Posted by BarbaraL_CA on 3/29/07 9:05pm
Msg #182766
Interesting re: Land America and BGC
A fellow notary I know was filling out an application for LandAmerica to be listed as one of their notaries. They needed a BGC that said "passed." She called the Live Scan number and asked if she could get a copy of her BGC to send. He said there is no copy, there is no certificate, that I am just live scanned and it checks everything that is needed, if I didn't pass I wouldn't have been commissioned. Then she called LandAmerica and talked to a representative of the Notary section and she said, he was right, she does not need to do anything. Just to see that she was commissioned in California is proof alone that she has been background checked and not to worry. Land America also stated that they are going to change their contracts not to include California in the BGC section.
|
Reply by TitleGalCA on 3/29/07 9:30pm
Msg #182771
Barbara, thanks for that.
***Just to see that she was commissioned in California is proof alone that she has been background checked and not to worry. Land America also stated that they are going to change their contracts not to include California in the BGC section.***
It has bothered me alot that the company I work for is not recognizing the beautiful job the CA SOS does in our background checks. I hope this trend spreads, and the octopus-like grip of the NNA and their money-making schemes doesn't infect the notary community- at least in California. It simply isn't necessary, period.
Great post.
|
Reply by Harry [NR] on 3/29/07 10:59pm
Msg #182781
If true, that is OUTSTANDING news. LandAmerica may have come to the conclusion that the NNA / Signix / LexisNexis background check is woefully inadequate relative to a governmental check. Based on what we have seen, this may not be far from the truth.
Our position has always been that checks should not be required in states that perform their own background investigations provided those investigations are relatively current. Our initial plan was to offer a light-weight check in those states to complement the state check, especially in cases where the check was stale. However, conversations with certain title company representatives indicated that they would not settle for anything less than about the most comprehensive check a non-governmental entity can perform. The Level 3 Certification at http://www.notarypublicbackgroundcheck.com is such a check.
Since going live, we have learned considerably more than what we knew before, particularly with respect to the NNA certification. In short, our Level 3 verification, as it currently stands, seems to be vastly superior to what NNA and Signix have been doing. In fact, after seeing a number of their background checks, I cannot understand how title companies and lenders could consider it adequate.
Based on our observations, here are the primary differences between the NPBC check and the NNA / Signix check:
1) They do not have live identity verification.
2) They are not running any Federal district searches, which reveal Federal crimes.
3) They only appear to be running the current legal name and not considering any AKAs.
What does this mean? Among other things, a person convicted of a various Federal crimes - a multitude of different types of fraud, racketeering, money laundering, etc. - may not be exposed. As well, a criminal with multiple names - whether maiden names or otherwise legally-changed names - may not be exposed.
Of course, the omission of Federal District searches and multi-name/multi-county criminal searches offers a couple significant advantages: it is easier to manage and considerably less expensive, which makes a very high-volume program feasible. They can simply take your money without the additional burden and expense of dealing with the additional names revealed by your social security number. (Believe me, the additional names makes things considerably more complicated.)
The Level 2 NPBC Certification, which will be available soon, will be similar to the NNA approach, but only available to notaries in background checking states. I personally believe it would be irresponsible to have it any other way - the omission of at least 1 Federal District search along with AKAs/FKAs is very substantial in my opinion - and we do not want to be accused of simply "going through the motions" or presenting the facade of a substantial background check absent the same.
Harry
Notary Rotary, Inc.
|
