Posted by Bruce_CA on 7/11/06 7:04pm
Msg #132476

2 quick questions....

Last night I was at a signing and 2 questions came up.
First, on the Uniform Residential Loan App.
In the upper section where it is talking about borrower and Co borrower, if it is a SINGLE person, is this area signed or not?

Second, on a "assignment of Deed of trust", it had the words "printed name:__, and then in a seperate area (almost looked like another comumn) it had "By:________________"
Then below the Printed it had another "Printed Name:____" and then level with this it had "Its:________"
My take on this is that the borrower should have printed her name in the first printed name and signed in the BY space. and the other lines would be used in the case of a power of attn or if somebody had title for some other reason (trust etc.)
The loan agent was at the signing (boy THAT made it NICE!!!), but she said I (the notary) should sign the BY line. I am NOT exicuting the document, and I could NOT notarize my own signature....

What is the correct way of doing this? This is the first time I have seen this layout and wording.


Thanks
Bruce

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 7/11/06 7:19pm
Msg #132482

1. The Loan Application states... "If this is an application for joint credit, Borrower and Co-Borrower each agree that we intend to apply for joint credit (sign below):" so... if it is not for joint credit then no, the borrower does not need to sign.

2. The assignment of Deed of Trust is used when the mortgage is sold to another financial institution and should be used by the mortgage company for that purpose. Should not be signed by you or borrower.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/11/06 10:16pm
Msg #132555

Barbara is dead-on right, and the topic of READING

And here's the funny thing when I started doing signings. I entered into this with almost no training, but with my title background I did know how to READ lender docs.

If you just READ what Barbara states, and like Barbara states, you can answer the question yourself. That's what I did in a similar sitation after the loan app changed this year. Read the sentence.

If you read what you are questioning, you'd be surprised how much you don't need to ask questions. In fact if you do read, you might be dispensing the advice yourself - you will be the expert.

Reply by PL on 7/11/06 7:27pm
Msg #132484

Barbara is right on the 1003, but I cannot tell you how many calls I field when I have the single borrower skip that portion. Now I have them sign, so there are no questions down the road. There is no harm in having them sign and it may get you in the habit of having the couples sign also.

Reply by hcampersFL on 7/11/06 8:20pm
Msg #132508

I always have them sign it single or not.

Reply by Joe Ewing on 7/11/06 7:48pm
Msg #132491

First the 1003

This is a Generic loan application and all the single borrowers live history is inserted. Page 1 should be signed at the top (new).

Assignment of Deed of trust

Leave it alone. That is what the Loan Company will use to transfer the property to the lender. Look at the RESPA document and you will see that all (100%) of this Loan Company's loans are transfered with this document. (FYI) This loan will have a Compliance Agreement that needs to signed too so the Lender can have the credit info on the 1003.

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 7/11/06 8:02pm
Msg #132497

"Technically"... if you read the instructions verbatim the single borrower does not need to sign the top, but... it doesn't hurt if he/she does sign the top.

Reply by Joe Ewing on 7/11/06 8:07pm
Msg #132499

Technically that's true B. Why don't you leave that blank on your next loan signing and let us know what happens.

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 7/11/06 8:15pm
Msg #132505

I've never had any repercussions from a single (one borrower) person not signing the top. I've also had a single borrow sign. No problem either way.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/11/06 8:25pm
Msg #132513

Same here Barbara and never had a problem n/m

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/11/06 11:37pm
Msg #132585

Like Barbara has suggested I used the "reading" technique when this new requirement first came out. I was so confused by the time I read the threads on this board about what to do that I just decided to "read" this info aloud to the bwr/s and let them decide if they believe it applies to them. I never signed a "single" bwr one that line.

I always agreed with their decision. Now, I just know it means "joint credit" and that's it. One bwr/no joint anything.

If the loan is only in one spouse's name and the other only signing spousal docs they seem to know it is not joint credit and I have not had them sign it.

No problems thus far. LOL... I probably won't read responses because I finally have a system that is working and I do not want any more confusion on this.

Do NOT, however, assume I am correct.

