Posted by Larry/Ca on 10/29/06 12:03am
Msg #155888

Another credible witness signing......

and after the signing I was reading the statute (1185) with respect to the use of credible witnesses and now I'm thinking that my use of them was improper. A sentence in that statute states that the signer does NOT possess any of the acceptable identification documents. Well she shure did, except one was in her maiden name and one was in her married name. The documents had both her maiden and married name, way too much. One id Mary Smith, other id Mary Jones, docs Mary Jones Smith. She said that she was in the process of getting id with Mary Jones Smith and the credible witnesses swore to me that she was Mary Jones Smith. What do you think?

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 10/29/06 1:05am
Msg #155899

Well... good question! Based on the statute, you are a reasonable person and do you believe that she is NOT the individual she claims to be? Two valid ID's (like CA drivers license and Military ID?) both with photos that match, signatures that match, physical identification that match. Do you have any doubt? Now... what about the wording that says "any ONE of the following? This might be a judgement call on your part. As for the credible witnesses (you did use 2 didn't you, or do you personally know the credible witness?) ... even though she possesses 2 valid ID's, she did NOT have ONE valid ID with the names that need to match the documents. SO... I don't see why using credible witnesses would be wrong. I would've noted her 2 ID's in my journal noting that they were two different names and she didn't have ONE ID with the names required, so you used credible witnesses for verification (and of course note the names and ID's of the credible witnesses in your journal. The journal is your "bible" - I note everything in the journal, and sometimes I go overboard, but... one never knows when you may need that information.

Hope this makes sense, it's late and I'm tired.

Reply by Larry/Ca on 10/29/06 1:40am
Msg #155905

Barbara, my take upon rereading the statute ....

was that a basic condition for the use of credible witnesses was not met. she cannot possess an acceptable identifing document like a California Drivers license. She had two of them but without enuogh names on them. I'm convinced that I had the right person in front of me to be signing but I now would have felt much better if she had told me she had lost her ID's. Then credible witnesses whoud have been completely appropriate. I did ID and have the witnesses sign my journal like they should.

Reply by John_NorCal on 10/29/06 10:03pm
Msg #156050

Larry......Attached is a copy of a similar question that I..

posed to the SOS office. Beware though, they do get confusing at the SOS office!

Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 5:34 AM
To: [e-mail address]
Subject: Use of Credible Witness


Hello,

Questions have been raised regarding the use of credible witnesses to establish identification. Please respond to the following scenario:



Suzy Smith marries and takes the name of Suzy Jones. She presents current identification showing her name as Smith. Can credible witnesses be used to establish her identity as Suzy Jones?

Thank you.




Yes, as long as all of the requirements of Civil Code section 1185 are met. I have included a portion of the text below:

(1) The oath or affirmation of a credible witness personally known to the officer that the

person making the acknowledgment is personally known to the witness and that each of the

following are true:

(A) The person making the acknowledgment is the person named in the document.

(B) The person making the acknowledgment is personally known to the witness.

(C) That it is the reasonable belief of the witness that the circumstances of the person making

the acknowledgment are such that it would be very difficult or impossible for that person to

obtain another form of identification.

(D) The person making the acknowledgment does not possess any of the identification

documents named in paragraphs (3) and (4).

(E) The witness does not have a financial interest in the document being acknowledged and

is not named in the document.

(2) The oath or affirmation under penalty of perjury of two credible witnesses, whose identities

are proven to the officer upon the presentation of satisfactory evidence, that each statement in paragraph (1) of this subdivision is true.


Mary Ingham
Notary Public Section

Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 10/29/06 10:30pm
Msg #156053

Concerning # C & D

The person without I.D. and it would be impossible or very difficult to get an acceptable I.D. in Calif is addressed this way: at the time the notarization is taking place this person could not get a Ca drivers license/I.D. Card/ passport/etc.

Sure, they should have taken care of it before this particular notarization, but the person didn't and they couldn't at "this moment in time" get an acceptable I.D. Card of any type.

A Calif driver's license usually takes approx. 10 days or more and a passport over approx. 2-4 weeks just to name 2 acceptable Calif I.D.

As far as # D goes: they often have an I.D. but it not in an acceptable name or its expired.

Calif notaries are lucky to have the use of 2 credible witnesses (only Florida also allows the use of 2 credible witnesses) every other state uses the one credible witness and in the world of loan signing that probably will never happen.
I have used 2 credible witnesses over 35 times in the approx 3000 loans I have notarized.

Reply by TnNotary on 10/29/06 6:44am
Msg #155911

How about fingerprinting would that have helped?
When a private person calls me to notarize something for them I get their id and fingeprint them. I don't do this for signings.