Posted by GA/Atty on 12/9/07 2:48am
Msg #225128

Confirming Essential Terms with Borrower

I was just wondering if any of you made it a practice to confirm specific terms of the loan with the borrower ahead of time to hopefully catch any errors or deal-breakers before making a trip. Things like loan amount, interest rate, monthly payments & net cash out seem to be the most common problem issues I have run into.

I suspect the title companies and lenders would frown upon this practice, as they probably prefer to get the closer out there and make it a little harder for the borrower to refuse to sign the docs. Any comments would be welcome & appreciated.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 12/9/07 7:04am
Msg #225130

It's very tough-to-impossible to get around the Privacy Act over the phone. For that reason alone, unless circumstances have allowed me to confidently hold secure such private information, such as the fact that "Mr. Smith" is even involved in a loan transaction, I say very little on the phone, period. I do not go so far as to even disclose the nature of my call, if leaving a v/m.

Just wanted to point that out - since I do feel it is an often overlooked aspect of such phone conversations.

Reply by CopperheadVA on 12/9/07 8:14am
Msg #225134

Renee, I agree with you that we should be very careful - especially when leaving a VM and especially when leaving a message at a work number. In fact, if I don't get a recorded message identifying the person I'm calling (EX: "Hi, this is Joe Smith, I'm away from my desk right now..." then I don't leave a message at all, and I especially don't if I'm speaking to a receptionist.

However, my experience has been that if I don't at least say something on the VM about being a notary and bringing their loan documents to them this evening, they won't bother to call back. I've had people who I found out later screened their calls and didn't pick up because they didn't recognize my name and number on caller ID. And then of course they didn't bother to listen to my message.

To the original poster, I don't normally go over terms over the phone, unless I have some reason to suspect that I need to, it's a resign due to terms being wrong originally, or if the drive is abnormally far. But I agree with Renee that you must proceed with caution due to privacy reasons.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 12/9/07 9:06am
Msg #225138

It can be a dilemma - what I leave on v/m is "my name is ... and I'm calling to confirm an appt with Mr/Mrs. Whatever for Monday at 4:00." I don't have a problem getting people to call me back with that message, and if the message lands in the wrong hands, the person can easily make up some excuse as to what it might mean.

Reply by Linda Juenger on 12/9/07 9:13am
Msg #225139

I have gone over the initial terms of the loan on the phone only 1 time. I was called at 8pm on the last day to sign (EOM) to travel an hour and 1/2 one way. As it was, it was going to be close to midnight before I even got there. Something gave me a gut feeling that I should go over the loan terms before I made the trip. Before I even printed, I stated the terms to them. I'm thankful I did. It was not the terms they agreed upon and had I gone, they would not have signed. There was just something about the company and they way they were dancing around my questions that I felt to save everyone time and money, I disclosed the terms over the phone. The borrowers for one, were staying up way past their bed time waiting for me and felt it was the right thing to do for them. I felt I put the borrowers first in this, not me, not the company or the LO. They appreciated it very much. I did get to go to them a couple days later and they thanked me very much. They knew they were being pushed as they didn't even know they were closing until a couple of hours before I called. This is where I agree with the UCI that the borrowers must receive the HUD beforehand. Saves a lot of headaches, time, money and miscommunication. JMO

Reply by Demore on 12/9/07 12:49pm
Msg #225163

Hello! Linda,

It is very good that you know your acts. I concur with you 100 percent that the HUD-1 "Settlement Statement" is a document which the borrower(s) must sign first. Then, the Residential Loan Application--known as the 1003. The loan application containing information the borrower provided to initiate the loan, and the RTC. Last, the Itemization of Amount Financed, and the Good Faith Estimate.

Reply by Charm_AL on 12/9/07 9:30am
Msg #225140

I never discuss anything but the time and address until I confirm the identity of the person(s) I'm dealing with. That is in person.

Reply by Carmen/123 on 12/9/07 11:34am
Msg #225150

I have done this on many occasions when I suspect something is just not right, however, once I identify the signer on the phone, I have them tell me what the numbers should be rather than me giving the person on the phone the information. This way I haven't violated anything or disclosed sensitive information to the wrong person. This approach has save a few loans in my day. No one I do business with has found a problem with this. But then again I don't deal with any shady characters.

On the subject of leaving a message, I just leave my name and say that I am a Notary Public and that usually gets me a call back.

~Carmen

Reply by Teresa/FL on 12/9/07 12:45pm
Msg #225162

That's the same tactic I've used lately. When confirming the appointment I ask if their LO has reviewed the final loan terms with them and then ask what those terms are, just so I can make sure the documents are correct. If there is any discrepancy, I call the TC or LO and ask them to call the borrower to resolve any issues before I get there.