Reply by PAW on 7/11/06 9:24pm
Msg #132528

Had 1003 returned because it was signed

Single borrower signed the top of page 1 on the 1003. Lender wanted a new 1003 page 1 initialed and NOT signed since the borrower was not applying for joint credit. Reason given: By having someone sign the statement that they were applying for joint credit, it raised a flag by underwriting where the underwriter was looking for the other borrower. Of course, none was found as the borrower was not really applying for joint credit.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 7/11/06 9:53pm
Msg #132538

Re: Had 1003 returned because it was signed

That's unique! Although I accommodate the many requests I get to have single brw's sign the top of page one fo the 1003 as a brw applying for joint credit, I think many people in the industry don't get it. It explicitly states for brw's applying for joint credit.
I have at least 2 calls a week from brokers who want to "remind me" to have a single brw. sign as well.

Reply by Becca_FL on 7/11/06 10:08pm
Msg #132551

What? id10t's!

I'm glad I don't get those calls. I'd just have to read the fine print to them and then ask "are you certain you would like Ms. Single Borrower sign the top of the 1003?"

Reply by MistarellaFL on 7/12/06 7:50am
Msg #132641

Re: What? id10t's!

I gave up trying to edumacate them.
I understand why someone new to the field would ask.
L/O's are supposed to know what time it is.
There is so much confusion about this issue, and I
do NOT for the life of me understand why.

Reply by bfd110_IN on 7/11/06 10:15pm
Msg #132554

Re: Had 1003 returned because it was signed

knock on wodd but I have not had one returned yet either. I do though make sure that single borrower initials the bottom whether there is an initial line or not.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/11/06 10:21pm
Msg #132558

I agree w/the reason for returned 1003 Paul, thanks. n/m

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/11/06 10:20pm
Msg #132557

"Technically" Joe? I suggest you read too

If signer is single, no need. If for joint credit (like the language says) it must be signed. Never, ever have I had a single person that hasn't signed the top of the app returned to me.

Reply by Becca_FL on 7/11/06 10:31pm
Msg #132563

Me too, Sue. I follow the directions as set forth on the doc n/m

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 7/12/06 12:20am
Msg #132603

We have been round and round on this a whole,,,,,,

bunch of times.
My reading is that the last sentance "if this is a joint ....." does not
mean that the section need only be singed if it is a joint app.
The language above that sentance is also significant and anticipates a
sig by whoever is applying for the loan.
First line is "This application is designed to be completed by the applicant(S)
{emphasis supplied} with the lenders assistance.
A number of major lenders print a single bwrs name at the top indicating
that he/she should sign at top.
A number of title cos include an instruction sheet stating the top of page one
should be signed by either a single or joint bwrs as the case may be.
In many cases an "x" has been written in on the "Borrower " line when
there is only one bwr.
I have never seen an instruction stating that a single bwr should NOT sign top of
page 1.
As an aside, assume that there are three bwrs, a H & W and the H's widowed
mother who is also on title and/or is acting as a co-signer because H & W
can not qualify for loan on their own.
There would be two 1003, one for H & W and one for Mom.
Mom would be requird to sign top to her 1003 by anyone's interpretaion ,
as she and kids ARE applying for joint credit. even though she is the only one
named on that particular 1003..
I read Paul's post about a compliant for having a single bwr sign top.
I, feel that you would have a much better chance of being required to make
a second trip if you failed to have a single bwr sign and the lender expected him
two
I don't feed that it could hurt. Do not see how they could be looking for
an additional bwr if only one signed note .
My view is that the better practice is to have the top of page 1 signed in all
cases, absent a specific instuction not to do so. I have done this on every signing
since the new form came out and have never been called on it.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/12/06 12:28am
Msg #132607

Re: We have been round and round on this a whole,,,,,,

Who do you think you are, Bob? Me? Long post, buddy.

Okay - your bottom line is sign no matter what? Is this what I am reading?

I tried that once before the reading technique and the bwr actually read it. I'll stick with this lonely way of doing it the way I do because it's worked repeatedly for me...but I will let you all know if my method suddenly goes dysfunctional in Texas.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 7/12/06 12:36am
Msg #132611

There are those who believe that the phrase......

"Dysfunctional in Texas" is redundant.
Nighty nite.

Reply by Carolyn Bodley on 7/12/06 8:23am
Msg #132642

Re: We have been round and round on this a whole,,,,,,

"My view is that the better practice is to have the top of page 1 signed in all
cases, absent a specific instuction not to do so. I have done this on every signing
since the new form came out and have never been called on it."

This is how I do it, too -- and I've never been called on it either.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/12/06 8:36am
Msg #132646

Re: We have been round and round on this a whole,,,,,,

I'd say that in reality that line means a heck of a lot less than the time we give to discussing it.