Posted by JulieD/KS on 5/23/07 10:11pm
Msg #191666

Prompt & Precise

Has anyone worked for Prompt & Precise? It took 6 hours to get an email from them after being called for a job and the email includes an agreement I have to sign and fax back and among other things, it says I won't be paid if I fail to follow all their rules. They won't send the confirmation until I sign and fax this sheet back.
I've never heard of them and am reluctant to sign anything until I see the confirmation.

Reply by Calnotary on 5/23/07 10:21pm
Msg #191669

Stay away from those SS that play those games. It will be the same story once they owe you money.

Reply by LJ on 5/23/07 10:30pm
Msg #191675

I just did one for them last week. Jennifer was very nice and decided to give her a try. All I had to fax back was an agreement of short list of instructions that I would agree too. Ex: I will call both LO and Prompt after the closing. I will e-mail tracking # etc. Very easy, typical things we do with most companies. I had no problem doing this. It's only been a week so I haven't been paid, but she said they usually pay in about 2-3 weeks. I can live with that. Pkg was 60 pages. Not bad. I'll keep you posted.

Reply by pan/nd on 5/23/07 10:27pm
Msg #191673

Julie,

I'd tell them to take a hike.

That is unless they're paying you awfully well..which I doubt.

That whole thing is about as tempting as horseradish pudding.

"Prompt and Precise"--most likely they are neither.

The idea of holding the confirmation hostage until they get their funky contractor's agreement back is ridiculous..not to mention bait and switch and a poor attempt at strong-arm.

Life is too short. Who needs 'em?

Reply by JulieD/KS on 5/23/07 10:30pm
Msg #191676

It's the same tactic that DocuservUSA uses. Making the signing agent sign a contractor agreement before granting access to the confirmation. I will not do it. According to their agreement, if I fail to collect a copy of the borrower's driver's license, they can not pay me a dime. Now, who in their right mind would agree to that? Occasionally, borrowers forget to get a copy - - so, now I give up my pay? NOT.

Reply by LJ on 5/23/07 10:36pm
Msg #191677

Julie, I must be different than you are. I feel it is my responsibility to get a copy of the ID. We are the only ones who meet these people face to face. We are the only ones who can verify their ID. They could fax or mail it in, but how is the LO to know these are the correct people without meeting them face to face? I take it upon myself to always carry my digital camera for the purpose of getting a copy if they can't or forget. I feel it should be our responsiblity. I have no problem doing this and I had no problem signing an agreement that I would do this. Just me, I guess.

Reply by pan/nd on 5/23/07 10:41pm
Msg #191681

Julie,

IMHO, LJ to the contrary, any outfit which has a bunch of reasons not to pay you will probably find one or two reasons (real or trumped up) and either not pay you or ding you for this or that.

Life is too short.

Reply by JulieD/KS on 5/23/07 11:00pm
Msg #191690

If requested, I tell the borrowers to have a photocopy of their ID, but if they forget, I don't take a camera along. I just fill out a ID Affidavit instead. Plus, I have all the information and a thumbprint in my notary journal.
My point wasn't about the photocopy; my point was that if the borrower forgets to make that photocopy of the picture ID, why should I forfeit my entire pay? That's a little radical.
Also, I don't feel it's my job to phone the loan officer. It's only my job to phone the company that hired me. But - that's another stipulation for the signing agent....and failure to do so, they'll not pay me.
I know how to do my job and these hand-holding companies I find to be a pain.

Reply by Marlene/USNA on 5/24/07 9:56am
Msg #191729

This gets my dander up. . .

>How is the LO to know these are the correct people without meeting them face to face?<

They know it because you properly ID'd them, which is YOUR JOB AS A NOTARY. You're a public official, why would the LO question the identity of borrowers whom you have identified by your signature and seal - "personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person. . ."

Trust yourself, people, you're the ID authority in the signing.

If the borrowers have a photocopy of their ID, great, but if they don't, I'd put a note with the package explaining that they didn't have it and leave it at that.