Reply by Demore on 12/9/07 1:09pm
Msg #225165

Hello! Theresa/FL

Organize the documents previous to proceed with an appointment is critical to a Notary Public. It is customary that a Notary Public evaluates the documents for correct name spellings, property addresses, loan term and dates. Then, he/she may celebrate with the success of such a process that makes it more effective or more appropriate to a mortgage loan documents for a borrower(s) put his/her signature on. :-)

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/9/07 1:20pm
Msg #225166

Demore...I'm curious...

Are you by any chance using an online language translator to translate your posts from Italian to English?

Reply by Demore on 12/9/07 2:02pm
Msg #225178

Re: Demore...I'm curious...

Hello! Brenda TX,


Thank you for your response and probing mind.
I am not “using an online language translator to translate your posts from Italian to English?”

Reply by Becca_FL on 12/9/07 1:27pm
Msg #225167

Exactly what I have had to do lately in light of companies initiating new no-fee policies for no-closes of any kind.

When we had this debate a year and a half ago, I was completely against the practice of confirming terms over the phone with borrowers. Now that some of my clients have taken a strong no pay stance, I have had to inform them that I will be conducting over the phone interviews with their clients before printing. Last Friday was was the first time I accepted a closing under my new terms of service and the hiring entity completely understood.

I, like Teresa and the previous poster, just ask the borrower if their broker/LO has called them to go over all the terms of the loan. If I get a negative response, I ask them to contact their LO and I call the party that hired me to let them know the borrower is unprepared to close. If the borrower tells me that the LO has gone over the terms, I ask them to tell me the interest rate, payment, escrows and cash back. If all is correct I print and go, if not, you guessed it, I call the party that hired me.

As I said, Last Friday was the first time I implemented this policy and am I glad I did. As it turned out, there were three people on title and the TC and the broker neglected to tell the borrower that the others needed to be at the closing. Long story short, I asked the borrower questions to find out what the deal was and called my contact to let them know that one party on title was dead and another was married AND marital status was not disclosed on the deed. I wonder what would have happened had the TC sent some former barista turned NSA to do this closing. Just another example of why it pays to hire experienced NSAs.

The times are changing and I'm going to take the time to ensure I get paid my fee. It used to be that I would not work for companies with no-close - no-fee policies. The sad fact is that some of my long standing TCs have begun to implement this policy. Roll with the changes.

Reply by Linda Juenger on 12/9/07 1:40pm
Msg #225172

Excellent Idea. n/m

Reply by bsylade on 12/9/07 6:03pm
Msg #225212

How can they not pay us for doing what we are being hired to do. That is to witness the signatures. We have nothing to do with the terms of the loan or the contents of the documents, which we as Notaries have no control. Let the broker who did not do their job by not communicating the correct information to the borrowers, so they are confortable signing, PAY for our work. Maybe the LO will be careful how they communicate with the borrowers.

Reply by LKT/CA on 12/10/07 1:32am
Msg #225245

Charge Extra for their negligence and incompetence.

I wouldn't work for a no-close, no fee policy. If the signing is completed, the Notary has done the job in which they were enlisted to do. Funding of the loan should NOT be a condition for getting paid. On one hand, it's great that you confirm facts of what you see in the paperwork with the borrowers for a smooth signing. However, this only gives license to the TC, LO, escrow to be sloppy and incompetent in their work. If the NSA cleans up after them, they will continue in their neglect. Everything should be squared away with the borrowers before you even receive the docs. Only thing that should be verified is if they have current ID's, the appt. date and time, location of property in question.

I say charge EXTRA for the interview. AFter all, your time to make all those back and forth phone calls is money.

Reply by Ernest__CT on 12/9/07 1:50pm
Msg #225174

My message to an answering machine

"Good {morning | afternoon | evening}, this is Ernest Adams, the Notary. I understand we have an appointment for [time] {tomorrow | xday | yday}. Both [Mr. Borrower's first name] and [Mrs. Borrower's first name] will need to have two forms of identification. The primary form must be a driver's license or passport, in other words a government-issued ID _with_ a photograph. The second form of ID doesn't need to have a picture; it can be something as simple as a work ID or a credit card / debit card. Connecticut law says I can't use a Social Security Card or birth certificate.

I also need to make sure you've arranged to have a witness present. It can be anyone over 18. They won't need to see any of the details of the documents, they'll just need to see you sign your names. The witness won't need to be there for the whole thing; they can be there just at the beginning or the end.

