Posted by Charm_AL on 3/16/06 1:39pm
Msg #105801

MichiganAL...

great synopsis on feedback, I backed it up and hopefully others will too. Somethings got to be done. There also should be a collection of her posts to be sent to FL SOS.
she's been a notary since 03 per PAW and her profile claims over 10 years in the notary industry. I'm sure we feel like babysitters jumping up and correcting everything she writes so that no harm comes to anyone here and I'm tired of it.

Reply by Beth/MD on 3/16/06 1:48pm
Msg #105803

Charm, thanks for the heads up. I also gave Al's post a thumbs up.

I also am beginning to think that FlaMac is posting the way she does simply to get the attention. She makes a post with an incorrect statement. Repeatedly. And she does it daily. If she's doing this for attention, she's got bigger issues than anyone here can deal with. I think my dogs would be better informed notaries.

Reply by Cherilyn_CO on 3/16/06 1:50pm
Msg #105804

Ok, I give

where is the feedback forum? I suspect it's right under my nose, but can't seem to find it.

Reply by Charm_AL on 3/16/06 1:52pm
Msg #105806

Re: Ok, I give

down at the bottom of the page, click on contact us, it's on that page

Reply by Winston_Tn on 3/16/06 3:54pm
Msg #105840

Although the concept failed miserably since its (CIA rooted) inception, as evidenced by Watergate and TrickyDick Nixon, I believe one might plead 'FlaMacian Plausible Deniability' when rendering up an excuse for the occasional Notary faux paux.
Given just one favorable ruling in the courts, 'FlaMacian Plausible Deniability' might even provide cessation of the required 'Enough'&'Outrageous' insurance.
One must simply argue that he/she was legally advised, on a respected on-line 'trade' board,
to act in this (anti-notoral) fashion by what one could only assume was an attorney advising in 'your' best interest, aka FlaMac.
'FlaMacian Plausible Deniability' might even work for Harry, since we just technically implicated the 'board' in our argument. ( Harry...You might also try the '1stAmendment Plausible Deniability' )

I believe this is the solution to the POA notorization involving the 'vapor' signee and Ms.Gotrocks agent.
Now don't feel remorse for involving FlaMac, you see..the 'normal' plausible deniability shows no bias, and can act as her net, for another example of plausible deniability is someone who actively avoids gaining certain knowledge of facts because it benefits that person not to know.
As an example, an unscrupulous attorney may suspect that facts exist which would hurt his case, but decide not to investigate the issue because if the attorney had actual knowledge, the rules of ethics might require him to reveal those facts to the opposing side. Thus his failure to investigate maintains plausible deniability.
There is however a mental, spiritual, and moral price to pay...In the term Plausible denial, the word "denial" implies some social mores against lying or fraud.
This means that the users of this term know its use is immoral. One living in an amoral society would not need to falsely deny their actions.
Plausible denial is a type of lying that requires preparation to avoid blame or detection. By preparing to use plausible denial,
one admits by their actions the foreknowledge of guilt and the knowledge of social mores. Otherwise, one would not feel the need to prepare.

That being said, 'FlaMacian Plausible Deniability' hereafter known as FPD, must truely be weighed as a viable defense.


DISCLAIMER:
All dialogue is offered as amusement and saturated with sarcasm, had I been an attorney, I would have evoked the 2nd Amendment to bear arms...and shot myself...using 2ndAmendment Plausible Deniability as an out if I somehow missed...lol

Reply by MichiganAl on 3/16/06 4:34pm
Msg #105864

Winston, I just have to know

What is your background? Were you or are you a journalist? A professor? Your writing and communication skills are very impressive. Knot lik the usuwal peepal we c here.

Reply by Charm_AL on 3/16/06 6:16pm
Msg #105905

Re: MichiganAL...Winston!....

