Posted by GWest on 1/20/08 11:26am
Msg #231511

Re-Acknowledge Deed of Trust

I am curious as to what the general consenses is to the following situation:
SS calls and stated that the TC would like a new acknowledgement for a Deed of Trust so they can re-record the Deed of Trust due to an error in the body of the original recorded Deed of Trust. They have corrected the error and want the acknowledgement dated the same date as the original acknowledgement but they don't want the Borrower to initial the correction and resign it. Get this, they also want me to date it the date of the original acknowledgement, which was in Sept. of 2007, but want me to use the 2008 CA Acknowledgement.

My feeling is why should I re-acknowledged a Deed of Trust if the Borrower doesn't need to initial the corrections and resign it. Also, if what the TC has requested was an acceptable solution, why would I use a 2008 Acknowledgement? The SS agrees with my reasoning but wants me to hash it out with the TC, which I will do on Tuesday. I have spoken with the County Recorder in the past when this has happened and have done what they stated needed to be done, but would like to hear your feedback.

Reply by BobbiCT on 1/20/08 11:40am
Msg #231513

Re-Acknowledge a Deed ?

Should I re-acknowledged a Deed of Trust if the Borrower doesn't need to initial the corrections and resign it?

BAD NEWS! If the title company "corrected" the document it is NOT the same document. The "new version" needs to be re-signed and re-acknowledged with a new date. Simple: It is NOT the same document that was signed in September 2007. It is a different document. How can you re-acknowledge signatures on a document that didn't exist in Sept. 2007?

Reply by Lee/AR on 1/20/08 11:55am
Msg #231516

Re: Re-Acknowledge a Deed ?

Before you agree to do this, make sure your E&O is paid & you've transferred all of your assets into a Trust.... In other words.... I don't think sooooooooooo. They give you a hard time, ask them to put in writing exactly what they want you to do so you can run it past your SOS. It's a fax or e-mail you will never receive.

Reply by GWest on 1/20/08 12:08pm
Msg #231523

Re: Re-Acknowledge a Deed ?

Just so you know I would NOT do this as requested by the TC. I am looking for opinions as to what other NSA's would do if your were asked to do this by the TC. The TC is stating that this is what the Recorders Office requires. I have spoken with the local Recorders Office and they do want it re-acknowledged, but there interpretation of re-acknowledgement is different than the TC's interpretation.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 1/20/08 12:55pm
Msg #231533

Re: Re-Acknowledge a Deed ?

I had something similar occur.

I told them that is not in my authority to deal with this at all. I am just here to notarize signatures for a fee and in accordance with the law. They need to figure out what is correct with their attorney or whomever, get the proper paperwork ready to correct the situation and then call you to execute, and you will be using the dates that the new transaction occurs. There is no"hashing out with the TC" to be done on your part. Period. Someone is just lazy here and does not want to take responsibility for the error and do the paperwork to correct the situation.

Reply by CopperheadVA on 1/20/08 11:57am
Msg #231517

I don't believe I could comply with this in Virginia. I have been asked to do similar things before and I tell them it's illegal for me to do so. I even had to confirm once with my Secretary of State before the TC would drop the matter and accept a newly signed DOT with current notarization date.

Reply by GA/Atty on 1/20/08 12:03pm
Msg #231519

It sounds like they want a new acknowledgement for a re-record. What I do not understand is why they want you to do anything at all. Why don't they just have one of their own notaries in house do it? I mean, if you don't have to go out to see the borrowers anyway, why do they have you involved at all?

Reply by desktopfull on 1/20/08 12:17pm
Msg #231524

If they made changes to the document, then the borrower doesn't have a copy of what they signed. I've always been sent back to the borrower with the new document if corrections were made to the wording and they re-signed the mortgage/deed of trust if there was a problem and dated it for the current date. Otherwise, what is the purpose for having the borrower's sign a correction agreement for instances such as this.

Second, it's my understanding that the new acknowledgements in CA weren't to be used before Jan. 1, 2008, how could you possibly do an ack. dated for 2007 with the 2008 wording and it be accepted for recording. I see a BIG RED FLAG here.

Reply by rengel/CA on 1/20/08 12:17pm
Msg #231525

What they are asking is:
1) an illegal act for you to perform, and
2) a misdomeanor for them to even ask you!
What part of "no" do they not understand?

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 1/20/08 12:18pm
Msg #231526

I would tell them I don't acknowledge Deeds of Trust or any other documents. I notarize signatures. If the borrower wants to bring me a signed document and acknowledges that he or she signed it, then I can notarize their signature on the date they appear before me.