Reply by BrendaTx on 5/24/07 10:09am
Msg #191730

Re: This gets my dander up. . .There should be a new phrase

*Trust yourself, people...* says, Marlene...

*Marlene* should rank right up in there with the character, "Towanda" from Fried Green Tomatoes.

From this day forward, if I want to express that I am about to open the proverbial can of whoop-a$$, I shall tell the offender...

"That's it....I am about to get 'my Marlene' on."

Reply by Marlene/USNA on 5/24/07 10:32am
Msg #191737

Is Towanda the one who barbequed the investigator. . .

. . .and served him up in the restaurant?

If so, my co-workers would agree with your assessment of my character. And so would I, actually.

Reply by BrendaTx on 5/24/07 12:40pm
Msg #191767

Re: Is Towanda the one who barbequed the investigator. . .

Barbequed the wife-beating husband of Ruth and served him to the investigator.

Yeah, you've got the picture. "Towanda" is a powerful word.

Reply by Marlene/USNA on 5/24/07 12:58pm
Msg #191773

Re: Is Towanda the one who barbequed the investigator. . .

I'm gonna have to watch that movie again, it's been a lot of years.

"Towanda" even sounds powerful when you say it out loud. Like "whoop-a$$."

Reply by lenelle/FL on 5/24/07 4:00pm
Msg #191812

I just watched it again 2 weeks ago. . .

I love this movie and it's funny because after I watch it I tell me kids that I will "Towanda their butts" if they don't listen.

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 11:03am
Msg #191747

Re: This gets my dander up. . .

I got 'in trouble' a few weeks ago because the borrowers didn't have their id copies and the owner of the title company went ballistic because somehow this was my fault. Anyway, his theory is that they need the copies 'to be sure the notary in the field' actually checks the id. I've got no idea who he is hiring if that's a problem.

Reply by dickb/wi on 5/24/07 11:31am
Msg #191752

as marlene said........

that's what an ack or a jurat says.....it is your attestation as to the validity of the signer.....you are an officer odf the state and your word in a court of law is GOLD unless some one can prove with out a doubt that what you attested to [such as most docs that pass thru a bank where a staff person just notarizes at the end of a day and never sees the signers] ios false........NEVER would i take digital pics of some ones id.......if they need it and don't have it i tell thewm to get it and fax it in.......my job is to wittness sigs...i am not a photographer by trade.....i am a notray public.......jmho

Reply by BrendaTx on 5/23/07 10:41pm
Msg #191680

**That whole thing is about as tempting as horseradish pudding.**

I love that.

Reply by pan/nd on 5/23/07 10:43pm
Msg #191683

Brenda,

Yeah, it's not very tasty..but it's better with a little ketchup.

Reply by ZeeCA on 5/23/07 10:49pm
Msg #191687

reminds me of the sedar........ n/m

Reply by LJ on 5/23/07 10:54pm
Msg #191688

I am hoping I can come back and post in a couple of weeks that you guys missed out. Time wil tell. Believe me, the fax back was nothing to worry about. All real easy, typical stuff that we do anyway. She told me everything that was on it before hand, there were no surprises on it at all. I also asked her a lot of questions before I agreed to accepting. I hate when I accept an assignment and do it, then get an agreement that I have to sign before they pay me. They are holding my payment hostage until I sign it. This way, they hold the confirmation until everything is clear between both parties before the signing. This is the correct way if you ask me. No surprises on either end.

Reply by ZeeCA on 5/23/07 10:47pm
Msg #191684

i find the more hoops and excuses and $$$ held hostage the less they tend to offer for a signing... I had one hold my $$ hostage and discussed it here. It was not that I was refusing to sign their stupid paperwork it was the idea AFTER the fact .... I sent in a w9

Reply by ZeeCA on 5/23/07 10:48pm
Msg #191686

the rest of it... no clue what hap.. sry

and finally got paid....

as i said there seems to be a direct correlation to ridiculous applications and low ball fees...

jmo..............

Reply by LJ on 5/23/07 10:55pm
Msg #191689

Re: the rest of it... no clue what hap.. sry

I was paid a very fair fee from them also.

