Posted by MonicaFL on 11/16/06 6:06pm
Msg #160654

Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney

about this. I had sent a message to the Library of Congress to have someone explain this to me and here is what he said - Before spending any money on a BG check, call the title companies you work for and see if the Bkg check that was done in your state is sufficient for them. he also stated that he thought the one for Florida would be sufficient but we would need to get a certified copy of it. He also told me - and this is new - that eventually we will all need to have what he called a "identity Theft Red Flag Program" on our computer. This is "already in place with the banking industry" and then we will be covered by both the Banking Legislation and by the FTC. He also stated that, although he has nothing to do with the NNA, he did look at their website and felt that what they were doing was worth it since it will be sort of a "one stop for all to see" website. Just thought I would pass this on to all of you.

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 6:14pm
Msg #160655

I am interested as to why you contacted the Library of Congress. Just curious.

Reply by MonicaFL on 11/17/06 10:01am
Msg #160822

Well, I couldn't get any response from the Notary Association here in Florida nor could I get a response from one of the Senators who co-sponsored the bill, nor from a Senator who sponsored an amendment to the bill. I was just trying to get the straight scoop on it so I tried the lawyers at the Library of Congress.

Reply by Carmen/123 on 11/16/06 6:19pm
Msg #160656

Very interesting indeed. I am puzzled by one thing however; for those of you who are still NNA members (I gave mine up years ago) I am wondering how the BG check will be viewed by title companies looking at their site. Will they have to register to view this information since the directory is not open to the public? Most of the folks I work for are so in a hurry I doubt hat they will have the patience for this.

C

Reply by Susan Fischer on 11/16/06 6:27pm
Msg #160659

Good point, Carmen. Plus, pay to view, too? n/m

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 6:38pm
Msg #160662

Re: Good point, Carmen. Plus, pay to view, too?

No, you do not have to pay to view if you are company seeking signing agents.

Reply by Ndwa on 11/16/06 6:44pm
Msg #160665

Pay to view...Wanna bet Brenda?

I don't get HBO & Showtime for free....Sheeeeshhhh

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/17/06 8:39am
Msg #160791

Re: Good point, Carmen. Plus, pay to view, too?

NNA has a separate, free website for SSs or TCs - www.signingagent.com - which the companies can use to find NSAs. All they have to do is register - it doesn't cost them anything. When I asked NNA how the companies would know whether an NSA has passed their background check, they said just refer them to signingagent.com. The only info they will get about the BC is whether you passed - no details.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/16/06 7:03pm
Msg #160674

** I am puzzled by one thing however; for those of you who are still NNA members (I gave mine up years ago) I am wondering how the BG check will be viewed by title companies looking at their site. Will they have to register to view this information since the directory is not open to the public?**

NNA says that the TCs and SSs can check www.signingagent.com to view your BGC results. Yes, they have to register, but it doesn't cost them anything... Will they bother doing that? Your guess is as good as mine, but that's where I'm directing the companies that are asking for GLB compliance (and there have been a few....)

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 7:22pm
Msg #160683

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

When a company looks for a signing agent at the NNA signingagent.com site. Those that are NNA certified and have had a background check have a gold symbol next to their name.
Those that are certified only have a red symbol, those that only have the background screening without being certified have a green symbol and those that are just a signing agent without being certified or had a background check have a blue symbol.

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 7:26pm
Msg #160685

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

Interesting, isn't it Sylvia.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 7:33pm
Msg #160688

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

Yup - I thought so too

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 8:23pm
Msg #160701

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

When did they start doing BGC if not certified? When I cantacted them, I was told they would NOT offer BGC unless you were currently certified. I said I didn't want to get re-certified and was told that I could not get the BGC.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 8:42pm
Msg #160708

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

Jojo
I don't know, but I saw a message somewhere that if you called them you could get just the background check.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 11/16/06 8:54pm
Msg #160710

Re: I have a problem with that too..

