Posted by Joe Ewing on 1/4/07 12:27pm
Msg #169030

Regarding UPL

I read an interesting paragraph in the 29th edition of the 2007 California notary Law primer under the heading of Unauthorized Practice of Law. First the usual stuff from Govt. Code 8214.1. Then EXCEPTIONS. Specially trained, nonattorney Notaries certified or licensed in a particular field (e.g., real estate) may offer advice in that field only. Would that now include new UPL privileges granted to current and future Certified Notary Signing Agents

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/4/07 12:35pm
Msg #169032

Re: Regarding UPL - Conspiracy theory...hey, Joe

OPINION ONLY BUT...

It sure looks like your lawmakers know the XXX ASSN./Employees by pet names like "my baby daddy" or "my baby momma" - - yeah, that's a pretty bold statement to make but frankly my dear, I think I see a conspiracy theory in the making! Oh boy...a new grassy knoll for me and my favoriate conspiracy theorist expert (NDWA) to chat about on dark and stormy nights.

Reply by Lee/AR on 1/4/07 12:55pm
Msg #169037

Re: Regarding UPL - Conspiracy theory...hey, Joe

Sounds like a good plot to me, too, Brenda. Let's write a book. Sorta like Primary Colors.

Reply by Joe Ewing on 1/4/07 1:03pm
Msg #169040

Re: Regarding UPL - Conspiracy theory...hey, Joe

Well I'm not looking for a conspiracy. I have read a lot of replies on this subject and this welcome exception is new to me. I am genuinely interested and so also most all of you I would guess, in any additional information on this subject such as who, what or where this exception originated such as a foot note or something

Reply by Ndwa on 1/4/07 2:15pm
Msg #169058

Re: Regarding UPL - Conspiracy theory...hey, Joe

***I am genuinely interested and so also most all of you I would guess, in any additional information on this subject such as who, what or where this exception originated such as a foot note or something***

If not a plot for another round of after market notary then your profile only hold dirts.

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/4/07 2:26pm
Msg #169061

Re: Regarding UPL - Conspiracy theory...hey, Joe

Thank you Andy, I also thought that was abundantly clear there was an aftermarket set up in the making.

Lee, let's start our book right away. Either, "Primary Notaries" or "Notary Color" .

My first impression is usually accurate. So.... Joe, I stick with my original assessment. I don't know what you were looking for, but the obvious aftermarket potential is (IMHO) being explored by the XXX and your legislature is on board for it.

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 1/4/07 1:36pm
Msg #169044

While I am not an attorney, nor am I a Notary Public in California, to wit is my interpretation of the exception:
I am a licensed Real Estate Broker and a Notary Public. During the course of executing a document that requires Notarization, I may offer advice if the document specifically pertains to Florida Real Estate transactions, and am NOT guilty of UPL.

The day that the joke known as "Certification" by the NNA is deemed a license to opine in MY state, I shall forever hang up my seal.

Reply by Gerry_VT on 1/4/07 2:11pm
Msg #169056

Not all notaries are mobile notaries; many of them may be approached directly by the signer, and they have no particular obligation to avoid negative comments about the document to be signed. So I don't see why a CPA/notary couldn't say "Boy, that's a really high interest rate" or why an electrical engineer couldn't say "there's no way this home improvement loan will cover all the electrical work you need; you're going to need at least $10k more." Of course, I'd think making negative comments about the document and then offering a better deal yourself would be clearly over the line.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 1/4/07 2:37pm
Msg #169065

Because notaries are *impartial* witnesses?

Reply by Gerry_VT on 1/4/07 2:51pm
Msg #169069

Notaries are not supposed to get a financial gain from a transaction they notarize, except their notary/travel/printing fees. I don't know if they really have to be completely impartial. After all, in most states, lawyers are allowed to notarize documents for their clients, but at the same time, they are supposed to be on their client's side. So why couldn't other professionals who are also notaries be on their client's side? Provided of course the notary does not get financial gain from the transaction.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 1/4/07 3:12pm
Msg #169074

IMHO, when you wear the notary hat, you are acting as an impartial witness under your Commission. Changing hats in the middle of a transaction, for me, is not only inappropriate, it may be unethical and possibly illegal. I have seen some lousy loan products, but would never comment to the borrower. Not my place, not my business.

