Posted by kathy/ca on 7/22/06 11:49am
Msg #134688

Exhibit A is attached but there is nothing on it, no legal

description but it is attached, so is that considered to be "a blank space"? Thanks.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/22/06 12:30pm
Msg #134695

Re: Exhibit A is attached but there is nothing on it, no leg

No, not at all. You're fine.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 7/22/06 12:42pm
Msg #134700

I concur, and confirms why I believe that this whole......

Exhibit A issue is silly.
It is ok to have a blank Ex A that can be filled in later with
the legal of the White House , but NG if there is there is no Ex A present.
The purpose of the no blank doc rule is to protect the signer of
the doc from someone filling in the blank later to the
detriment of the signer.
In the case of the mortgage, the only one that would be harmed if
wrong legal filled in later would be the lender or the TC.
There is enough Property identification in the dox , so that it
is clear what property the bwr intends to encumber.
I wonder how many bwrs have blown a payoff or a rate lock because
a NSA refulsed (believed that they were unable) to notarize a mtg
due to no Ex A in pkg.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/22/06 1:08pm
Msg #134705

A slightly different wrinkle

This actually happened to a friend of mine, signed her docs and of course got her copy. Legal description on DOT "see Exhibit A", "Exhibit A" showed her address, ok...she's feeling fine. 2 years later upon paying her taxes the Recorder tells her there's a lien on her second piece of property which was debt free, has a mobile home on it with renters. Recorder gave her a copy of the initial DOT with a completed Exhibit A which incorrectly listed BOTH properties. She has been jumping through hoops trying to get it corrected and would have never signed had she seen this completed Exhibit. Title is no longer in business and lender jacked her around for 6 months, she finally refi'd with another lender who is untangling the mess. Yes, it's only one example but that's all it takes.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/22/06 1:19pm
Msg #134707

Re: A slightly different wrinkle - Interesting

but I think that particular problem lies with the title company that insured it, and the lender.

Out of business? Or purchased by another company.... if so, her policy is just as good as the original.

And, in court, the trail would be clear, regardless of an error on a document. That lender who jacked her around would be hurrying to fix it, if she threated such. Cross-collateralizing isn't all that common (here) unless it's commercial property.

I hope notaries don't take this to mean that they have to see Exhibit's attached or the legal description filled in - that would be a mistake, and notaries aren't qualified to determine what is and what is not a correct legal.

I think your friends problem lies solely with the title company and lender, not with copies of docs left by the notary.

Reply by kathy/ca on 7/22/06 12:50pm
Msg #134703

Thanks TG, I was hoping you would respond, Bob, you make a

very interesting point.

Reply by PAW on 7/22/06 6:48pm
Msg #134753

I respectfully disagree

The wording that I usually see on mortgages where the legal is subsequently attached is:

"Legal description attached hereto and made a part hereof, as Exhibit 'A.' "

Therefore, a blank Exhibit 'A' would still be considered an incomplete document since the mortgage specifically states that it is the "Legal description" that must be attached. The statement then further describes that the attached legal description is to be called "Exhibit 'A'".

Reply by GWest on 7/22/06 8:50pm
Msg #134772

Re: I respectfully disagree

Borrowers usually never see the prelim completed on the property therefore how would they know if the title company included an additional parcel of property, which they also own, which they did not want encumbered.

There are many times that the legal description is not included with loan documents and I ask for the legal description to be emailed to me, most of the time without a response or a refusal. I have had title companies laugh at me for requesting a legal advising that I don't need it and it will be added before recording. Look on the Deed of Trust for the AP No. and you can see if more than one parcel is being encumbered. If the Borrower only owns the single parcel it should not be a problem.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/22/06 9:25pm
Msg #134775

Gwest

This is the difference between "wide open spaces" and apartment type living, dwellings on top of each other or to be more to the point, this is an issue in my state. Most of my borrowers own more than a "lot", two owned half a mountain and it's not uncommon to have family on either side, each parcel 10+ acres. My point was: docs were presented, ex. A only showed the addy of the property in question (which would have been correct). Between the signing and Title, ex. A was changed to show both parcels, recorded that way and liens in place. She would have NEVER signed had she seen what was recorded. And if you think it's an easy fix, think again. Title co. wasn't sold, it dropped off the face of the earth. Threatening legal action against the lender was a major joke. Dollar wise it was cheaper for her to refi with another lender than it was to hire an attorney to force them to undo what they had done. I'm not disputing anyone's opinion, I'm not in favor of UPL...this is merely an example of what CAN happen. I don't want to start disagreements, just friendly discussion on the pro's and con's of NOT having all the ducks in a row.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/22/06 9:36pm
Msg #134780

Re: I respectfully disagree - GWest

Honestly, I am too damn tired tonight to address this, but I will.