I was told just about ten days ago by the NNA (on the phone) that you didn't need to be certified to get their BGC - the way he said it was "you're paying for the certification anyway so why not take the test?"...my understanding was always you needed to be certified to get only the BGC..

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 8:57pm
Msg #160711

Re: I have a problem with that too..

It sounds like they did an about-face on that subject. I had a couple heated discussions with two different CSRs from the NNA that said they wouldn't do it for non-certified. Guess they figured they would make more money this way.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/16/06 9:14pm
Msg #160716

Re: Gramm-Leach...I just spoke with an attorney- NNA symbols

I think it's one of those things you have to press them for - there is definitely a symbol for non-certified NSAs with background check, so they do offer it even if they don't promote it as an option.

Maybe the question to them should be "How do I get that symbol next to my name?"

Reply by Nancy Korb on 11/16/06 8:07pm
Msg #160696

I took the NNA certification and background check this last month. I was told by the NNA that the largest six companies in America were banding together with the NNA to institute this new certification and background check. I wasn't told that any companies would have to pay to see my name, but I've been getting calls from the list.

Reply by Poppy on 11/16/06 8:22pm
Msg #160700

Nancy, if you don't mind my asking... The calls you're

getting, are they from good paying companies or are you being low-balled?

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 8:33pm
Msg #160705

**I was told by the NNA that the largest six companies in America were banding together with the NNA to institute this new certification and background check. **

Nancy, you seem like a very nice person. Some days people get really upset about this NNA and the BGC thing. Please don't take it personal if that happens...it is not directed at you...it's about the NNA being perceived as the impetus behind the need for BGCs. When they get to do them, they make the money is the perception.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/16/06 8:37pm
Msg #160707

Here's what I wonder...

Is it - or will it be - still set up so that TCs and SSs can view all of our data, but even if we are members, we can't view our own to see if it is accurate or how it's being displayed??? (Not that I'm even considering this...) When it was a marketing profile, that was one thing, but background check info? Maybe I'm ignorant of how this works, but it would make me very nervous.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 8:53pm
Msg #160709

Re: Here's what I wonder...

Janet
It only has a symbol next to your name to indicate whether you have had the background check. No access to the data they collected.

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 8:59pm
Msg #160712

Re: Here's what I wonder...

You have to be an NNA and an NSA member to see it.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 9:40pm
Msg #160719

Re: Here's what I wonder...

Jojo
I have a signing agency and it is registered with the NNA, although I rarely use it to find a signing agent, I use TSR and NotRot.

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 9:47pm
Msg #160721

Sylvia, I sent you an e-mail. n/m

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 11/16/06 10:00pm
Msg #160724

Re: Sylvia, I sent you an e-mail. - Got it Jojo n/m

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/16/06 8:59pm
Msg #160713

Re: Here's what I wonder...

The only thing the TCs and SSs will see on your profile is whether or not you passed the cbc. There is no detailed information provided, and as far as I know the NNA has no idea what was in your cbc - the whole process is handled by a separate company (Signix), which just reports back a pass/fail to NNA. You have the right to get a copy of your cbc (and the right to challenge any inaccuracies...)

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 9:08pm
Msg #160715

Re: Here's what I wonder...

Check out the website of the company that is doing the "background check".
Their phone number is 877-890-5350. The answer the phone. "Thank you for calling Sunguard Signix customer care for the NNA". I was told by the receptionist that if I wanted information, I could check out their website at www.signix.com.

Happy reading!

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 11/16/06 11:30pm
Msg #160735

Re: doesn't tell you diddly-dink about bgc's and NNA! n/m

Reply by jojo_MN on 11/16/06 11:53pm
Msg #160739

Exactly my point...there is no reference to background

checks. It seems to me to be an Enjoa-related business. IMHO.

