Posted by cassiewi on 11/13/06 9:01am
Msg #159505

Now the Background check is recommended, not required

This is the email I received from the NNA, I'm sure some of you received the same one. I find it interesting that the tone has changed from required to recommended and now they are an "option".

Dear NNA Member,

Leading title services companies have recommended that all Notaries handling loan signings complete their background screening by December 1.

First American Lenders Advantage, Fiserv Lending Solutions, LandAmerica OneStop, National Real Estate Information Services and Stewart Mortgage Information have agreed to employ the NNA's Notary Signing Agent Certification and Background Screening program as an option to comply with new lending industry requirements.

To make it easy for you to add the NNA's industry-recognized background screening to your credentials, we are providing background screening for NNA Certified Notary Signing Agents at a reduced-rate of just $39, a $10 savings off the regular $49 enrollment fee.

Get more information here.

Or call 1-800-US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827).

The National Notary Association

Reply by ZeeCA on 11/13/06 9:06am
Msg #159506

interestingly, the list of those stating that they require bc checks...two have called me repeatedly for signings and I have never had a bc ck.... nor have I ever established with them

Reply by Carmen/123 on 11/13/06 9:12am
Msg #159508

Just as I thought. I too have worked for a couple of those companies myself and they never mentioned this 'so called background check'. This is why I never respond to scare tactics with the NNA. They did the same thing with the enjoa machine and we see how that turned out. We need to all stick together and keep the lines of communication open.

C

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 11/13/06 9:17am
Msg #159511

Re: Carmen and you also if your in CA-CA COMMISSIONED

you did a bg ck

Reply by Carmen/123 on 11/13/06 10:24am
Msg #159542

Re: Carmen and you also if your in CA-CA COMMISSIONED

Yes, I know DOJ for all CA notaries. But, I have notaries calling in to tell me that the NNA has told them that it is a reguirement for all of the States including CA. Which I know is BS.

C

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 11/13/06 9:16am
Msg #159510

Re: Zee but you have had a bg ck, you are in CA, you

did when you were commissioned.

Reply by ZeeCA on 11/13/06 9:21am
Msg #159513

Re: True, but NNA told me it was a sep ck not the same NM n/m

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 11/13/06 9:30am
Msg #159518

Re: Zee, think a minute, the SOS required you to have a bg

ck, now it would be my opinion the SOS is more powerful and superior to the NNA.....do you not agree? SOS-STATE RULES, NNA INDEPENDENT BUSINESS MAKING MONEY.......

Reply by ZeeCA on 11/13/06 9:38am
Msg #159519

Re: Zee, think a minute, the SOS required you to have a bg

and YES I definitely agree... BUT I called NNA and asked them about this....I told them I read on a notary board I would not have to blah blah and they said NOPE it is separate...you will still need it unless you do not want to work with the big 5....

go figure... Maybe the person said that to get his commision if I signed up for it?
jmho

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 11/13/06 9:44am
Msg #159522

Re: Zee my response would be why are you calling the NNA

they are not the almighty source and they do not rule the notary world.......Just my opinion, you have time to do this, if you insist on doing it. Why don't you want and see if your business decreases first, allow x amount of time and see if you feel you are losing business. I assume you have clients other then the Big 5......

Reply by ZeeCA on 11/13/06 9:47am
Msg #159523

Re: Zee my response would be why are you calling the NNA

no, I was not calling to sign up... I was calling to see what they would say....

and I agree completely... I did exactly that and the phone did not stop ringing ....

I know some people immed ran out and got it because the NNA said so....

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 11/13/06 9:50am
Msg #159525

Re: Zee my response would be why are you calling the NNA

**I know some people immed ran out and got it because the NNA said so....**

One of my competitors did exactly that, and proudly states so on her NR Profile! I couldn't stop laughing and couldn't be happier for the little lemming! She's obviously concerned with the low-ball SS business she reaps from the NNA/NSA site, which also suits me.
As an aside, my phone did stop ringing to an extent when my membership expired... SOX stopped calling me
LOL

Reply by Stamper_WI on 11/13/06 10:19am
Msg #159538

Well that explains it

SOX has only called me a couple of times and I don't belong to the NNA.

Reply by Carmen/123 on 11/13/06 10:25am
Msg #159544

Re: Zee, think a minute, the SOS required you to have a bg

Correct!!

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 11/13/06 9:25am
Msg #159515

Hmmm.... methinks they're rethinking their position...

Gee... I wonder why?
It's all in the careful wording Cassie. They are back-peddling

Reply by cassiewi on 11/13/06 9:26am
Msg #159516

Re: Hmmm.... methinks they're rethinking their position...

LOL, I know, that's why I thought you'd like to see it. Pretty humorous if you ask me.

Reply by SarahBeth_CA on 11/13/06 9:28am
Msg #159517

Re: Hmmm.... methinks they're rethinking their position...

