Posted by kkarate on 7/3/08 6:49am
Msg #254035

Additional forms not included by lender

I had a loan signing a few weeks ago, where the lender did not include four affidavits that they needed signed and notorized. The lender felt that I should have known to provide and include them. I do not carry additional forms with me when on the road. I believe that the lender should include all the documents that they need in the package. Do any of you carry additional documents in case the lender doesn't provide the require documents?

Reply by WDMD on 7/3/08 6:58am
Msg #254036

I will provide the county specific refinance affidavits if they are missing. Some of the out of state title companies forget them occasionally. I do not provide any other forms.

Reply by sue_pa on 7/3/08 7:55am
Msg #254038

How ridiculous. What were the 4 affidavits?

I won't even get into the part about us providing documentation on a loan we know nothing about. Every lender has different loan documents for their different programs. We work for hundreds of lenders - how in the world would we know what each of them want on each loan? Where did they think you were going to obtain these affidavits - Affidavits 'R Us?

TOTALLY not your fault and I truly think there is nothing you could even have done about it - missing the Note, the Mortgage, etc., certainly requires a phone call but affidavits? I don't think so.

Reply by LindaD/NJ on 7/3/08 8:33am
Msg #254042

Totally agree with not providing any document.

I have made calls in the past to who ever I am working for to provide the sellers residency certification/exemption and affidavit of consideration since I understand these need to be completed and attached if there is a deed in the pkg. These documents are NJ specific, I do carry them, but usually catch them missing before the closing and make the call. But I would never put anything into a pkg. After a while you know what belongs in a pkg. with different lenders but again that always changes per borrower, lender and updates. Ps. Sue_pa, like your straight-forward 'tude, lady. You make me laugh! Happy 4th to all!

Reply by WDMD on 7/3/08 9:23am
Msg #254053

"I won't even get into the part about us providing documentation on a loan we know nothing about. "

Maryland finance affidavits are not lender specific. They are a title document having to do with recording taxes. As a licensed title producer I believe I can add this required title document to the title documents already provided without committing UPL. Does anyone know any different? If so I would be glad to see your reference.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/3/08 7:56am
Msg #254039

Carrying extra documents is ludicrous.

The lender messed up. You didn't.

WDMD is a licensed title producer. The rest of the states aren't. Adding documents to the package is UPL.

Reply by kkarate on 7/3/08 8:26am
Msg #254040

Not only were four affidavits missing , they rush the closing. Apt at 8:00 They schedule FedEx to arrive at 8:30 to pick up documents and called me on the way to the closing to notified me. In rushing I missed two signatures on the W-9. This signing was for three borrowers in two different states. They wanted me add my name and stamp to the same forms that the notary in the other state had already filled in (not enough room of course) and add an affidavit for each one.

Reply by hcampersFL on 7/3/08 8:32am
Msg #254041

Okay let me see if I understand what you are saying. This was a split signing and when you recieve the docs the other Notary had already used the provided Affidavits and the lender didn't provide you with any others??? Is this what happened?

Reply by kkarate on 7/3/08 8:49am
Msg #254045

No. These affidavits were in additional to what the other notary signed. I had to sign his documents as well.

Reply by hcampersFL on 7/3/08 9:04am
Msg #254048

"No. These affidavits were in additional to what the other notary signed. I had to sign his documents as well."


Maybe I haven't had enough coffee yet, but this is about as clear as mud.

If they in fact left out a complete document that needed to be included with the loan package and expected you to provide something you didn't even have a clue about then that is a different situation. Of course you can't provide this, what are you a mind reader???


The way I'm reading it is you had a split signing and they wanted you to notarize the BR in front of you but didn't provide the proper Ack or Jurat for you to use. IF this is the case you should have provided your own.

I always carry extra blank ones to use in these cases. I can't tell you how many times I've gone to a closing that the docs were sent to the BR and it was a split signing. I would never expect the first notary to leave anything blank, nor would I add to the notarization that they had already completed. I would take a blank ack or jurat out of my briefcase and fill it out properly and attach it to the document.

Reply by LindaD/NJ on 7/3/08 11:05am
Msg #254062

Sounds like a split signing n/m

Reply by Lee/AR on 7/3/08 8:49am
Msg #254044

After reading whole thread thus far & discovering that this was a split, IF by Affs, you really mean Acks or Jurats, then, YES, you should have known to include them for the person you signed. If you really mean a Lender-specific Affidavit (or even state-specific), Sue/PA is right... and funny, too. Affidavits R Us..... LOL

Reply by snoopdogMs on 7/3/08 9:03am
Msg #254047

Agree with Lee

Sounds like what she should be referring to is extra certificates that we must all carry. A split signing can be confusing if someone has not done one before and best left to those that have. The hiring entitly should always ask about experience on this type of closing and if the notary has not done one, they should move on OR if willing to take a chance, give detailed instructions for a successful package.

Reply by snoopdogMs on 7/3/08 9:24am
Msg #254054

Correction to my own statement

Not having done a split signing does not disqualify one from being quite able. This would be for the notary that does not have a clue about a split signing and has not studied enough to know that they don't have a clue.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/3/08 9:57am
Msg #254059

Agree w/ Lee here.

If it was acks or jurats then kkarate should have added them.

Reply by davidK/CA on 7/3/08 11:17am
Msg #254064

That would be UPL in CA

Does your state have a law prohibiting the Unlicensed Practice of Law? More than likely they do, and if so, providing documents (other than an Ack or Jurat) could be considered UPL.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 7/3/08 4:56pm
Msg #254113

The only forms I carry are those required by NY in certain situations, such as when a quit claim deed is being signed. One of these forms is multi-part NCR, so it's not something that would appear in e-docs anyway. I rarely need them, but they're good to have if the situation comes up. I have occasionally had a lender or TC ask if I had those forms, and it makes their life a little easier (plus makes me look more professional) when I can say yes.

As for lender-specific docs - unless I am actually employed by them, why would I know or care what documents they require? It sounds like someone at the lender's office was just looking for a scapegoat to cover their own screwup.

Reply by WDMD on 7/3/08 5:05pm
Msg #254116

" I rarely need them, but they're good to have if the situation comes up. I have occasionally had a lender or TC ask if I had those forms, and it makes their life a little easier (plus makes me look more professional) when I can say yes."


Exactly Mike. Maryland also has a couple of forms for deeds transferring property having to do with witholding taxes. I also will provide those if no one can be reached at title.