I've called there a couple times and spoke to a couple different individuals there. I decided to investigate those that are investigating me. I was told that they check back 7 years for criminal actions and felonies. They check the DMV records for DUI and other driving-related matters and do a terrorist check. They do not do fingerprint checks. So much for more intense background checks! The results PASS or FAIL are sent to the NNA and it is posted next to your name if you passed.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/17/06 1:43am
Msg #160753

Re: Exactly my point...there is no reference to background

I let my NNA membership lapse a few years back. Did they change things so that you can view your own profile (as potential clients would see it) without being a ss or tc? I always wondered if my profile was showing up on page 2, page 20 or page 200... Not that I really care anymore...

Reply by SueW/Tn on 11/17/06 1:38pm
Msg #160856

WOW...now I'm wondering

What are the perimeters for passing/failing? Just how is that determined? Of course I realize if you're a convicted felon things will go downhill BUT what are their guidelines and who makes the determination? This wording gets to me....once I failed a random drug test and nearly lost my job. HR department had me go back immediately and retest. Seems that someone in the lab spilled the specimen so there wasn't enough to test i.e. they failed me. It was up to the company to decide if they wanted me to retest. Now something like that stinks but because you sign all the necessary paperwork and you agree that the findings are final...you're SOL if something comes back questionable. On a background check, from what I'm reading, any number of things could be inaccurately reported....who determines pass/fail? This isn't good......

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/17/06 4:44pm
Msg #160885

Re: WOW...now I'm wondering

I'm not sure what parameters they've set, but you have a right to a copy of the results. Based on what they're asking for to ID you (SSN, DOB, AKA, etc), they should have enough info to get an accurate report. The search is done through LexisNexis, which is very reliable (unlike zabasearch and the others like it). There is always the possibility that they will turn up something inaccurate, and then you have the burden of proving them wrong - same as with any inaccuracies on your credit report.

As far as who determines those parameters, my guess is it would be the NNA and the companies they've managed to bring on board. There is no federal requirement, other than that the financial institutions have to come up with a security policy; they are free to determine exactly what that policy is. Since the NNA has gotten some of the companies to agree to accept their BC, it stands to reason that those companies have all agreed on some minimally acceptable standard to use in their own security policies; IOW, they're not looking for top-secret clearance, they may just want to know that you haven't been convicted of a crime.

I just completed an application with a TC today - I had to sign their privacy policy (none of which I found objectionable), plus provide proof of a CBC. That's the third or fourth one in the past two weeks that has required a CBC, so it looks like the tide is starting to come in on this one...

Some TCs will require a CBC, and some will not - there is no "federal mandate"; the FTC has left it up to them to decide what their policy will be. Those who DO require a CBC cannot give you work unless you have one; if they did, they'd be violating their own security policy. I doubt that any amount of foot-stomping and righteous indignation is going to change that - after all, you can't force them to use you - so it comes down to an economic decision on your part.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 11/17/06 5:39pm
Msg #160891

A thoughtful reply that I read with interest Mike

I completely and totally understand what you're saying and bottom line, yes indeedy it has to do with simple economics. Up to now not one of my clients has requested this BC so I'm sitting tight and waiting patiently for Harry to put something together. There will be NO WAY I will ever agree to something not being made fully aware of the parameters involved beforehand. The last time I found a mistake on my credit report it took me 11 months to get it corrected. The last time I made a mistake and the IRS owed ME instead of me owing them it took nearly a year to get the money.

My personal view on what I see happening now is alot of less experienced SA's are doing exactly what NNA "suggests" and yes, they definitely are getting work from those 5 companies in the NNA's hip pocket (purely I'm sure as a matter of convenience). From what I have seen all those companies are paying lower fees and I, to the best of my knowledge, have never worked for any of them. So until it begins to effect my pocket book I again repeat that I'm going to sit tight and see what shakes out.

There is a huge gap in quality information coming from these folks. I want to see something in writing that says what they will and what they won't check. I want to know once they have my vitals how many times they'll recheck. A fellow SA had one of the 5 named companies run a credit check on her 6 times in 2 years. That's unacceptable in my book. Tell me what you're checking, when and how you're going to protect my information. Tell me how misinformation will be handled. Are you going to ask me to sign a waiver that IF you make a mistake AND misinformation is released you're not liable? And finally I would like to know what Red Flag protection your company has in place to protect my information and I want to know that every employee touching my name has in fact "passed" their own BG check. And these are just starters......