Reply by ZeeCA on 5/23/07 11:14pm
Msg #191693

was just going to ask you that ... tx n/m

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/24/07 5:58am
Msg #191706

Actually it sounds as if they are pursuing the correct course of conduct by showing you the contract before the confirmation. Had it been the other way around you might have completed the closing on the strength of the contents of the confirmation, and been unpleasantly surprised afterward by additional terms contained in the contract.

The contract governs the contractual relationship between the parties. If there are conflicting terms in the confirmation, they constitute modifications to the existing contract, you would have the right to negotiate them subsequently, or refuse the assignment.

In so far as non-payment for failure to perform any of the services to which you agreed is concerned, they would be within their rights not to pay you in the event that you had overlooked something during the closing. The failure to perform would constitute a contract breach which would discharge their obligation to make payment. This is a matter of law, and would be the case even if it were not spelled out in the agreement. Therefore, it should not be a matter of concern. The matters about which you should be concerned are the duties enumerated in the contract which you will be required to perform and adequate and timely payment

You have the right to negotiate their contract with them. If you can not live with the terms contained therein, draw a line through the offesive language, striking it from the contract. See if they will accept it. The big isues are fee, payment thereof and timely payment.

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 6:56am
Msg #191708

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

do a search - I've got a previous post that's quite long about how 'nice' she is and the games she tried to play with me. She was fine when she gave me the order until it was time to get paid months after the closing. I had to get the broker and the owner of the title company involved days before filing my civil suit. And anyone that accepts an order should be aware that her fees are VERY high and you can easily get $200 and she still will be making a hefty profit.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/24/07 7:24am
Msg #191711

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

I would agree that timely payment is a source of concern. However, you can use her contract to clearly define the time line when payment is due.

Last week there was some discussion about the use of the attorney's lien on a file to assure payment from one of the parties (ss,TC or lender) in the chain that had taken possession of the file. It works very well. I was just paid for a fee due from a signing service that dusappeared.

If your state does not provide for a similar lien for signing agents, you may be able to accomplish the same thing by contract under your State's version of the Uniform Commercial Code regulating secured transactions. You could build a financing agreement into the verbiage of the contract, permitting you to file a UCC1 financing statement to secure payment for your services. You would have to record it with your Secretary of State Office (or other agency designated by your state for the perfection of liens) upon completion of your services so that the other parties in the chain take the file subject to the lien.

Reply by BrendaTx on 5/24/07 7:25am
Msg #191713

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT...Kevin,

If notaries have debts to collect and are not having luck with them, I am curious...will you collect the debts for them?

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/24/07 7:45am
Msg #191716

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT...Kevin,

Hi Brend,

I am only licensed to practice in Connecticut. I can collect debts within the courts of Connecticut with no problem. I have been doing it for 22 years.

I can appear in the courts of other states on a pro haec vice appearance, but I would need to be sponsored by a local law firm within that state. In effect the notary would need to hire two attorneys....me...and the local firm to sponsor my appearance before the court. It may get a little expensive for the notary. However, if you draft into the contract a right for the notary to recover attorney's fees...the notary can get reimbursement for attorney's fees as part of the award of damages.

The other way around it is to have the notary assign the debt to me. It then becomes my property. I have a constitutional right to represent my interests before any court in the country.

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 8:02am
Msg #191717

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

I didn't have a contract with her - I don't sign them and I certainly would never sign one where someone can randomly reduce my fee with basically no proof other than they want to. However, I have found, as in her case, that every entity involved was in PA, except Prompt & Precise. so a copy of the small claims complaint faxed to everyone who received the benefit of my services got them to get her to pay me - read my prior post and see the continued games she tried to play, even a just before I was filing suit.

The best way to be paid in this business is to bypass signing services, which I generally do other than a moment of weakness, which I generally regret.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 5/24/07 8:19am
Msg #191720

A Moment of Weakness for You, Sue?

I'd have paid money to be present when that occurred! That's a once in a blue moon event.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/24/07 8:21am
Msg #191721

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

If your agreement was with the signing service and not with the TC or lender...you were very lucky when you filed the suit against the other parties.

