out the information that is on the papers. The question is should I have just informed the borrower to contact their loan officer for more clarification or is also our duty to make sure the clients understand what they are signing.

Reply by ananotary on 8/27/06 11:46pm
Msg #141383

As a signing agent you did the right thing. It does not constitute UPL because it is STATED in the documents and can be pointed out. It is not an opinion or advice. This is one of the many reasons that you must speak the language of the signer in California. Good for you! Shame on that loan officer.

Reply by Elizabeth Soliday on 8/27/06 11:58pm
Msg #141387

Wow, that is a good question. Well, did you paraphrase what it said about the prepayment penalty? or did you read verbatim? It is always better to read/translate verbatim so that they can make up their own minds about the meaning of it. I have 4 years paralegal experience and that's what I would do. It's not like anyone is there supervising you or anything, but by all means, I would always do what is morally right which is what you did in telling them the truth.

Reply by Salvador Avalos on 8/28/06 12:08am
Msg #141389

I sleep better at night knowing I told them the truth, I do not think I could sleep had I not told them anything. I will take your advice and translate word by word to the borrowers.

Thanks

Reply by John_NorCal on 8/28/06 1:17am
Msg #141396

You did right Salvador. That loan officer is the epitome of a predatory lender. At least you can look at yourself in the mirror everyday and be proud of what you see. Good going!

Reply by NCLisa on 8/28/06 5:24am
Msg #141405

Not everyone understands the language used in loan docs, so I have always found it in the best interest to "paraphrase" what the prepayment penalty says. Paraphrazing or summarizing is not giving legal advice or opinions, it is putting the material into a "plain english" format that the layperson can understand. I've been doing this for 16 years, and I have more than 10 years paralegal experience, even I have a hard time understanding what some of the loan docs say in the prepayment riders or paragraphs.

Reply by Stamper_WI on 8/28/06 6:04am
Msg #141407

The TIL doc usually states simplictstlly that there is or is not a prepayment penalty. This form is a synopsis of the loan terms and a mandatory part of the loan package.
You were also hired because of your command of their language. Reading the english doc's to them does not constitute advise.

my opinion only. I am not an attorney

Reply by Diga2Lin/FL on 8/28/06 9:40am
Msg #141431

The one I had the other night I briefly reviewed the prepayment paragraph with the borrowers reading along, made sure they understood that there WAS a prepayment penalty under the circumstances outlined, then went into the old "you have three days to re-read this and call your LO with any questions"...that seemed to satisfy them and I felt they weren't totally blind about the prepayment issue.

Reply by PAW on 8/28/06 12:06pm
Msg #141467

I certainly agree that this does not constitute UPL as the prepayment penalty (if there is one) appears in two places: (1) the note or addendum to the note and (2) on the TIL. Often there is also a prepayment rider to the DOT/mortgage.

My major concern with this whole scenario is that if the borrowers could not understand what they were signing and executing, how could you, the notary, notarize their signature in the first place? Part of an acknowledgment is that the signers understand what they are signing. If they couldn't read their documents, they couldn't know and understand what the effects of executing those documents would be.

Reply by Gary_CA on 8/28/06 12:13pm
Msg #141472

Nah... you did good... I think I know the lender

Was the lender K. Brown ???

(read the name in Spanish)

Reply by Jenny_CA on 8/28/06 4:34pm
Msg #141551

LOL Gary. Perhaps this link will help w/ Spanish / English

signings: http://www.realestateespanol.com/English/Refinance/glossary.asp


(Thanks Mung for resending that to me)

I believe this is where our ethics come into play, CA SOS says we could notarize for non English speaking people as long as we can communicate in their language, it does not state that we have to be certified interpretors but we end up playing a bit of that role.

The Spanish speaking borrowers may or may not trust me but they are expecting me to be honest an ethical as an impartial notary public....more than once borrowers have sighed w/ relief when I tell them I am independent from the lender, title and so forth.

I am not going to be deceptive, as I have mentioned before I have lost well paying clients because I would point out the info on the Note and TIL....many where subprime loans.

Reply by Mike Photon on 8/28/06 2:00pm
Msg #141511

I know telling the borrower that the LO is a liar and moron (or whatever fits) is giving opinion. But would that constiture UPL in anyway?
I'm sure that would almost certainy ensure you won't get any more business from him, (and I wouldn't want to work for him anyways), but can I get sued for that?