Major back peddling. But then again they said both recommend and industry recognized. Still has me going hmmmmmm.

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 11/13/06 9:40am
Msg #159521

It's all legalese... it would appear that their legal team

has decided to more carefully word their BGC publicity campaign, which is exactly what it is. Remember... if the NNA can "sell" this service to major Title Underwriters and Lenders (without misleading them), then they are guilty of nothing other than being very good "snake-oil salesmen".
IF they mislead the industry giants into thinking there is a law that's being broken, that is a huge issue for them and the FTC.
Furthermore, if they "sell" this to Notaries by misleading them, it is a CONSUMER PROTECTION ISSUE. (yes, I meant to emphasize that)
They've evidently been put on notice by someone

Reply by Stamper_WI on 11/13/06 10:14am
Msg #159534

At Least one of those companies

Has their own background checking subsudiary. Fiserv owns CredStar and gives you the option on going through them for your bgc

Reply by Stamper_WI on 11/13/06 10:22am
Msg #159541

Re: At Least one of those companies

And given You don't have to join an organization and its multiple levels its a bargin. I see it as a tax deductable business expense. The BGC was sent to me and I forwarded it to Fiserv.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 11/13/06 10:29am
Msg #159545

FWIW, I recd an e-mail this AM from a notary lisiing.....

service stating that henceforth , they would only list NSAs in
their data bank if they were CBC compliant. They offered to secure
the CBC for $23 and attached an info form asking for just about
everythig but shoe size and hobbies and a consent to check just about
everything.
However, they stated, that if you had passed the NNA, CBC, they to just
let them know that you had passed, and that upon verification, you
would be CBC compliant with them.
I understand that after you have passed the NNA CBC, your profile at
signingagent.com is listed as such.
This is only intended as a FYI

Reply by Stamper_WI on 11/13/06 10:48am
Msg #159550

There seems to be discrepencies

On the extent of the BGC. IF they accept the NNA's and Fiserv accepts the NNA's with the option of doing it through Cred Star there is a big difference in what information they need from you and what they "need" to have. Credstar wasn't requiring such minute details that could be compared to my shoe size. Name,address and SS#. I have not seen what the NNA wants from you and still don't know what they look at in my background. But it sounds like that SS wants a lot of info and find the NNA seems to satisfiy that.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 11/13/06 11:03am
Msg #159555

As I recall, the NNA wanted:Name,SS#,DL#,DOB where born n/m

Reply by Judi Lowenthal Newport Beach Mobile Notary Services on 11/13/06 3:54pm
Msg #159649

CA Background Check

Go this link and read about the ACT that states how we as notaries are already authorized by the State to complete any notary act including the handling of loan documents WITHOUT LIMITATIONS. There is also a Compliant form you can download and forward a copy to any company requiring you to have additional checks completed. It is sick how people/companies keep finding ways to dig deeper in our pockets!

Reply by KBriscoe on 11/13/06 10:46am
Msg #159548

I am a notary in California and we already have to get live scan (fingerprinted) before our commission is approved. How much more money should we spend to have additional background checks. I know other states notary commissioning rules are not as tough as California--some states are just based on application and a meager fee. Califonia notaries are required to do much more than that, which is mandatory, for a more signifcant cost. States that require notaries to go through as much as a California notary should be exempt from further background checks.

Reply by Poppy on 11/13/06 11:49am
Msg #159575

Logically you're right K... But if this whole thing was

based on logic and not $$$ BC would not be an issue...

Reply by Judi Lowenthal Newport Beach Mobile Notary Services on 11/13/06 4:00pm
Msg #159652

Background Check

OOPS! I'm so sorry - I forgot to include the link! Please go to http://notaryclasses.com/backgroundclearance.aspx to read about the ACT that states that we as California notaries are authorized to complete any notary act including the handling of loan documents WITHOUT LIMITATIONS. I agree - we've already had a live scan fingerprinting which is done so the State has a complete background check done on us already. Print out and also save the Compliant form so you can give it to these companies that require a background check. Good luck!

Reply by LkArrowhd/CA on 11/13/06 4:08pm
Msg #159653

Re: Background Check-Excellent Judi....Thanks............... n/m

Reply by Blueink_CA on 11/13/06 4:17pm
Msg #159655

Judy, this is headline appropriate info

it probably deserves it's own thread. Thank you, thank you, thank you!!

Reply by Judi Lowenthal Newport Beach Mobile Notary Services on 11/13/06 4:54pm
Msg #159660

Re: Judy, this is headline appropriate info

You're welcome!

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/13/06 7:36pm
Msg #159686

Just for the record...

Judy, I think you've possibly misinterpreted what that link says. I don't disagree with anything stated on that page, but it is based on the opinion of the owner of NotaryClasses.com. It is my understanding that there's nothing in the original Graham Leach Bliley Act that references notaries, just a general statement about contractors and sub-contractors. That's one of the reasons this whole mess has been so controversial.