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 1/4/07 3:52pm
Msg #169086

I am a Notary Public, and I have a financial gain each and every time I use my seal, thank you very much.
I think you mean that the Notary should not have a financial INTEREST in the document/transaction they are notarizing... quite different when worded that way.

Please see my previous post as to "Agency Relationship" with regard to your comment about the Lawyer who is allowed to notarize and advise.

And as an aside... anyone who would dare compare 4 years of law school to a 50-question open book 'test' for Certification... sheesh.

Reply by Lisa Prestegard on 1/4/07 3:48pm
Msg #169085

***OMG***
Do you SERIOUSLY think a CPA/Notary would be qualified to discern whether or not a Borrowers interest rate is "high"??
*muttering to self* I will NOT get out the wooden spoons, and I will be nice....

Gerry... as a Real Estate Broker, I have been specifically trained and licensed by my State Department of Business and Professional Regulation to read, understand, complete, and advise as to the content of certain documents relating to a real estate transaction. If the document in question also needs to be Notarized, I can do that as well. However, I CANNOT tell the Buyer "Whoa, Chum! I think you paid WAY too much for this house!!" unless I am in a SPECIFIC AGENCY RELATIONSHIP with that Buyer.

Mr. CPA/Notary, even if he IS the Borrowers CPA, cannot and should not advise as to their rate. He can, however, as their CPA "Gee, Mr. Jones... you really cannot afford this house payment based on your fiscal condition". As their CPA, he would be privvy to what they can/cannot afford. However, he is NOT the investor/lender and might not have the slightest clue as to their credit score... or things like past bankruptcy.... and therefore is not qualified to make such an abject remark.

Reply by Gerry_VT on 1/4/07 5:24pm
Msg #169171

I think Lisa's example of a CPA advising a client about a loan being affordable is indeed a better example than my example of a CPA commenting on an interest rate.

Reply by Poppy on 1/4/07 3:58pm
Msg #169090

Lets not forget who publishes the CA law primer. It's not

the official SOS handbook. (Unless there is another primer that I'm not aware of)
I like the primer but it's times like this that I have to remind myself that the primer must be compared to the SOS official Notary Handbook.

Reply by Poppy on 1/4/07 4:04pm
Msg #169097

BTW: It's not new it was also in the 2006 Primer.. n/m

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/4/07 4:04pm
Msg #169099

Re: Lets not forget who publishes the CA law primer. It's not

I assumed that Joe meant "primer" in a generic sense, rather than "Primer", as in the book published by a certain company that spends money on Rose Bowl floats... I haven't yet seen the 2007 SOS Handbook (guess I need to got to the website and get updated!), but that's what I thought he meant. Off I go to check it out...

Reply by Poppy on 1/4/07 4:09pm
Msg #169104

Thanks Janet... I misunderstood... I'll have to check it

out too...
Sorry Joe... I should have known better... Since it was you. ;-)

Reply by Poppy on 1/4/07 4:13pm
Msg #169109

Opps.. No new SOS handbook yet. Think it is the other

primer. The 2006 primer is the 28th edition so it makes sense that the 2007 would be the 29th edition that Joe spoke of...

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/4/07 4:26pm
Msg #169123

Did you get an advance copy?

Or was I wrong about which book you were referring to? The SOS website still has the 2006 edition posted. (Please let us know if the 2007 version is available for order.)

Regardless, I wouldn't interpret this as referring to the NNA's (or anyone else's) certification of notaries, but rather other widely recognized certifications (like for realtors or CPAs, etc.) or possibly official certifications or licenses recognized by the state. I also think Lisa made some excellent points above about when this might or might not be appropriate. Hopefully, the people who hold those additional "certifications" alluded to will know when it is or is not appropriate to use that expertise in a given situation. My guess would be that it would most likely apply when they are acting primarily in that capacity and notarizing a given document as an aside.

Reply by Joe Ewing on 1/4/07 6:02pm
Msg #169194

Re: Did you get an advance copy?

Janet I am on their &*^%$ list so I cannot comment. Your welcome to send me a personal e-mail.

Reply by Kate/CA on 1/4/07 5:27pm
Msg #169175

Joe isn't that talking about notaries that also have.....

their real estate license, or some other CA State Certification?