Reply by sue_pa on 1/20/08 12:23pm
Msg #231528

not in PA

and I'm guessing not in most states. I've always wondered why notaries ask for the original docs that are in 'error' to be faxed. Who cares. You still cannot 'reacknowledge' something - even if you made the mistake. You take it back to your signer and have them reacknowledge - you then ntoarize for that date.

GWest, why are you going to hash it out yourself with the TC? The SS is YOUR client and the supposed 'buffer' between you and the title company. Make them earn their fee -- tell them no and have them communicate with THEIR client. Why do you want in the middle of that - I am assuming no one is paying you for your time

Reply by GWest on 1/20/08 1:37pm
Msg #231540

Re: not in PA

You got a good point. I already told the SS that I would not completed this the way the TC wanted me to and they understood. The SS conveyed what I said to the TC and the TC reply to the SS was that "I hope this does not get to complicated" and requested again that I Federal Express a 2008 Acknowledgement to them. The SS has asked that I speak directly with them since they cannot convince them.

Reply by John_NorCal on 1/20/08 2:35pm
Msg #231550

Re: not in PA

***TC reply to the SS was that "I hope this does not get to complicated" and requested again that I Federal Express a 2008 Acknowledgement to them.***

They should be told by someone, not necessarily you, that it will be as complicated as they make it. There is now way in h___ that you wil send them an acknowledgement, and no way that you will perform an illegal act. Can't see what keeps them from understanding that. Tell them to talk to their corporate attorney and figure it out without your involvement. At this point I think you should just stay away from this deal, they could try to make it backfire on you.

Reply by Julie/MI on 1/20/08 1:30pm
Msg #231538

no new acknowledgement needed

Gotta love the errors and omissions agreement.

In Michigan, if you need to re-record, the reason for the re-recording goes somewhere on the first page and poof it's re-recorded, no initialing, no big deal.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/20/08 1:33pm
Msg #231539

<<<...... but they don't want the Borrower to initial the correction and resign it........My feeling is why should I re-acknowledged a Deed of Trust if the Borrower doesn't need to initial the corrections and resign it.>>>

The question isn't "why" should you, it's "how" could you re-acknowledged a Deed of Trust if the Borrower doesn't need to initial the corrections and resign it? You cannot, since to acknowledge a doc means you either watched the borrower sign or the borrower "acknowledged" that they signed. Neither is the case since the TC doesn't want the borrowers signature. It's like they don't want the borrowers to see the DOT. Wonder why?

Plus the TC wants the old 2007 date and a 2008 acknowledgement? Very bizarre.

Reply by BytheX/MO/KS on 1/20/08 1:58pm
Msg #231542

Did they say what the original error was? Usually it is because they messed up the Schedule A, actual legal description, which most of the time seems to be blank when they want the borrowers to first inital it. Just another reason why they should complete the file before they send it to us to have signed in the first place. I am always very happy to see the companies that have the Schedule A filled out when the docs come out. I would definately want more info before I would agree to giving them anything. As others have stated, they have the correction agreement in the file from the borrowers, so that can take the place of having the borrowers re-initial the document if it is something that falls within the confines agreed to on that document. They should tell you what the issue was and if it falls into that category of the Correction agreement. Follow your gut instinct, we are usually right on if we listen to ourselves and not a persuasive TC who has nothing to lose. It is your future on the line, not theirs. Good luck...

Reply by GWest on 1/20/08 3:16pm
Msg #231553

The error was a portion of the Vin number of a Mobile Home was left off.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 1/20/08 3:42pm
Msg #231556

That all????????? A missing number ??!?!?!?

They are creating this fuss over a missing number??!?!? All they need to do is a correction deed (of course you are not an attorney and can't tell them that, but maybe you can ask them "Isn't there such a thing as a correction deed?". A couple of years ago, I was sent out a second time with a correction deed to correct the description of the property. They had the wrong page in the book of maps for the county recorder. This was about two months after the signing. I took the deed to the BO's , they signed it, I notarized it with that day's date, sent it back and got an EXTRA 50 bucks because it was not my error .......... It was no big deal like this is for you. This stuff happens a lot.

This sounds like a lot of noise for really nothing. ......

Reply by Gary_CA on 1/21/08 11:18am
Msg #231628

This is classic... they want a 2008 ACK form...

which has the new wording that you declare UNDER PENTALTY OF PERJURY... etc, etc, etc...

and the very fact that it's a new form with an old date proves that it's false.

if that's not irony, I don't know what is... oh wait... the thread above where someone was asked to fake a notarization for a prisoner that has a log of everyone he appears before maintained by a peace officer.

Tell 'em to have one of their own notaries stamp it.