By the time I'm done I swear I'll have invested at least 45 minutes. In real time, that would equate to a value of $50 bucks an hour.

So, there's the value of the post, by a title and escrow professional.

***Borrowers usually never see the prelim completed on the property therefore how would they know if the title company included an additional parcel of property, which they also own, which they did not want encumbered.***

That statement is out-of-the-park FALSE, for three reasons.

1. The borrower gets a copy of the preliminary title report, period.
2. Escrow gets a copy of the preliminary title report, period.
3. Lender gets a copy of the preliminary title report, period.

I know this because I DO it...all day long, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. If your borrower, GWest didn't see/read/understand the prelim, it is NOT the title companies fault - and to make a statement like this on a national notary board just makes you look foolish because it is wrong.

***There are many times that the legal description is not included with the loan documents and I ask for the legal description to be emailed to me***

Call the real estate agent or mortgage broker who was frothing at the mouth for their commission, they couldn't bother. Fortunately, for the residents of California, the title company looks out for them and thoroughly searches the property, including the legal description. Unfortunately, the lender (who has also got froth on the lips) uses the info provided by the buyer or (said) frothing agent. The info goes into the computer, sans correct legal description, but maybe (if the buyer is lucky) an address.

The order is called in as a Rush! This is a Rush! We want to lock in this loan before buyer/borrower figure out they are being ripped off royally!! Hurry! (They are all "rushes" BTW).

The title company hurries, and produces the prelim in record time, including a legal description (but too late for lender - who's plugged in sh*t information from the agent/mortgage broker). The computer system is smokin' because the property in question (or PIQ if you're an insider) was recently subdivider 6 months ago as a condominium and no new assessor parcel number has been issued because the County Assessor Office is behind by a year. The address helps though...lol.

As a result, no current APN/and the legal is at best fuzzy...if you are the title company who didn't insure the first sale out. If it was a condominium project (aren't they all?) then it just gets better.

GWest says: ***I have had title companies laugh at me for requesting a legal advising that I don't need it and it will be added before recording***

Yeppers - are you serious? You think YOU are capable of determining a correct legal description, GWest?? What if the TC "emailed" you a bunch of silly numbers? You "request" what you don't know sh*t about, and expect a professional who's actually the CLOSING AGENT (you aren't) to answer to you...a notary? LOL. That's rich. Yes the legal will be attached before recording....Silly Notary - you are in this for $150 bucks but the title company is in it for $750,000.00. You better betcha the correct legal will be attached.

You're post suggests you know something about this Legal Description issue and I say, you don't know squat and no notary should be concerned with an issue that is a title company and insurance matter.

Get a grip about your ROLE in the transaction!

Reply by Ernest__CT on 7/23/06 8:19am
Msg #134826

We're seeing more and more Posts ...

... from Notaries and/or Notary Signing Agents who think that they are qualified to practice law. (I'm NOT talking about TitleGal, who clearly is well-schooled in title work because she works for a title company as a full-time employee). Unless you have been admitted to the state bar, you cannot and must not give legal advice.

Reply by Paul_IL on 7/23/06 9:29pm
Msg #134917

Re: We're seeing more and more Posts ...

Ernest,
Here is a newsflash for you but reading a legal description is not the Practice of Law. There are others on this board besides Titlegal that are more than qualified to read a legal description.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/23/06 10:24pm
Msg #134928

I agree, but you can vouch for accuracy?

Which brings us right back to Sue's friend and her problem.

Only the title company is RESPONSIBLE for attaching a correct legal, not a notary. For a notary to refuse such a document...IMO they should be reported to the SOS for refusal to notarize.

It is not necessary to refuse notarizing a document because the legal isn't there on the basis of an "incomplete" document.