I think the compliance form that notaryclasses.com has posted for us to use to send to national companies who request something we've already done (i.e. the background check) can be very helpful. However, let's make sure we don't muddy the waters any more than has already been done...

Reply by Judi Lowenthal Newport Beach Mobile Notary Services on 11/13/06 8:59pm
Msg #159719

Re: Just for the record...

I don't think that is "muddying the waters" at all. And it actually is not based on their opinion, but written in the Act. No, they don't specify "notary", but they do refer to real estate transactions and services related to the real estate/loans with the consent of the consumer.

Aside from the Act.... again, our initial background check we are required to have done before we can even obtain a commission is sufficient, and we should not be made to feel we have to spend more money and have another check done. If the background check being done by the State, is incomplete or inaccurate, then maybe they should take it up with the State, not us.

By the way, are you an attorney?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/13/06 11:17pm
Msg #159771

Re: Just for the record...

Maybe I'm not understanding what you are saying then, as well as not making myself clear. (And no, I'm not an attorney.) Please see notes in brackets.

"And it actually is not based on their opinion, but written in the Act."

[This is the part I'm not sure I understand. Who is the "their" here and which "Act" are you talking about? Graham Leach Bliley? If so, where does it mention anything about notaries?]

"...again, our initial background check we are required to have done before we can even obtain a commission is sufficient,"

[It seems this is what most of us believe (myself included), but on what basis do you state this as a fact? The article you referenced by Notaryclasses.com? Or are YOU an attorney and is this your considered legal opinon? If so, I'd appreciate some sort of reference or back-up for that opinion.]

The point I was trying to make is simply that the link you provided was to a page written by someone who runs a business teaching notaries. While I feel he has provided us with a useful tool, I wouldn't consider him a legal authority on an issue such as this. If I missed your point - which is entirely possible - please enlighten me. Thanks.

Reply by Judi Lowenthal Newport Beach Mobile Notary Services on 11/13/06 11:27pm
Msg #159772

Re: Just for the record...

As I said, it does NOT specifically mention "notaries"... it states services related to the real estate transaction, etc.... and no, I'm not an attorney. Furthermore, that site has nothing to gain by putting this information out there for us. I'm curious if you have some other information that would further enlighten me as to why you seem to be supportive of this whole issue. Is there something you know that maybe the rest of us would be enlightened by your sharing the same? Thank you.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/14/06 3:17am
Msg #159797

Re: Just for the record...

"why you seem to be supportive of this whole issue." Supportive of what? Now I'm really confused again. I'm not sure what you think I'm trying to do. Anyone who has been reading this board for a while knows that one thing I am NOT is supportive of the NNA (if that's what you meant) and its apparent attempt to manipulate people into thinking they need a background check and paying them for multiple services they don't want. [This is just my opinion. I have to be careful about how I say that, since I'm one of the folks who was threatened by the NNA with a potential libel action -- from another very late night post...]

The reason for my first post in this thread was to attempt to add some clarity to a comment by you that I thought might possibly be misinterpreted by some. I believe you were referring to the following statement by notaryclasses.com:

"If you hold a current commission as a California Notary, we want to re-assure you that you are authorized by the state of California to complete any notary act required of you within the state including the handling of loan documents WITHOUT LIMITATIONS"!

Then you commented on the "ACT" that said we can notarize any document without limitation, or something to that affect. This is not from any "act". What I am trying to make sure people realize is that the "Clearance Compliant" certificate offered there for our general use, while potentially useful and very official looking, is not a government form, but a document that notaryclasses.com created for our benefit, upon the shared belief that we shouldn't have to get another background check. I'm grateful to them for that and may even use it myself, but let's not represent it to be something other than what it is. That could be more harmful than helpful in the long run. And as I said before, while I agree with the statements in the certificate, it has no legal authority. So let's appreciate it for what it is, but not pretend it is something it isn't. (BTW, none of my comments on this issue are intended as a criticism of notaryclasses.com.)

Reply by BrendaTx on 11/14/06 7:34am
Msg #159801

Re: Just for the record...

If I were in California, I'd say "Ditto! Yeah, what Janet said..."

**Then you commented on the "ACT" that said we can notarize any document without limitation, or something to that affect. This is not from any "act". What I am trying to make sure people realize is that the "Clearance Compliant" certificate offered there for our general use, while potentially useful and very official looking, is not a government form, but a document that notaryclasses.com created for our benefit, upon the shared belief that we shouldn't have to get another background check. I'm grateful to them for that and may even use it myself, but let's not represent it to be something other than what it is. That could be more harmful than helpful in the long run. And as I said before, while I agree with the statements in the certificate, it has no legal authority. So let's appreciate it for what it is, but not pretend it is something it isn't. (BTW, none of my comments on this issue are intended as a criticism of notaryclasses.com**