In Connecticut instituting a suit (small claims or otherwise) without the benefit of a lien to enforce or other reasonable cause could result in the plaintiff's having been subsequently sued by the other parties for vexatious litigation. In Connecticut the vexatious litigation statute provides for the recovery of double and in certain cases tripple damages plus recovery of attorney's fee. It can be devastatingly expensive if you lose. Most states have variations on Connecticut's vexatious litigation statute or in the alternative a common law cause of action for abuse of process or malicious prosecution to accomplish the same thing
.

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 10:59am
Msg #191745

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

If I ever had to file the actual complaint - just faxing a copy generally works - my argument would be unjust enrichment - every person in the chain received the benefit of my services. I am an agent of the lender and title company should a borrower ever wish to include me in a suit for whatever and the reverse is also true, a signing service is the agent of the title company and/or lender. It would be an interesting outcome should it ever be necessary.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 5/24/07 11:53am
Msg #191756

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

Unjust enrichment is not a particularly strong argument in this scenario. It is an equitable remedy, and not granted lightly. In Connecticut the Defendants would need to have accepted your services under circumstances in which they knew or should have known that you expected to be paid. In all probability they were not even aware of your identity at the time. As far as they knew the signing service was handling the closing through whatever means it saw fit.

The court is not going to create a contract either express or implied in either law or fact where none exists. I read a case a while back in which a landscaper planted bushes at the wrong address. He tried to sue on the theory of unjust enrichment (quantum meruit), and he lost.

Your argument for agency is equally as hard to make , since you would have to be clothed with actual, inherent or apparent authority by the defendants. There would have to be some agency agreement between them and you. Your agreement with the signing service is probably not going to create an agency relationship with the TC or lender.

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 1:10pm
Msg #191776

Re: Prompt & Precise - NOT

as i said, the threat gets everyone in an uproar as they all know that payment is due. If I had to, I'd take my chance locally here in small claims, knowing that someone is going to pony up the $$$ as it's a legitimate debt. In this case, sufficient pressure was put on her that she paid me. In the other cases, the broker paid up. The only time I have actually sued has been a PA company and I got my $$$, plus interest and costs. Best insurance is to stay away, as I usually do, from signing services.

Dennis, I had a few weak moments the beginning of the year - I have sufficiently smacked myself upside my head and back to working with no middle men.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 5/24/07 1:40pm
Msg #191781

Whew!

You had me worried, Sue! The next time a bargain basement signing service calls you, send me an SOS if you're tempted to accept. Sometimes all it takes is letting a kindred spirit know of your situation. We'll call it the "10 Step Program for Freedom from the Tyranny of Signing Services". Perhaps we can even market this together, Sue, & make an extra buck or two on the side. Whatta ya think?

Reply by sue_pa on 5/24/07 1:49pm
Msg #191783

Re: Whew!

actually Dennis it wasn't bargain basement. I had the order first from a title company I've worked for years and years. They called back and said the broker insisted the order go through Prompt & Precise. She then called me several minutes later. She did offer I believe less than 1/2 the fee I got - I didn't come down one penny from my title company fee - why would I? It is the exact same work. Although this was several months after the closing, she said she would NEVER (her emphasis) pay anyone until she was paid. Unfortunately for her, I didn't care.

Reply by Dennis D Broadbooks on 5/24/07 2:15pm
Msg #191789

I Almost Had to Send You an SOS...

...a few minutes ago. Fortunately I was able to muster up the courage on my own to turn down an assignment for tomorrow from a bargain basement SS. Actually it was a no-brainer decision. We're going on vacation starting tomorrow morning & this declination was a piece of cake.

Reply by PCasey/CO on 5/24/07 1:45pm
Msg #191782

Whenever I have gotten one of these I modify the agreement. Cross out the sections you don't agree to (line through and initial) then sign and send to them. If they don't like your modifications they won't accept it, no skin off your teeth, I haven't had any comments back to the ones I have modified.

Reply by Ernest__CT on 8/14/07 9:15pm
Msg #205572

Re: Prompt and Precise

I'll take all they'll send to me!