Posted by Kristin/CA on 7/8/06 10:22pm
Msg #131837

First signing today for a Texas loan

Hello, I just need some reassurance please! I had my first loan signing today. I'm a California notary and it was a Texas 80/20 purchase. I attached acknowledgements and jurats with the proper California verbiage to all of their acknowledgements and jurats seeing that the docs were signed in California and we have to comply with California law. In the package was included two acknowledgment forms not attached to anything. Do I included two of my own acknowledgment forms and leave the bottom part blank? That worries me because then they could be used to attach to another document. What do you suggest?
Thanks for any help!

Kristin Kading

Reply by larry Schaffer on 7/8/06 11:06pm
Msg #131842

i would not sign and stamp a loose acknowledgement that is not attached to a document. people send these in loan packages all the time, perhaps to cover their mistakes or something. i've even seen them listed in a table of contents that i was suppose to check that i had completed, listed as general acknowledgement. i usually attach a note to them stating,"i cannot sign and stamp a loose acknowledgement that is not attached to a document that i am witnessing the signing of. it's pretty much improper if not illegal.

good luck, this is kind of a fun job,

larry

Reply by Kristin/CA on 7/8/06 11:22pm
Msg #131845

I thought they might have been included in case a mistake was made on another one. I knew I shouldn't notarize these unless they are attached to a document. I will just write a note like you said. For my first signing this was quite a challenge! I was told it was only a first lien but when I got the docs it was a first and second. There were 10 pages requiring notarizing. And I had to fill out separate acknowledgments and jurats for everything! It took about 2 hours to complete. I'm still nervous and stressed that I might have made a mistake somewhere. But I suppose you just have to live and learn and everyone is new at some point right!
Thanks so much for your help.

Reply by Dorothy_MI on 7/8/06 11:32pm
Msg #131847

Make sure you let whomever hired you

that is was two loans. The least you should get for the second loan is 50% of whatever they paid you for the first. If it was a SS they probably did not know it was a first and second and only quoted for one loan. They will need to rebill to get the extra $$. If you don't contact them you are cheating both of you out of extra $$.

Remember most SS are in actuality a broker and never handle or see the product. Just wish they got the normal broker's fee of 10%!

Reply by Kristin/CA on 7/8/06 11:50pm
Msg #131852

Re: Make sure you let whomever hired you

It was a title company who hired me and I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt and maybe it was me who misunderstood. It was early in the morning ,I was driving and it was my very first call so I was nervous! When they overnight the docs to you, aren't they suppose to provide a copy of them for the borrowers? I thought so, so I went ahead and went to Kinko's and made copies of both sets. I did leave a msg on the cell phone of the person who hired me stating that I had to make copies and that we would need to revise my fee by adding on $25. Do you think I did the right thing in this situation? Should I wait for a revised confirmation with the new fee before I fax the invoice over? They provided an invoice and it includes a space for the fee and who it was approved by, should I wait to send this until i get the approval of the fee?

Reply by larry Schaffer on 7/8/06 11:36pm
Msg #131848

Kristin,
i cannot believe the mistakes i've made. mostly missing a signature in my hurry to print the docs, flag them and make the appointment. fortunately, i go through the docs very carfully before i leave the signing and have not yet had to go back because of something i've missed. had i not checked my work before i left i would have had to go back many times. i think it's a must to check the docs before you leave the signing.

larry

Reply by Kristin/CA on 7/8/06 11:42pm
Msg #131850

I think I am probably over reacting because it's my first signing. I checked the docs twice while with the borrowers and 4 more times when I got home! To the best of my knowledge they are done correctly. I'm sure I'll hear about it if they aren't! But I feel comforted to know others make mistakes too, thanks

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 7/8/06 11:44pm
Msg #131851

Re: Kristin were in CA are you? n/m

Reply by Kristin/CA on 7/8/06 11:51pm
Msg #131853

Re: Kristin were in CA are you?

Anaheim

Reply by Joe Ewing on 7/9/06 1:47am
Msg #131864

I have a little pipeline that sends me a Loan a week for signatures on Texas propertys. There's some screaming deals there now since the Vegas market has collapsed. I also do a thriving process serving gig for several other TX firms. Does this qualify me to comment?

Kristen have you ever read Civil Code 1189 (c) ? Well I can assure you that you screwed up the Acknowledgments. As for the Jurats, well those require modification no matter where they originated (even California) because no state except California requires identify verification and an oath of truthfulness. Texas even has roving Commissioners of Deeds that Notarize record able documents signed outside of the State.

(IMHO) If this loan records it will be because Texas has reciprocity however I doubt if the Mortgage will record with a California all purpose Acknowledgment attached to it.

I'm curious, were those loose Acknowledgments California compliant?

Reply by John_NorCal on 7/9/06 9:40am
Msg #131878

Re: Enlighten me where did she screw up?