Please call me to confirm out appointment; my number is [my home number] or you can reach me 24 hours a day on my cell phone at [cell phone number]."

Reply by MelissaCT on 12/10/07 11:18am
Msg #225305

Re: My message to an answering machine

Ernest, sounds like the standard message I use. Although, depending on the ans maching greeting, I may simply state that there are some details that I need to discuss to prompt a call back. I've had too many that just didn't listen to the message & neglected to find a witness. I do try to emphasize that part. I, too, don't disclose the reason for the appointment on the phone, even when speaking to "the spouse", since I can't be certain who is on the other end.

Reply by Ernest__CT on 12/9/07 1:55pm
Msg #225176

Because I've people out and out lie to me ...

... over the phone about who they were, I never discuss any loan terms. One young man represented himself on the phone as his father. He was a nightmare at the signing table.

If somebody asks for info over the phone, I aslways ask them for some key piece of info before confirming anything.

A borrower's privacy is more important to me than driving an hour for a no-sign.

Reply by MichiganAl on 12/9/07 3:05pm
Msg #225196

To close to UPL for me

Any discussion about loan terms over the phone gets into UPL in my mind. How can I claim that I'm just showing them terms or showing them where they can find their information? And no matter what, you're never 100% sure of who you're talking to even if they know what's going on and know the loan figures. They could still be a relative or friend. You obviously haven't properly identified the person on the phone. Even if they're the ones telling you what they were expecting, and you're just confirming it, that's still over the line in my eyes. If someone wants to go over their terms over the phone, I immediately direct them to their l.o. or contact person.

Reply by Demore on 12/9/07 3:20pm
Msg #225198

Re: To close to UPL for me

MichaganAl,

I like to make sure that I be familiar with my limitations at the time of confirming an appointment with the borrower(s). If not, I am at risk in this state of Wyoming. Also, I understand that some of documents are federal and other is lenders. Therefore, I hold back from suggestions.

Reply by Becca_FL on 12/9/07 6:52pm
Msg #225216

Re: To close to UPL for me

Asking a borrower to repeat what their LO told them UPL? I don't think so. LOs rarely have anything but phone contact with the borrower. Are they afraid of privacy issues? Probably not, though, they should be. The fact of the matter is, by the time we get involved the damage (so to say) is already done. The TC and lenders hire us to make sure the borrower(s), that the LO has never met, are who they say they are.

It's unfortunate, but some of my best TC clients have cut back on absolutely everything just to stay in business. With a fraction of the staff still on board, they are getting into my pocket because NSAs are an easy target. What would happen if NSAs came up with a two page list (like some SSs do) on what not to do because you will be docked or charged a fee? Well, let me tell you; They would move on and trash a four year relationship to keep their own job. Would you blame them? I sure wouldn't.

This is why I prefer to be upfront and honest with the people that I have had a lasting relationship with. If they can not guarantee that I am being sent on a sold deal, I reserve the right to qualify the lead before I use my paper, my toner, my gas and my time. If the company wants to go back to the way we used to do business, I would much prefer it, but until that time, I will protect my best interest and my bottom line.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 12/9/07 9:10pm
Msg #225232

UPL

<<Asking a borrower to repeat what their LO told them UPL? I don't think so. LOs rarely have anything but phone contact with the borrower. Are they afraid of privacy issues? Probably not, though, they should be. The fact of the matter is, by the time we get involved the damage (so to say) is already done. The TC and lenders hire us to make sure the borrower(s), that the LO has never met, are who they say they are.>>

I agree with you, Becca, and I think there's a general misunderstanding of what UPL actually is. Too many people are raising the UPL flag when they don't understand the difference between information and advice. According to the ABA, here's where one crosses the line into UPL:

"Although the line between legal information and legal advice is blurry, there are important differences between the two. Anyone can sell or give you legal information. On the other hand, only a licensed lawyer can give you legal advice. Legal information is supposed to be general and not based on a specific set of facts. Legal advice is provided by a trained lawyer who uses his or her knowledge of the law to tell you how the law applies to your specific circumstances."

(Source: http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/findlegalhelp/faq_legalinfo.cfm)

Confirming with the borrowers beforehand that the terms you see in the loan documents are the ones they were expecting doesn't even come close to being UPL. There may be privacy issues involved, but it's not UPL (unless you get into a discussion about why the numbers are different, and even then it's dicey).

Describing what a document means in general terms (e.g, explaining what a compliance agreement or signature affidavit is, etc) is not UPL; discussing with the borrowers whether or not they should sign it probably would be. Telling someone what the options are for handling a problem with their automobile title is not UPL; telling them which one they should use might be.

The list goes on...