Posted by Dre73_MS on 5/22/07 9:55am
Msg #191297

A little P. Oed with LFC

Just a little concern. Last week I completed a signing for Lenders First Chioce. First, I was a little concerned because I felt that the company was a little vague in their closing requests. I finished the signing and sent the docs back to them immediately. On yesterday, they called me and told me that there were some docs not notarized. Ok, I know that I notarized these files, because i always check them in front of the borrower and then, I check them again in my office before i forward them back to the prospective company. Now, I am not sure if they assume that I am ignorant or in experienced, but I took offense to their allegations that I had not accurately completed the signing. I called the company and questioned their new requests. Well they tried to put it off on the state of Mississippi not accepting the docs, because of the lack of a seal. I am not too sure about this company, but they seem not to have a clue. I called the closing company and he could not explain their request.
I will send the docs back as they have requested, but maybe they need to re vamp themselves. Any thoughts on this??????????????

Reply by NVnotary on 5/22/07 10:10am
Msg #191298

Did they send you a PDF of your error? I would definitely request that. Anything short of that, I would not take their word for it. We all make mistakes but I do request that I see it first.

Reply by Dre73_MS on 5/22/07 10:22am
Msg #191301

I have requested to see the forms that they are requesting notary. I have received them and I just called the company. Poor guy told me that even he is trying to find out why there are additional requests.

Reply by ME/NJ on 5/22/07 10:18am
Msg #191299

We all make simple mistakes most times its a quick fix before funding.

Reply by Sher_AZ on 5/22/07 10:20am
Msg #191300

Andre, I've worked with LFC a bit in the past without any issues. It sounds like maybe you have encountered a new scheduler? if instructions were incomplete or vague. I would ask to see the "rejected" documents first. They can e-mail you the doc's for you to view before you take action to correct.
Incidentally I did have this exact scenario happen to me once (different Co) and when they e-mailed the "proof" to me, I had to apologize profusely. They were understanding & requested a fax of the corrected doc before shipping out and yes I was "docked" a small amt of my fee, but it also served as a learning lesson to "take a break" before shipping doc's back. Your eyes can be deceiving even when you're looking right at the obvious.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/22/07 10:33am
Msg #191305

Under the full faith and credit clause of the U. S. Constitution...If procedues have been completed in accord with the law of the state in which they are performed...the other 49 states are required to recognize the procedues required and performed in their sister state. Very often a TC or Lender interprets the closer's performance in terms of what they understand to be correct. Their understanding may be entirely erroneous as to the work you performed. If you performed your work in conformity with the law of your state...insist on payment for your services.

Reply by OR on 5/22/07 10:58am
Msg #191310

Re: IMHO Stop chasing the why just for right now fix

the doc/docs ASAP. That way the Loan gets funded first and the Borrower, LO CO and or the SS are yes YOU are happy. Then if you want to chase down "your why do I have to do this question." The whole process will run smother. Everyone invalved will be much more willing help you understand way. One more thing dont forget to breath in and out. It always helps me to think clearly. Best of luck

Reply by Charles_Ca on 5/22/07 1:36pm
Msg #191339

Kevin/CT a quick question, please.

Would you be so kind as to cite the reference for my own personal use. I have not heard of a section of the USC described thusly, and I think it might be an interesting read. I am not in anyway questioning what you said, I'm just hoping to learn from it, since it has been my experience in associating with my attorney friends that things we take for granted often have much different meanings under the law. Thanks

Reply by BobbiCT on 5/22/07 5:32pm
Msg #191395

US Constitution

U.S. Constitution Article IV Section 1. "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts..." Short of God, you can't site a higher legal authority in the U.S. than our own constitution.

Of course, that doesn't mean there isn't a village missing an idiot. I've often had to fax that section of the Constitution to "legal experts" in other states. Favorite was brownie points I earned with a VIP Connecticut commerical mergers & acquistion attorney working on a multi-multi-million dollar interstate transaction who had a California attorney call and state,"your documents are no good because the notarizations are all wrong."

Huh? This was not a dumb attorney - faxed our Conn. laws with "exact statutory wording" that we used. No good: California doesn't accept that. Attorney at wits end remembered "Bobbi knows weird notarial trivia." He faxed that section of the U.S. Constitution with only the kind of stern letter only a lawyer knowing he is right and citing a supreme authority can write. Problem ended; no more arguments, documents accepted.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/22/07 7:34pm
Msg #191432

Re: US Constitution

Excellent, Bobbi. Thank you.

I remember reading an interesting case in law school about the "Full faith and credit clause." The case involved an inter-racial couple who moved to Virginia. Their marriage was perfectly legal in the state in which it was performed. At the time Virginia made inter-racial marriage a crime. The matter was appealed to the U S Supreme court. The court ruled that Virginia had to recognize the validity of the couple's marriage even though it did not conform to Virginia's laws because it was legal in the state where it was performed. Virginia had to give full faith and credit to the law of a sister state.

Reply by MelissaCT on 5/22/07 4:42pm
Msg #191384

Re: Similar experience

I recently had a company call me because they "needed the names of the witnesses to type underneath the lines". Funny thing is that I ALWAYS have the witness print their name under the line -- funnier still is that I am one of the witnesses & I always print my name under the line. I don't believe funding was held up, but it was an interesting request nonetheless.