Posted by Lora/FL on 12/4/07 1:18pm
Msg #224220

Uniform Closing Instructions-a continuance of Msg.#224039

MBA meeting-keep the fires buring! It's speak now or forever hold your peace. I would challenge each of you that take stock in the future of your career to speak up and send your comments to the powers that be. It's not a matter of "if" this is going to happen but more like a matter of "when"-how long will it take? Who knows exactly but it is moving forward for 2008. If you feel strongly about making a difference, send in a comment. If ID is your biggest thorn, or maybe backdating, or stressing the importance of getting the docs to the borrower's within the required time frame, send in those comments or suggestions! You don't have to necessarily come up w/ a new gripe/suggestion, but if you feel something they have already outlined is very important, show your support OR if you disagree w/ something, voice that as well. If you feel you should be compensated whether the loan funds or not ( like the appraiser ) then TELL THEM SO! Now is YOUR time to be heard.

Reply by LisaWI on 12/4/07 2:55pm
Msg #224237

I agree Lora. We've been acknowledged as a person of importance at a loan closing, not some unknown figure in the background. I ask you if this opportunity has ever been presented where we can have a voice to the respected comps/orgs that put this together?

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/4/07 6:23pm
Msg #224300

I agree BIG TIME. n/m

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/4/07 6:40pm
Msg #224303

this time of change is bursting with opportunity

Fitch aka Wall Street and all the money behind mortgages is telling the lending community to get their act together and find and prevent fraud. [See new thread with report link.]

The "closing employee" or whatever they may eventually be called has been recognized in its old-fashioned role of the guardian of the gates AND at the same time lenders are going ABOVE the radar and saying they understand the Signing Agent position and WANT to embrace the concept.

Now you are hearing what they want you to do. Be a professional and be trustworthy about identity, follow THEIR instructions with doc order and explanations AND be their eyes and ears and responsibly help them prevent fraud. The opportunity is in the NEWLY CODIFIED ROLE AS THE LENDER'S EYES AND EARS.

Remember that THIS part is critical and it is a necessary step for mortgage lenders as they are trying to re-establish their credibility with Wall Street. Mortgage backed securities are worth zippo because nobody trusts the due diligence underneath the paper.

If YOU are expected to assist the lender towards this VERY CRITICAL AND IMPORTANT end - stop a closing to prevent fraud AND they think you should provide THIS VERY IMPORTANT FUNCTION FOR FREE just because just because hey no one has ever asked them for money in the past, well is that just? Is that fair?

I believe the lending community shoud consider some form of payment to the closing employee who effectively saves their skin. Remember, no closing employee is going to stop a closing unless they are really darn sure that funny business is taking place. Lots of people will be mad and so you have to have a firm stance and position. It will take GUTS and it will be a whole lot easier if the mortgage lender acknowledges by payment for services rendered that you performed your function as agreed.

If this kind of payment system is put in place it will take a little time to ferret out some guidelines but I expect soon we'll have a reasonable framework and game plan that everyone will understand. Frankly, having a few examples out there in the community will likely stop lots of stuff from ever reaching the closing table because word will get out that the closing employee will NOT act as an enabler.

No, if lenders AREN'T serious about fraud control at the table then they can pooh pooh the idea of payment but then what will they say to WALL STREET? When WALL STREET asks why they are expected to put billions of dollars into this industry and mortgage lenders won't even agree to pay the fraud police????? Are you kidding?

This concept is new to mortgage lenders and they'll need to hear it a few times to ponder and consider the implications. I intend to blab about it at length here, there, and everywhere. Join me here, if you'd like.

signed, big blabbermouth dc

Reply by LisaWI on 12/4/07 7:17pm
Msg #224310

Re: this time of change is bursting with opportunity

This needs to be backed up a bit. First, do we take on the liability to report fraud? Yes, liability, their will be issues with these situations and their is no protection as it stands right now for a "Signing Agent" to take on that liability. There are too many "what if" questions in these situations. We have protection as far as Notary issues go, but that is about as far as it goes.
Second, we have been acknowledged, but to whose definition? And what is that "exact" definition? Dont get me wrong here, I think this is great, I just dont know if they see me as I see me. Get what Im getting at here.
There are holes in this where us Signing Agents come in. I want to embrace, accept, and still provide the best services as possible, but Im not about to jump off the ledge with the rest of the herd because they dont know the ledge is there.
I dont disagree that this is bursting with opportunity, but I see it as a long road to get where we need to be and everyone being on the same page.