Below is the civil code section you refer to. I believe in her post she did not feel the acnowledgements provided were compliant with Calif law. As long as she didn't send any notarized unattached certificates, she should be o.k. Did I miss something in her post?

(c) On documents to be filed in another state or jurisdiction of
the United States, a California notary public may complete any
acknowledgment form as may be required in that other state or
jurisdiction on a document, provided the form does not require the
notary to determine or certify that the signer holds a particular
representative capacity or to make other determinations and
certifications not allowed by California law.

Reply by kathy/ca on 7/9/06 9:52am
Msg #131879

Joe, why do you assure her she "screwed up the Acks"? Did

you see them? Nothing she said about the Notary certs sounded like she screwed up to me. Maybe you know something the rest of of dont so please explain further. Thanks!

Reply by Calnotary on 7/9/06 10:04am
Msg #131882

Re: Joe, why do you assure her she "screwed up the Acks"? Di

I think he is referring that if its an out of state property and that property is going to be record it out of CA, you can use the other state ack, and not provide with a California ack.But what do I know?

Reply by kathy/ca on 7/9/06 10:09am
Msg #131884

When in doubt the out of state verbiage is correct, my

understanding that we may use notary certs for the state the signing takes place in. We dont know for sure that the ack included in the loan package is state compliant with Tx if we are from Ca. Maybe Joe is trying to say something other than what we are reading here Cal, I hope he explains further.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/9/06 11:31am
Msg #131904

Re: When in doubt the out of state verbiage is correct, my

DISCLAIMER: I am not an attorney. Consider me no more truthful than your run of the mill grifter and con artist when you read this -- believe me no further than you can throw me. Do your own research!
==============

I am 99.999% sure that your basic California Ack is sufficient for recording in Texas. It has all the elements of our own ack. I would not stress over attaching a CA ack to a deed in recorded Texas.

In fact, once upon a time AG Mattox ruled that an ack with both jurat and ack language in it was recordable.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 7/9/06 12:47pm
Msg #131926

Re: When in doubt the out of state verbiage is correct, my

The CA handbook states as of Jan 2006 that "any certificate of acknowledgement taken within this state shall be in the following form". Then they show the form. Verbaige is no longer an option.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/9/06 1:06pm
Msg #131932

Re: When in doubt the out of state verbiage is correct, my

This is another welcomed thread of debate!

Reply by Jon on 7/9/06 2:55pm
Msg #131950

Re: When in doubt the out of state verbiage is correct, my

"The CA handbook states as of Jan 2006 that 'any certificate of acknowledgement taken within this state shall be in the following form'."

You need to read the complete statement. For sake of time, I have posted it below from the SOS website, http://www.ss.ca.gov/business/notary/notary_ack_06.htm.

"Effective January 1, 2006, the California certificate of acknowledgment must be in the form set forth in Civil Code section 1189, rather than "substantially" in the form set forth therein. The form set forth in Civil Code section 1189 did not change, but variations in the California form are no longer permitted. (The law regarding acknowledgments to be used with documents to be filed in other states has not changed (Civil Code § 1189(c))."

Note the sentence within the ( ). For documents going out of state, you still have the option using out of state verbiage if it is REQUIRED, not just because it is printed differently on the ack.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 7/9/06 3:03pm
Msg #131954

They need to fix the handbook

and make it clear where the example form is to not state "any". The way it is there in my opinion is contrary to the statement. But here's the good news. I won't be working in CA anymore. I'll be setting up shop soon here in TX.

Reply by John_NorCal on 7/9/06 4:41pm
Msg #131964

Re: They need to fix the handbook

I agree the handbook does need work. However in my opinion, strictly as my opinion, the handbook references the various government codes, ie. civil code, probate code, etc. The secretary of state does not enact laws but sets the guidelines as to how notaries adhere to the law. The final arbiter of our actions as notaries are the various governmental codes that authorize our authority.

Reply by Life Saving Services - Doug on 7/9/06 7:08pm
Msg #131976

Re: They need to fix the handbook

OK OK If I understand this correctly. Sign and date the out of CA. Notorized section of the doc's then attach an acknowledgement and fill in the bottom section stating the Doc it belongs to. If this docuement is recorded in another state you are OK and you are in compliance with CA. with the attached acknowledgement. If this is true why don't we ( if you have one ) just stamp the additional acknowledement language on the out of state doc and sign and execute both ?

Just trying to understand, any feed back is appreciated.

Reply by JAM/CA on 7/10/06 1:28am
Msg #132029

I really don't understand what you're saying Joe. I do 4 Purchase Closings a week for Texas properties here in CA. I always attach CA All Purpose ACK's and Jurat's and they all close. Within these loan docs are all kinds of different wording for their ACK's and I don't know which is correct wording for Texas, so any other states I always use a CA ACK. They all close and never have a problem.