Reply by MikeC/NY on 11/17/06 7:21pm
Msg #160903

Re: A thoughtful reply that I read with interest Mike

If none of your clients are requesting a CBC, there's no reason to get one and no reason to be concerned about it. The only time it will become an issue is if they raise it - and at that point you'll have to decide whether or not to comply.

As for the rest of it - you're right. This is one huge furball of bad information. There is nothing in either GLB or the FTC's final decision on how to enforce it that requires a CBC of anyone in the chain from financial company to consumer. There is a SUGGESTION in the FTC guidance about a CBC, but no requirement. Everything beyond that is kind of fuzzy.

The reality is that there are some TCs that are now requiring a CBC, and that's what we have to deal with. Debate is nice, but at this point it's what a friend once described as flogging the wet spot inside the chalk outline of where the dead horse used to be...

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 11/16/06 6:26pm
Msg #160658

Re: Identity Theft Red Flag Program Information

Link to the ID Theft Red Flag Program Certification. http://www.sba.gov/ADVO/laws/comments/ftc06_0918.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I found the last 2 paragraphs interesting - (below)


The FTC should consider creating a certification option for small low-risk entities. Under this
option, the FTC would produce a one-page certification form that would take the place of the written report required in the NPRM. This form would state that the undersigned small business has reviewed their policy on preventing identity theft, found that there was an extremely small likelihood of such occurrence, and have taken steps necessary to prevent or mitigate it. If the FTC adopts a shortened Red Flag list, as described above, these could be listed on the form as steps necessary for certification. Making this option available to small businesses which have a low risk of identity theft will increase compliance with the rule by making it simple and efficient to do so. In addition, the FTC can state the minimum steps necessary on the certification form, which will help prevent identity theft involving low-risk
entities.

Compliance Guide.
While not technically an alternative, the Commission should issue a compliance guide for small businesses
which would walk them through each step in the program. Because of the extensive reach of this program, many small businesses will be covered by the program that do not have professional expertise in this area. A clearly written compliance guide will help them comply while minimizing the amount of time and resources they must spend preparing their identity theft red flag program.

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 6:36pm
Msg #160661

Re: Identity Theft Red Flag Program Information

OMG...and the commission should do this and that and the other thing. Barbara, thank you! Now, tell me this...am I just dense or is this thing still NOT exactly mandatory or even clearly planned out yet?

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 11/16/06 6:44pm
Msg #160666

Re: HaHaHa - lol lol - chuckle, etc....

"am I just dense or is this thing still NOT exactly mandatory or even clearly planned out yet? "


Hey Brenda, it's the Government - what do you think???????

Who's on 1st, 2nd, and 3rd? and does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/16/06 6:51pm
Msg #160667

Re: HaHaHa - lol lol - chuckle, etc....And...it's quite

possible that the attorney on staff at the Library of Congress has lots of info, but not the right info about the problems this is presenting because it has been promoted by one organization to bring money out of pockets and into........................

Nevermind...you know what I mean.

Reply by David Kral on 11/18/06 12:46am
Msg #160931

Why not just check it at the State level?

I do not know why the title companies would not just check this at the State level. I feel comfortable in letting the State have my information. In fact, I think they should require it to get a notary seal. Is the state going to have some non-criminal notaries and then unchecked notaries or criminal notaries? If the State is doing a state only check and you have done something criminal in another state, then your State needs to improve its check process.

This is so stupid. This is a State function. If the State ran a GL compliant check, it would be only one background check and the information handled by the state. In fact the state could run it every year automatically if you hold a license good for several years. Every state notary association should be recommending adopting this change to the state officer that regulates notaries in their state. They should be supplying sample language lifted right out of the GL act. State officals are always looking to toot their horn on a public safety measures they help improved come elections. Well this is a layup!