Posted by Bob_Chicago on 1/2/06 8:33am
Msg #85584

New 1003 Form Follow-Up

I had not seen the earlier threads on this subject
either here or on GMN.
I have not researched the issue, nor to I indend to
take the time to do so, but I have the following opinion.
In my limited knowledge of "GOVSPEAK" , the arcane language
used only by beaurocrats and understood only by lawyers,
(with as many interpretations as there are lawyers),
I believe that the language "If this is an application for joint credit,
Borrower and Co-Borrower each agree that we intend to apply
for joint credit (sign Below)" when read in conjunction with
the five lines of gobbotygook above it ,
does NOT indicate that this section of the 1003
need only be signed if there are multiple borrowers.
I read to mean , that IF there are multiple borrowers,
then both must sign in this section and also sign and date
on page 4 and any "continuation sheets.
If there is only one "borrower" (the one "on the hook" who signs the note,
or HELOC loan agreement, as opposed to a NBS or NOB), then that
party ONLY should sign the 1003 on page 1, 4 ,etc.
I would err on the side on caution. If there is only one obligaged
bwr and that person signs the 1003 (including page 1) it would
not void the doc or create liability on a non-signer)
I believe that if you have page 1 signed by a sinle bwr, it will not
hurt anyting and will only constitue a unneeded signature from
a party who is signing the doc anyway.
If you leave it blank, then you are opening yourself up to a request
for a second trip (unpaid) to get it signed, if the lender
thinks that page one must be signed by a single bwr.