Reply by GWest on 7/23/06 11:17am
Msg #134838

Re: I respectfully disagree - TitleGal

I have been in the real estate industry since 1975 and definately do know what I am talking about. I know my way completely around a title department, I have searched title as well as having been an escrow officer for 18 years. I have recently moved back to Northern California and have no desire to work in the title industry again as 32 years is enough. I am semi-retired and handle loan document signings for additional income.

With regard to the comment about the Borrower receiving a prelim, I was referring to refinance transactions, not sales. I have worked for enough title companies as well as escrow companies to know what there practices are, and when a Borrower tells me they never received a preliminary title report, I believe them. Even on sale transactions, can you be sure the buyer received a copy of the prelim? The Buyers copy is usually given to their Real Estate Agent to provide to the Buyer. Buyer signs for receipt for the Prelim when they sign loan doc's and more times than I can remember, when the Buyer came in to sign their final papers they claim they never saw the prelim at which time I would give them one and go over it with them.

When I receive a set of loan documents without a legal description (90% of the time) and can not get one from title, I pull a property profile prior to the signing so I at least am aware if they own more than one parcel. If they own more than one parcel I definetly want a legal description prior to the signing so there can be no question as to what is being encumbered.

You state that you feel that I am not capable of reading a legal description. I can read a simple lot and block as well as being able to read and plot a property with a metes and bounds legal. I have been asked many times by lenders to plot out a legal description for them as well as locate easments. If I had a legal description and can pull a property profile, I can verify the legal description against the plat map and know what property is being insured. I have also handled new subdivisions aquisition of the property, construction to sale of 450 separate lots and am aware of the time it take for a AP # to be assigned to a parcel. I have handed lot split transactions from search to completion.

I know my present role in a transaction and don't give advise or even make the borrower aware that anything is missing and if they notice that the legal is not included I advise that title will include prior to recording. All I am saying is that I feel that the legal description should always be included with loan documents. A deed of trust without an "Exhibit A: is an incomplete document as the "Exhibit A" is "attached hereto and made a part hereof".

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/23/06 10:17pm
Msg #134922

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

because the legal isn't filled in??

You are really wanting to make that statement in absolute?

I am sure you are experienced in the industry as your post suggests, and that you are ***capable of reading a legal description***

Of course you are, as most people are...it's sort of simple to "read" it. But - do you know it is correct? Of course not - that is nonsense, as no notary SA (even me) can vouch to it's accuracy, EXCEPT the title company that is insuring it.

So, the whole argument that the notary should make sure a legal is attached...because otherwise it is a blank document, is frankly, stupid. If you take that logic, any old legal description will do, just to fill in a blank. That would be the greater wrong, notarizing a doc with an incorrect legal.

So if we follow your logic...a notary would also have to be a title searcher, or a title company. After all - if we HAVE to make sure it's attached...we also have to make SURE it is correct - otherwise the DOT would record on the WRONG property.

You still want to vouch as to the "completeness" of the document because the legal isn't filled in?

Like I said before - hey - if all you signing agents want to refuse a signing because a legal isn't attached - go for it. I hope your sense of "being right" keeps your bank account flush. In the meantime, a much wiser and experienced Notary (not SA) will take the job you refuse..and sleep well.

Reply by PAW on 7/24/06 7:06am
Msg #134949

Re: Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

>>> Like I said before - hey - if all you signing agents want to refuse a signing because a legal isn't attached - go for it. I hope your sense of "being right" keeps your bank account flush. In the meantime, a much wiser and experienced Notary (not SA) will take the job you refuse..and sleep well. <<<

Again, I must disagree with this philosophy. By statute, we cannot notarize the signatures to a mortgage, deed, or any other document without all attachments, riders, and addendum present and accounted for. Granted, we cannot validate the accuracy of the contents, but if nothing is provided, then the underlying primary document is considered incomplete.

Yes, I flatly refuse to notarize the signatures to an incomplete instrument, as do many other professionally qualified notaries and signing agents. What this has accomplished over the past several years, is that 99% of the time, a Florida agent will get the legal description with the mortgage, as it should be. And, in the 1% of the time it doesn't happen, a quick phone call to the title company results in the legal being emailed or faxed. There have been times when the title processor emailed the whole commitment, just because it was easier for them to do so, then I just need to print the appropriate page.

