Posted by James H. Lissemore on 3/15/07 7:56am
Msg #180018

Fees for no signs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In New Jersey I have been contacting state Legislators in an effort
to add a specific regulation that would ban title ins. companies from paying no or reduced fees for loans that do not close.
A number have agreed that this practice puts the borrower at risk, beause a Notary is a disinterested Officer of the State and should not be offered any inducement to "sell" the loan.
Title Insurance Cops. are licenced by the state and come under any regulations a state wishes to impose.
I am not refering to no shows or borrowers without proper I.D. when the signing does not even start.
I think any experienced Notary signing specialist has run into the
"We are looking for team players to CLOSE our loans" attitude".

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 3/15/07 8:13am
Msg #180024

I would be reluctant to let the "camel's nose into the tent"

Traditionally , lawmakers, love to regulate. Why stop with payment
for no-signs for NSAs
They may want to train us, license us, regulate us,
CLE us, insure us. regulate our fees, hours , and who
knows what else?
Why did they not sign???? Could be a bunch of reasons.
YOUR contract with the party that hired you should control.
Your contract for payment is likely with an out of state
SS, TC or lender. Would be very difficult to enforce.
You might be opening a real can of worms

Reply by PAW on 3/15/07 8:21am
Msg #180028

Generalize

I certainly agree that specifically targeting the title insurance industry may be opening a real can of worms that we just don't want or need. IMO, a better approach would be to have a more general "right to compensation for work performed" law, where anyone who performs a job under contract would be compensated for the work performed regardless of the overall outcome.

Reply by TRG_wy on 3/15/07 9:26am
Msg #180048

Re: Generalize

I agree "...IMO, a better approach would be to have a more general "right to compensation for work performed" law..."

Check your existing state laws or statutes. Wyoming has this covered under "Theft of Services" laws. Nice piece of law that is further accepted because we are Sworn Officers of the state.

Reply by Gerry_VT on 3/15/07 12:18pm
Msg #180065

Re: Generalize

I don't think a general "right to compensation for work performed" law would be a good idea. Notaries are supposed to be disinterested and impartial, but that is not true for most occupations. For most occupations, there is nothing wrong with creating contracts with incentives for the contractor.

Reply by PAW on 3/15/07 12:53pm
Msg #180073

Re: Generalize

Obviously the "law" would have to be properly worded. If a contract states that certain things must be done, and those things are done, then the contractor has met his obligations and should be so compensated. It really doesn't make any difference what line of business is involved, if obligations are fulfilled, then payment should be made. I'm not advocating that there shouldn't be incentives, just that everyone should be paid according to work performed.

If you contract a person to dig a hole 10 feet deep and 10 feet across, and the contractor digs the hole, then the contractor should be paid, even if you decide afterwards that you don't want the hole and fill it in. The contractor met his obligations as contracted.

Reply by Gerry_VT on 3/15/07 1:10pm
Msg #180075

Re: Generalize

Suppose the hole is for a garden, and I say to the contractor "I'll give you half the vegetables in return for digging the hole". There is an early frost in the fall, and all the vegetables are destroyed; the contractor gets nothing. There is nothing improper with that deal, but it would be improper to give a notary that type of incentive.

Reply by PAW on 3/15/07 2:30pm
Msg #180088

Re: Generalize

In that case, the contract would be invalid as a notary cannot enter into a contract with incentives (making them a party to the underlying transaction or having a direct benefit to the underlying transaction). If the contract was valid and enforceable, then payment would be necessary.

IOW, for the contract to be valid for a notary (or other gov't official), the result of the (trans)action and fee must be separate and distinct. That's what keeps a notary a disinterested party.

Reply by ewing2surf on 3/15/07 9:06am
Msg #180041

Camels nose in the tent

Ha! Bob your comment caused me to remember the old Ant and Elephant joke.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/15/07 8:44am
Msg #180035

Re: Fees for no signs--Bad idea.

NSA-Texans fly under the radar here. Don't ask/don't tell, kind of thing. It's not illegal, but it will be a big problem if it is pranked with. That would eliminate all work for Txns if that kind of inquiry started.

You are playing w/ fire for NJ as well, IMHO. Who has the bigger budget to lobby NJ lawmakers...Notaries or TC's? TC's can dang sure do without you and any other free agent notary.

Reply by Jersey_Boy on 3/15/07 9:04am
Msg #180040

Leave well enough alone....

Stirring that pot in NJ and we're likely to become an Attorney Only state...

that would suck.

Reply by TitleGalCA on 3/15/07 8:22pm
Msg #180130

Brenda how right you are

***TC's can dang sure do without you and any other free agent notary***

Believe that. Every EO and their assistant is a notary. The ONLY reason they hire free agent notaries is to accomodate the off-hours signing for the convenience of the customer. TC's are all about making things convenient.

But if pushed? Guaran-dam-tee-you they could handle it without independents/free agents.

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/15/07 9:08am
Msg #180042

I will 5th this. Leave it be. n/m

Reply by ME/NJ on 3/15/07 9:39am
Msg #180052

are you insane or just have nothing better to do.. n/m

Reply by Pat/IL on 3/15/07 1:41pm
Msg #180080

Re: Well, consider a few things before dismissing...

On one hand:

Training, regulating, licensing, insurance requirements could help to weed out some of the incompetents who are driving down fees and inviting disrespect for the occupation.

From my personal observations in the title industry, I think I could confidently say that title companies in fee-regulated states earn far more per file than we do here in the land of price competition (Chicago area).

Even though a title company may be based out of state, I do believe they are subject to the different RESPA interpretations of the states in which they do business. I don't know how this would apply to signing services, but I'm guessing a little bit of scrutiny of the practices of some of those guys might not be the worst thing either. Difficult to enforce? I don't know. I think the threat of losing the ability to do business in a given state could loosen up some wallets.

On the other Hand:

At least in the state I call home, the legislators don't always consult with all of the most knowledgable people when making laws. They can't be expected to be experts on everything and they don't always wind up with the best solution. Depending on their political bent, they may give more weight to one opposing viewpoint over another. It's human nature and hard to avoid.

In Illinois, they seem to have a habit of enacting new laws without first having procedures in place to accommodate. One such instance in recent memory relates to the NSAs. Another disaster, enacted last year and now "suspended", was HB 4050 - a well-intentioned but poorly thought-out predatory lending bill.

I don't know what kind of can of worms James may be opening, and he'll do better to listen to his peers in Jersey than to some stranger in Illinois. But, if I were going to open a can of worms, I would probably start with the department of insurance, or whoever oversees the title industry in your state.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/15/07 4:10pm
Msg #180111

Re: Well, consider a few things before dismissing...

You bring up some good points in your section "on the other hand..."

Let's also not forget that lobbyists for the big monied constituents are the folks who are most likely to have access to the legislators to "educate" them about the issue - and that many laws are first drafted by the special interest's attorneys to "make it easier" for the legislators. You can be sure that they will draft them in their own best interest. And it would probably make us all nauseous to know how many legislators vote on bills they have never actually read!

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/15/07 6:13pm
Msg #180122

James...please read

Know you mean well and are trying to solve problems, but everyone has made some excellent points. As to the 'lobbying' that will go on---who do you suppose will have their Nasty Nose All the way in the tent??? You got it! And we know now how much that helps us.