I used your FPD approach!
By golly, let me share with the community! I went to a signing, it was a double, unbeknownst to me. I just whipped out a blank ack and used a staple gun to attach it to the entire 425 pages...BTW: record 2.5 minutes piggyback...When the TC called me and said "what the hell?!?!?"
I simply said hey, I am invoking the flamacian plausible deniability defense! This is in lieu of everything they're supposed to sign and the husband forgot to show up for the signing. However, I did call him and thru my magical camera phone, he produced his
ID . Guess what? They doubled my fee !!! I am damn good.

Reply by RayC_TX on 3/16/06 4:05pm
Msg #105844

As a new Forum Reader

In brief
PJM/MI stated: ˇ§She sits down with me and hands me an un-notarized POA signed by her hubby. Hubby can't be there, as he is a surgeon and in surgery all day. I call the TC and they tell me it's okay to notarize the POA... hubby signed it before he went to work that day and is in surgery all day.ˇ¨
To which FlaMac replies: ˇ§I don't see where you did anything illegal or wrong but you don't want your part in this to be misconstrued;ˇ¨ followed by ˇ§I think your idea to always call the signer of the POA is goodˇ¨ here is the clincher ˇ§ but in this case...she probably had her accomplice waiting for your phone callˇ¨

Again as a new kid around hereˇK reviewing the STATE <pick one of 50 there all about the same> Notary Laws ˇK SIGNER NOT BEING PRESENTˇK is not covered but in a few RARE instances. To which the States lay out specific guide lines to follow. YET this lady can find nothing wrong with it.
Furthermore/here aft and ONUNTO!! „˛ Please donˇ¦t mistake for a legal term
I am still searching for a STATE that recognizes ˇ§PHONE CALLSˇ¨ as a proof of ID.
And to top that NONE ˇK I repeat NONE declair SURGEON, Surgery, or private investigators exempt from being present when their signature and ID are presented to a notary. Nor, title companies have the authority to dictate what is and is not legal for a notary to sign, unless they are an attorney.

As a free member of this forum, I donˇ¦t feel I have a right to post in the ˇ§feedback forumˇ¨ but when a 10 year notary post such, I can certainly see the concern of others. I look forward to all the do and do notˇ¦s . I do read the feedback forum from time to time and I am afraid most of your concerns may be correct.

This FLA person may be on crack or suffering from a stroke. Possibly Altzimers or her rocking chair is pinching off the PROZACK drip. Which ever the case, what ever I can do to be of assistance let me know.

Reply by Anonymous on 3/16/06 4:18pm
Msg #105849

Okay..... Anyways........

I agree with you Ray on one concept. The concept that we, as free members, don't have a right to post a comment regarding FlaMac in the feedback forum. She, as others, are paying customers. We, the cheapo's, are not.

I disagree fully with FlaMac's response earlier and would love to voice that in the feedback forum. But I cannot.


Winston ---- Were you the writer of "As the Worm Turns"? I thought it was pretty clever and your writing style suggests to me that you may the the author.


Ray ---- Please stop using the 'symbols'. I'm reading your message and am having a hard time in doing so. Thanks!

Reply by Korey Humphreys on 3/16/06 4:19pm
Msg #105850

oops... I accidentially posted as Anonymous.. SORRY!! n/m

Reply by RayC_TX on 3/16/06 4:21pm
Msg #105853

Korrey aka "dirty SOX" ...

Opps sorry .... I had to type that while in another document for something else ... i didnt realize it posted as characters. Looked ok in WORD.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 3/16/06 5:24pm
Msg #105883

Re: Korrey aka "dirty SOX" ...

I totally disagree. I feel that as notaries public we are public servants and it is our responsibility to state when someone is commiting such a dispicable act as to willfully misinform in ways that could cause seriously legal problems for the one who took the advice. Basic or Premier doesn't matter in this case, we have a responsibility to the profession.

Reply by John_NorCal on 3/16/06 5:35pm
Msg #105891

Re: For my 2 cents worth I agree with SarahBeth......

If we are to be considered professionals, conduct such as FlaMac (whatever) has to be addressed. Of course it's up to the Florida SofS to do something, and until there is a verifiable violation that won't happen. So back to the advice that has been tendered here so often, "know your states laws and don't take anyone's word as gospel."