And, to quell any thoughts about borrowers not knowing their legal description, here in FL, most home owners are well aware of the correct description as everything we do concerning property requires the legal description to be printed on the documents, including tax bills, surveys and many insurance binders and policies. So, when I call to confirm an appointment with the borrowers, in addition to asking for IDs, I also ask them to have a copy of their survey and insurance declaration page available, because 9 times out of 10, they'll need it to fill in some blanks or verify some preprinted information.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 7/24/06 10:57am
Msg #134974

Re: Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

****we cannot notarize the signatures to a mortgage, deed, or any other document without all attachments, riders, and addendum present and accounted for. ****

The issue I have with this is we are to scan documents for blanks and obvious signs of fraud, that's what my CA class taught. But when it comes to a deed as sa's are we really to be checkers of the doc preparers work to make sure that they didn't leave anything out? I think that is a bit over and beyond the call of duty. Which by the slimmest of chances can lead to upl. It is not for me the sa to be the teacher checking the homework. Nor am I trained in preparing docs. In fact some states only have lawyers draw up deeds. I'm not questioning a lawyer on deed work. If this was supposed to be part of my job I would have to be properly trained and my fee would double.

Reply by GWest on 7/24/06 12:34pm
Msg #134995

Re: Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

I agree that I can not be sure that the legal description I receive is correct or not and I don't feel it is my responsibility as an SA to verify if the legal description is correct. But if no legal description is attached it is an incomplete document. I have had many clients ask to read the legal description as this is a rural area and many people own several lots but only one encumbered. As a Notary I have been taught not to notarize a document that is incomplete and if no "Exhibit A" is attached, it is not complete.

The California notary Handbook states, on page 17: NOTARIZAITON OF INCOMPLETE DOCUMENTS - a Notary Public may not notarize a document which is incomplete. If presented with a document for notarization, which the notary public knows from his or her experience to be incomplete or is without doubt on its face incomplete the notary public must refuse to notarize the document (Government Code Section 8205).

Reply by TitleGalCA on 7/24/06 8:33pm
Msg #135077

Re: Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

***The California notary Handbook states, on page 17: NOTARIZAITON OF INCOMPLETE DOCUMENTS - a Notary Public may not notarize a document which is incomplete. If presented with a document for notarization, which the notary public knows from his or her experience to be incomplete or is without doubt on its face incomplete the notary public must refuse to notarize the document (Government Code Section 8205).***

Gosh, I have never read that, ever, in the 4 commissions I've held in California!

And...the Definition of "Incomplete" is....? That's the rub.

I'm envisioning a scenario...where I have NOT notarized a document that didn't have Exhibit A filled in, held up funding, caused the lock to expire, and generally caused grief and damage to the borrower........and the Attorney grilling me in a courtroom:

"Um, I see, Mrs. Shipman, so you believed it was YOUR right and YOUR responsibility as a "notary" to tell the lender and all the lender's legal department and all the title company officers and the title company's legal department that YOU knew better ...."

Yeah.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/24/06 12:35pm
Msg #134996

Re: Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that notaries NOT notarize

>>> It is not for me the sa to be the teacher checking the homework. Nor am I trained in preparing docs. In fact ***some states only have lawyers draw up deeds.*** I'm not questioning a lawyer on deed work. If this was supposed to be part of my job I would have to be properly trained and my fee would double.<<

(See the ***) That's exactly where you are now. In Texas, attorneys are in the driver's seat and they must prepare the loan docs. You are getting your Ca attitude re-adjusted to the Texan perspective at warp speed. Congrats, SB.

Reply by AngelinaAZ on 7/24/06 5:18pm
Msg #135060

The *Statute* issue...

***Again, I must disagree with this philosophy. By statute, we cannot notarize the signatures to a mortgage, deed, or any other document without all attachments, riders, and addendum present and accounted for. Granted, we cannot validate the accuracy of the contents, but if nothing is provided, then the underlying primary document is considered incomplete.***

All states are different and some issues clearly bring this point to the forefront.

In Arizona... it is perfectly legal to notarize an incomplete document with an ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. This means that if an Exhibit A is missing on a DOT, I am OK to notarize it with an Ack. It is deemed in the books as 'not always a good idea' but it IS LEGAL.

AZ law only prohibits the notarization of incomplete documents when using a Jurat.