Posted by sue_pa on 1/15/08 8:19am
Msg #230636

UCI

I've said it repeatedly that I don't understand why signing agents are concerned with any changes to the general closing instructions and why anyone thinks any changes would be a big deal to us at the table as the majority of these instructions don't even pertain to us. No one has yet given me any concrete answer.

A VERY few limited portions directly concern us - such as the portion where they indicate backdating is not permitted. Well my, my my. One of the lenders sponsoring (don't know if that's the correct term or not) asked me to back date last week - not an entire package but a few documents they lost. No broker involved, this came directly from the lender. Loan funded quite some time ago. No attempt to blame me for missing them - just that they lost them.

So, please tell me again how these instructions are the magical answer to anything? What is said on paper from 'corporate' and what happens in the field are 2 entirely different things.

Reply by NancyOR on 1/15/08 8:58am
Msg #230641

It makes the settlement agent responsible for the signing agent. The title company I work for is considering not using signing agents at all or setting parameters about levels of experience and bonding we may require for a signing agent we hire.

The bottom line is that many borrowers have stated that they did not understand what they were signing. I feel we have a responsibility to the parties we close for and we're looking at how best to make sure everyone understands what they are signing.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/15/08 9:12am
Msg #230644

"The bottom line is that many borrowers have stated that they did not understand what they were signing. I feel we have a responsibility to the parties we close for and we're looking at how best to make sure everyone understands what they are signing. "

This will also be accomplished by the provision, if adopted, that the borrowers MUST have the docs 24 hours in advance for review. IMO, that's where we as signing agents will see the biggest change - no more surprises at the table and the borrowers will have already seen the docs and had their questions answered. If they have not reviewed their docs 24 hours in advance, then no signing...period - signing is rescheduled until such time as the 24-hour requirement has been satisfied.

Reply by jba/fl on 1/15/08 9:15am
Msg #230647

which still doen't mean they will read them in advance - only that they are storing them for the big event! lol

Reply by sue_pa on 1/15/08 9:21am
Msg #230653

actually had a Countrywide the other week where docs went to borrower. I called him the day before (you know, the only name on the confirmation) and asked if he read his paperwork and called his LO with questions. He sure did. I show up the next morning and the wife decides she's going to read everything.

Reply by sue_pa on 1/15/08 9:16am
Msg #230649

then why don't they send them 24 hours ahead now? these are suggested instructions from the lender to the title company, not laws. The lender has the ability today, yesterday and forever in the past to get the docs to their client 24 hours ahead of time. Why does anyone think if they don't do it today they will do it tomorrow (or whenver)?

Reply by Karen/OK on 1/15/08 10:18am
Msg #230668

This one thing would be worth it all to me. Getting copies of the docs to the borrower 24 hrs. in advance! It's my biggest problem, especially with RMs.

Reply by jba/fl on 1/15/08 9:13am
Msg #230645

I have had TC's tell me that they are not to comment on the docs either - that is the domain of the LO/lender. That being the case, perhaps the lender should be doing the hiring of notary/witness closer.

"The bottom line is that many borrowers have stated that they did not understand what they were signing."

Again, that goes back to the lender, partially, since they did not explain their product. And if one does not understand still, then one should recognize that one is deficient and find someone to explain it to them, like an attorney, best friend, or, (lightbulb!) read the papers left behind! That 3 day RTC can still figure into the final scenario.

Reply by sue_pa on 1/15/08 9:19am
Msg #230650

...It makes the settlement agent responsible for the signing agent. ..

they already are. IF I closed a loan yesterday for ABC Title and royally messed it up - not sure how but we saw someone post here not too long ago that went to closing and only took some of the docs (and she knew it) - so forwhatever reason that loan goes south and it is absolutely my fault. ABC Title sent me as their agent. They're going to be paying up and answering - if they choose to come after me that's their perrogative but they are on the line for my actions already.

PEOPLE, I DIDN'T MESS UP A LOAN - THAT PART OF THIS POST IS MADE UP AS AN EXAMPLE !!!!

Reply by snoopdogMs on 1/15/08 9:01am
Msg #230643

Sue, I printed the UCI from the MBA and took it to a title company (where I will be volunteering to learn more about this business) and asked the owner who is licensed why this might be of any concern to the notary or does it have any impact on us. He looked at it, handed it back and said I don't understand what any frenzy might be. End of subject.

Reply by sue_pa on 1/15/08 9:23am
Msg #230655

Thank goodness it's not just me not seeing any 'frenzy'. I'm not sure there is a 'frenzy' anywhere except this board. I'm certainly not going to compare but I bet if you looked at a 25ish page set of instructions today and compared them to the new ones there isn't a lot that's different - a few changes but not many and again, none that anyone has shown show me that will concern US at the table.

Reply by Lee/AR on 1/15/08 11:14am
Msg #230681

Agreed, Sue....Re: UCI

A lot like the much-hyped certifications and background checks. Much ado about nothing--except somebody will want to make some money off us---somehow.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 1/15/08 12:25pm
Msg #230694

Re: Agreed, Sue....Re: UCI

I can't wait until the NNA sends out flyers advertising classes for the notary on how to comply with UCI .............

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 1/15/08 1:01pm
Msg #230697

Re: Agreed, Sue....Re: UCI

Glenn
Please don't give the NNA any ideas. LOL