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/4/07 7:40pm
Msg #224318

Re: this time of change is bursting with opportunity

You are right and this is why it is so important for everyone to have as many conversations about these issues as possible. Group dynamics and free and open discussion often uncovers truths we might not have seen as individuals.

Every question and concern you are raising I agree with and that's what is so exciting because by participating you may be able to help answer those questions or define the role.

For instance, you know that I am a proponent of licensure. I am in PA. Personally, I think the law says that you have to be licensed as a title agent to close or be an attorney. [Stick with me - don't get steamed.]

I understand and agree that our regulators are thoroughly confused and that they just don't have enough concrete information to render an opinion in either direction.

I have asked for regulatory guidance on this issue but received no reply.

After reading the instructions, I have reformulated my thinking on this subject at least as it applies to PA. Here is what I am pondering....

My real beef was that there was anarchy - no regulatory umbrella under which the NSA was operating. These uniform closing instructions give me structure that I can comprehend and get my arms around. In PA the Settlement Agent would have to be a title agent/insurer/attorney. The Signing Agent is clearly not selling or producing title insurance and so that creates a framework for some kind of enhanced notary license or perhaps a limited sub-agent classification under a title agent/insurer.

You may entirely disagree with me and that's okay but it's giving me a new look and a new way to think and since change is in the air, and rules are likely to change, it seems plausible that PA might address this classification in either TIRBOP regulations or perhaps by amending the law.

Each state has it's own unique characteristics but having a model to work from makes the job of those who wish to formulate their place within the regulatory structure a whole lot easier.

Everything is on the table and all ideas are in play. It's a beautiful moment. We rarely get chances like this.

Reply by Roger_OH on 12/4/07 8:10pm
Msg #224323

Diane, question...

While I know you are providing some feedback from the NotRot board folks, has anyone associated with making these new guidelines/requirements considered asking US, the actual notary signing agents, what WE think about the process and our very important part in it??

I guess it would just be nice to have an actual notary voice or two around the decision-making table, to be involved in a process that certainly affects our businesses.

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/4/07 10:17pm
Msg #224344

Re: Diane, question...

Hi, Roger: I think it was clear in the MBA meeting that they are looking for feedback from every segment of the industry. They see this as being very important and likely don't want to launch it without lots of concerned eyes having seen it and having a chance to comment.

Heck, they decided to make it a free meeting to encourage more participation and though the original plan was comments by memebers only, they have opened up comments to everyone. I think that's pretty expansive and it's fair to say that they would like your comments.

Reply by Lora/FL on 12/4/07 9:25pm
Msg #224336

Re: this time of change is bursting with opportunity

" I don't disagree that this is bursting with opportunity, but I see it as a long road to get where we need to be and everyone being on the same page."

I couldn't agree with you more, Lisa. Unfortunately, we need to get on that page rather quickly since the pages are turning and the book will be going to press after Jan. 30. ( Sorry at my attempt to be witty) That is my reason to speak up and challenge the many, many signing agents that frequent this forum. Now is the time to put our 2 cents where it might really matter. There's a whole lot of whining that goes on, most of it is probably justified. Now's the time to put our best foot forward and speak up.
Roger-I understand what you are saying but quite frankly, the group that is pulling this together probably doesn't give 2 hoots about what an NSA thinks about it. But at the same time, the door has been open ( online workshop to non-members) so we should run right in, pull up a chair and PARTICIPATE.

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/4/07 10:22pm
Msg #224345

Re: this time of change is bursting with opportunity

Interestingly, of the 110 to 115 people whose were identified on the phone roster, at least four were NSAs. Two of the very few questions raised were related to NSA concerns.

I have to say Lora, you are right. It's a make hay while the sun shines kinda moment.

Reply by Gerry_VT on 12/4/07 11:27pm
Msg #224350

Re: Uniform Closing Instructions & attorney states

Speculation: the uniform closing instructions might turn some states into attorney-only states without any legislation. Today, closing instructions are under the radar; probably many state officials have no idea they even exist. One can maintain that the buyer or borrower is running the closing, and the signing agent is just performing the functions of a copy center, messenger, and notary. Once one single set of closing instructions gets attention focused on it, it comes above the radar. Some state officials may read the instructions and decide the degree of judgement exercised by the signing agent constitutes the practice of law.

Reply by JerryhFL on 12/5/07 4:09am
Msg #224361

Re: Uniform Closing Instructions & attorney states

"Now you are hearing what they want you to do. Be professional and be trustworthy about identification, follow their instructions with doc order and explanations."

