Posted by CaliNotary on 5/3/06 11:08am
Msg #117426
Gotta love the NNA n/m
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 5/3/06 11:21am
Msg #117428
Oops
I received this email this morning from a company who i did a signing for a couple of days ago. The want me to go back out today to get a couple of things resigned (due to an ultra picky lender, not any mistake I made). They asked me to date the notarizations for the date of the original signing, I emailed them and told them I couldn't, and this is the response:
"Thanks for your email and for checking in with us! We really appreciate that!
According to the National Notary Association, we were informed that a notary acknowledgment (back dated) is alright, as long as the document that is being acknowledged was signed on that specific date (the original signing date). Meaning, if you are acknowledging a document which you and the borrowers already signed and acknowledged, but then there was a mistake and/or missing signature, it is alright to acknowledge and use the original signing date, in this case (technically, it was already acknowledged on that specific date).
Please let me know if that helps and/or clears up the situation.
Thanks again!"
I think it's great that the company actually tried to find out the answer, but I can't believe that this was the answer they got. Even as a non NNA fan I'm still shocked that they would give this info to anyone.
|
Reply by LawrenceOK on 5/3/06 11:30am
Msg #117434
Re: Oops... You gotta be kidding me?
I sure hope this company doesn't rely on the NNA's answer in the future.
|
Reply by Regal/NC on 5/3/06 11:33am
Msg #117435
Re: Oops
But you are assuming that the answer given came from the NNA. If so, then the company knows less than the NNA if they had to inquire about the process.
|
Reply by lulu on 5/3/06 11:38am
Msg #117437
Re: Oops
Isn't this the purpose of the Ltd POA, to allow them to fix errors without having to get the borrower to re-sign? Maybe you could educate the company on that particular document if it was in the package. Just a thought I may be wrong.
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 5/3/06 11:56am
Msg #117444
Re: Oops
"According to the National Notary Association, we were informed that a notary acknowledgment (back dated) is alright"
I'm not assuming the answer was from the NNA, they told me the answer was from the NNA.
I can understand a signing service employee not being an expert on notary law. There are probably basic things they should know, but if they're not a notary themselves I can give a pass. But for the NNA to tell anyone that backdating is OK in certain circumstances? That is mindblowingly inept.
|
Reply by lulu on 5/3/06 11:39am
Msg #117438
Re: Oops
Oops is right! I keep attaching to the last message read.
Isn't this the purpose of the Ltd POA, to allow them to fix errors without having to get the borrower to re-sign? Maybe you could educate the company on that particular document if it was in the package. Just a thought I may be wrong.
|
Reply by Beth/MD on 5/3/06 11:45am
Msg #117440
Re: Oops on the NNA
If this is the answer the NNA is giving inquiring minds, well no wonder so many "fresh off the assembly line" notaries are posting the most basic of questions here. Figures.
|
Reply by JAM/CA on 5/3/06 12:07pm
Msg #117447
Re: Oops
Send this to the NNA and find out for sure if they are giving out this kind of info and let them know which company.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 5/3/06 3:37pm
Msg #117529
Re: Oops
**Send this to the NNA and find out for sure if they are giving out this kind of info and let them know which company.**
That's more trouble than it is worth, I'd think. It could tie Cali up for days. The company said they got it from the NNA so what else can he go on but that.
|
Reply by Kate/CA on 5/3/06 12:08pm
Msg #117448
Re: Oops
I think my answer to them would be, "When you get the SOS to put it in the CA notary Handbook, then I'll believe it is legal".
|
Reply by John_NorCal on 5/3/06 3:01pm
Msg #117515
Re: Oops
Was this essentially the same document that you originally signed or was it a changed document?
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 5/3/06 3:08pm
Msg #117518
Re: Oops
It was the same document, but a new copy which was being signed again. The lender didnt' like that the incorrect names of the sig/name affadavit were lined through and initialled, they wanted the borrower to write "never known by this name" without lining through it.
But does it matter? New signature, new notarization, it's that black and white.
|
Reply by Cherilyn_CO on 5/3/06 1:14pm
Msg #117468
I got this exact same response from a TC...
that I wouldn't back date for. Same scenario, needed something re-done and when I wouldn't date it for the day before, she told me that if I had acknowledged the signatures on that date, then it wouldn't be illegal.
|
Reply by Blueink_CA on 5/3/06 1:53pm
Msg #117477
Once upon a time
I was asked to send an ack after the fact 'cause they said I didn't send one with the pkg. (I say they lost it). Anyway, I called the CA SOS and was told it was OK to send as long as there were no changes to the document...
|
Reply by CaliNotary on 5/3/06 3:11pm
Msg #117519
Re: Once upon a time
I've done that, but that's a different situation. The borrower really DID appear in front of you on the day that you're sending the acknowledgement for that specific document. If this were just some sort of correction to what had already been signed I wouldn't have a problem with it. But when they're signing again it's a completely different story.
|
