Posted by bklyny on 2/3/07 6:38pm
Msg #173946

Here we go again: Backdating

Backdating is clearly one of the most discussed topics on these forums. Last week I was dismissed/fired because I didn't allow a Title company to backdate my docs. Huh? 'my docs' I can hear you saying to yourselves. Let me explain. Here's the fact pattern.

1)I get jobs from the same SC (they love me and have used me 10x in last 2 months)
2)This SC pays me very well, generally on avg $200+ per signing. (Don't ask who I can't say under the circumstances, and besides I'm trying to get back in. ;-))
3)This SC has a TC that they get a lot of business from. I've worked for that TC 10x via this SC. Both SC and TC are very happy with my work quality and work ethic. I give 'em 120%.
4)I get a call from the SC to backdate some docs on my next signing. I say, "no can do." They're really insistant. I tell 'em I'm not comfortable with that at all. So the SC patches in (three way)the TC and the TC says well, "don't date the docs that don't have your seal, can you live with that? I say ok. Well the next day I'm at the table with the borr and I'm thinking 'if I let them backdate these other docs it gives the apperance that I did it, even if it's not my writing. Bottom line I punked up and dated everything on the day it occured.
5)I delivered the docs to the TC. 10 minutes later they call me spitting mad. Chewed me out. Obviously, I didn't keep my word. And that's a good reason to be mad, but...
6)I speak with the SC about 20 minutes later. I say, "Look I'm sorry," they interrupt me and say, 'it's ok, it's not your fault, we understand your predicament, but we can't use you anymore the client is really mad you didn't keep your word. This loan may not fund and folks won't get paid.'
7)So the SC is not mad with me at all and have told me that they still want to use me.

So those are the facts. Here are the questions:
I've read on several posts that non recorded docs (ie non-notarized) can just about have any date.
I know I said I woudn't let them (the TC) back date "my docs". I know it's their docs but it seems to me they (the docs) are my responsibility. It seems to me that I am suppose to maintain the integrity of the transaction. It's one thing for me to comit a crime by back dating, and it seems to me that allowing someone else to do it with my name on the docs open me up to complicity. (the operative phrase is "it seems to me."

So the questions are (for all you non-lawyers about to practice UPL (misery loves company ;-) ):
a) Is it complicity if I allow the TC to backdate 'my docs'?
b) And would I be liable if the dates are an issue later on?
c) Was it ok what the TC was asking of me? (ie to leave the dates off all non notarized docs)
d) Should I have handled this differently? I probably should have decided that I couldn't do it early enough for them to find someone who might be willing (but if I'm right I hope another notary wouldn't do it to themselves.)

Finally, it seems to me that something has to be wrong with 'it' if you have to ask me to do something outside of the 'normal routine.' My instincts said to me at the borr table, very loudly I might add: "You must be crazy, are you ready to jepodize your commission after 5 months of working at this NSA thing? This thing can bite you in the butt months or years from now. When in doubt - don't do it."
(add'l fact: I'm a newbie, I've done 120 signings in last 5 months, and I really enjoy the work, flexibility, etc.)

So, if I'm wrong I want to apologize to the TC and see if I can make a mends, though the SC says it's not likely. Now I realize also that in the position that they've (TC) taken (not to use me anymore) that they are punishing me, but I don't feel that way at all.... there are thousands of SCs and thousands of TCs and lenders out there I'm not dependent on any one company - that's one reason alone that I really love this business. The're not punshing me they're punishing themselves but not working with me who has demonstrated that I'll get the job done and right - why because I wouldn't do something unethical? Their loss not mine. Well I still want that compensation, but I won't compromise my integrity or risk my commission for it.

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 2/3/07 7:37pm
Msg #173955

Just trying to understand better what exactly they;the TC/SC asked you to backdate...
You said: I get a call from the SC to backdate some docs on my next signing.
some"docs. Why just some?
Are you by chance referring to some docs also known as lender disclosures? Or were they talking about backdating the whole package? I can't exactly understand why they would want you to backdate only some, unless it is the lender disclosures, which happens often. Please clarify.

Reply by Larry/Ca on 2/3/07 7:43pm
Msg #173956

Well perhaps I would have done.....

it differently.

a. They are not "your docs". They are your notarizations and TC was asking you to execute them properly.

b. Dates on docs, besides the RTC and your notarizations are TC, Lender, Borrowers responsibility and between them they can figure out what is to go on here. I would think that you could safely let them do what they want and not be liable for anything. Just my opinion, I am not a lawyer.

c. Yes, their docs, their request would seem O.K.

d. You should do whatever you are comfortable with. I would have completed this signing.

My opinions only, Larry

Reply by closerchris on 2/3/07 9:08pm
Msg #173964

Let the borrowers date the documents however they want. Sometimes there are, well, not very good reasons, but somewhat valid reasons to backdate certain documents. As previously mentioned, lender/broker disclosures, initial 1003's, etc, that should've been signed prior to closing.

However, its your duty to ensure that the dates on your acknowledgements match the date that the borrowers actually appeared and executed before you.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 2/3/07 10:56pm
Msg #173970

As a Notary Public, The date is the thing. All other docs

are estraneous, except the RTC, and other elsewise defined docs, IMHO.

Reply by hp/MD on 2/4/07 9:14am
Msg #173984

Re: As a Notary Public, The date is the thing. All other do

"are estraneous, except the RTC, and other elsewise defined docs, IMHO."