What do they mean by "explanations". If it means explaining all documents and the content, then I believe we as NSA's are in trouble. I have always been instructed that if the signer has a non-trivial question about a document, call the SS, Title Company or Lender with those and have the signer ask their questions.

Now I know most of you could explain the documents as well as any of the above, however what we don't know is what the signer has been told by someone in the chain and is that why we were told not to get into detailed explanations. I don't think so! States has said that we are there to identify and observe the signing of documents. If we cross that line it would be considered giving legal advice.

I cannot understand how we are going to explain the documents and comply with the law.
We can't and therefore states will re-evaluate their requirements and perhaps eliminate our existence.

Help me understand how this is a good thing for me and what benefits I will get from all this hoopla.

One last thing, it's an election year and politicians are looking for meat. Everyone associated with the "meltdown" is out to cover their you know what.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/5/07 6:01am
Msg #224363

Re: Uniform Closing Instructions - Gerry and Texans:

Gerry has an excellent point.

In Texas UPL is a serious offense and is defined (in part) as "...rendering of any service requiring the use of legal skill or knowledge, such as preparing a will, contract, or other instrument, the legal effect of which under the facts and conclusions involved must be carefully determined."

Links and more about the Texas UPL Committee is shown below, if anyone is interested.

http://www.txuplc.org
The UPLC is charged with preventing the unauthorized practice of law. The practice of law involves specialized knowledge and skills. The practice of law by persons who are not authorized to do so frequently results in the loss of money, property or liberty.

http://www.txuplc.org/faq.htm
In this chapter the "practice of law" means the preparation of a pleading or other document incident to an action or special proceeding or the management of the action or proceeding on behalf of a client before a judge in court as well as a service rendered out of court, including the giving of advice >>>or the rendering of any service requiring the use of legal skill or knowledge, such as preparing a will, contract, or other instrument, the legal effect of which under the facts and conclusions involved must be carefully determined.<<<<

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/5/07 7:31am
Msg #224372

Re: Uniform Closing Instructions - Gerry and Texans:

The UCI are clear about UPL. They require that the "closing employee" explain the closing process and explain the documents - but they want you to know the laws in your state and comply.

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/5/07 9:05am
Msg #224383

Re: Uniform Closing Instructions - Texans and Diane...

**They require that the "closing employee" explain the closing process and explain the documents - but they want you to know the laws in your state and comply.**

Diane, thank you for boiling it down.

Texans, what do you think?

Point of fact - as to the Texas closing process and document explanation in mortgage lending, we already know that lenders are NOT allowed to draft their documents...whether they know the laws or not, lenders must hire lawyers who must draft and/or bless all documents related to a mortgaged property transaction.

Given that...that even licensed title companies and licensed bankers are not allowed to provide their own forms without an attorney's blessing, what does this mean to the one presenting the documents at closing given the clear instruction of the UCI?

If you understand the seriousness of UPL in Texas you may see why I cannot help but believe that the UCI and petitioning the legislature for licensing of SAs will create a belief among the lawmakers that these functions should only be handled by a lawyer or an escrow officer who is already licensed by the Texas Department of Insurance.

Diane, I am not opposed to cleaning up the process of mortgage lending or closing procedures. However, I feel each reader of this board should investigate the attitudes of their own state lawmakers to determine what the outcomes of pursuing licensure and so forth will be.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 12/5/07 1:27am
Msg #224357

Looking at earlier draft, found REMOVED ...

This paragraph was in an earlier draft from 07/2006 and I'm not finding it in the current draft - not the last sentence:

"B.5 Failure to Sign on Time.
If this Loan is not Signed on or before the earliest date prescribed in B.4 above, the Settlement Agent must immediately notify the Lender’s Contact Person as provided in the Lender Contact Information Section of the SPECIFIC CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS and return the Loan Documents and the Loan Proceeds to the Lender at the Lender’s expense, unless otherwise instructed by the Lender. The Lender will make the Settlement Agent whole for its out of pocket expenses actually incurred for the canceled transaction"

Reply by DianeCipa on 12/5/07 7:30am
Msg #224371

Re: Looking at earlier draft, found REMOVED ...

We should amend that section and suggest adding language addressing payment for transactions that cancel at the table or fall apart before disbursement.

Reply by JerryhFL on 12/5/07 10:09am
Msg #224393

Re: Looking at earlier draft, found REMOVED ...

Diane

I would like your thoughts on my posting of this date at 4:09 AM.