The word is extraneous. Sorry about that.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 2/4/07 12:04pm
Msg #174000

Yup, you're right, careless typo. Sorry. :( n/m

Reply by Gary_CA on 2/4/07 10:56am
Msg #173992

You screwed up from the start.

Of course the TC was pissed... they thought they had a solution you were agreable with.

The dates on the other docs are absolutely a grey area and they're insuring the title, not you.

It would have been a very simple thing to just turn down this assignment from the get go.

There's your lesson... if you don't like the shades of gray, walk away from the job AT THE BEGINNING.

I wouldn't do a signing with blank dates either, but if I were the TC I absolutely would never use you again... how could I know what's gonna happen next time you're at the signing table.

Reply by David Kral on 2/4/07 11:37pm
Msg #174045

I am not trying to beat up on you here but just provide things to think about.

1)
Non notarized documents can be dated however a borrower wants. If you come to my house, I can date and complete the documents anyway I want. I can back date or forward date and I don't have to listen to you the notary at all. Granted the bank/TC may or many not accept what I the borrower do, but I can do it.

However, notarized documents you have to follow your notary laws and I believe it is universal that you notarize that document the date it is signed in front of you.

2)
Thus, if the TC wanted the other documents dated some other day, that is up to the client.
The TC/Bank could even send the other documents express mail tell them to complete them and send them back without you ever seeing them. Or send them with you in a sealed envelop and tell the borrower to complete them without you seeing them. The documents you do see and notarize have to be dated that day.

3) Some lenders send certain documents out early and get the client to sign them. Others get
certain docuements signed at closing. Ever notice two different 1003s in one page(an initial and final) and with another package only a final( likely they got the initial signed and dated earlier in the process). That is not your concern or your problem. In fact, you likely do not even know if the language in their loan documents is legal for your state(sometimes out of state companies make mistakes and use the wrong form such as the one from their home state((eventually the state regulator may catch them)). Or if the mortgage/TC even used all the right forms. Again...not your problem. You are not responsible to see if the transaction is put together correctly. Just that you notarized the document correctly.

4) Did you try to call you state notary authority and ask them about the transaction?

5) Ask the TC to put the instructions in writing. Date all documents xx/xx/xxxx and notarized docuements to be dated aa/aa/aaaa the date of notarization.

6)
Finally, while you made have made a mistake and if the borrower lost out a lock on a low
interest rate that expired you could be sued. Still, at the end of the day, you are likely better to error and do what you did than participate in anything you think might be illegal.

Reply by BrendaTx on 2/5/07 6:36am
Msg #174055

**Finally, while you made have made a mistake and if the borrower lost out a lock on a low
interest rate that expired you could be sued.**

I think it would be more like this:


Your Honor, this notary is being sued because and our rate lock expired. The notary made an error during the loan signing appointment--would not lie about the date, and we had to redo the documents.


Judge: You worked with a lender and loan officer for two months on this loan, they got it done the last day you could sign, the notary made an "error"and you are suing the notary because the lender won't keep your interest rate?

Yes!

Judge: You had a crappy lender who would not work with you after they dilly dallied around to get the documents in front of that notary. You are suing the wrong entity. Tell the lender not to bother suing the notary because I will award damages to the notary for wasting the notary's time and mine in this courtroom. You are lucky I am not awarding the notary damages against you. Stupid case. Good-bye.

==================
JMHO. I am not a lawyer.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 2/5/07 8:23am
Msg #174064

Wowzers.......

I guess I see things differently....SA was asked to backdate, SA agreed, SA "saw the light", SA did his/her job. First off you should have NEVER agreed to anything illegal and you knew that. Water under the bridge now, thankfully you did your job correctly so now you must live with the fact that under fire you agreed to act in both an illegal AND unprofessional mode. Lesson learned, why on earth would you even want to work for a company that suggested this illegal activity to you let alone knock yourself out making it up to them? My personal opinion, and I'm not trying to beat you up here, you need to take a serious look at your operation. Never get yourself into a compromising position because the bottom line is your professional ethics. They started it by asking (lots of them do, we all know that) and you finished it by agreeing. It reminds me of the lookout agreeing to holler when they see the cops and once seeing the cops decides to go have dinner. You agreed to be a "co-liar", you need to be accountable for that.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 2/5/07 8:48am
Msg #174068

oops, I just re-read the initial post...

Dang I hate eating humble pie, tsk tsk. Sorry for my rough words...Fact: BO's can put any date they want, it's not our jobs to dictate and we're not at fault for that date. You stated that you dated "your docs" correctly which is exactly what you're supposed to do. Hmmm...appears as if they wanted the disclosures dated differently which is a different kettle of fish and within the "loan signing world". IF BO's agreed it would have been ok, most likely the disclosures weren't sent to the BO's per RESPA and lender is trying to cover that issue. The ones I've had that sound similar were due to the fact that the BO's NEVER signed and returned said docs per LO's request, I see alot of that here. 100% of the time the BO's admit that to me at the table when we discuss dates, fact is they're very open about their error. Sorry I jumped the gun, 10 lashes for me.

Reply by BrendaTx on 2/5/07 9:03am
Msg #174072

Re: oops, I just re-read the initial post...

I just want to say that Davil Kral sounds like a very smart person to me and I make it a point to read what it says...I just don't agree with the "sue the notary" scenario.

However, probably originated a long time ago to make notaries do whatever people (lenders) want.

We make the least money, have the smallest pockets, the least control over the terms, the rate, etc. We just aren't that important and lenders ultimately have the final word on the loan. In other words...they can work with the borrowers to improve the rate lock squeeze.