Posted by Mike/AZ on 3/11/08 4:22pm
Msg #238932

Know-nothing notaries

A recent post about certification and background screenings prompted me to post this.

There are so many incompetent notaries out there. You all know what I'm talking about - I know here in AZ I see notaries back-dating notary certificates, performing incomplete notarizations (i.e., the old "stamp and initial" method), and charging more than state laws permit ($2/signature here in AZ). But honestly, what do our SOS offices expect when notaries don't have to have any formal training training (except in CA) to be commissioned? I've heard some people say that in their home states don't even require background checks, and only 16 or so states require notaries to keep journals?

What do they expect when people just sign saying they've read the notary handbook, and can only charge pitifully low amounts to notarize? I thought AZ was low at $2/sig, but I read that quite a few states are even lower - Wisconsin is only 50 cents/sig? What do these SOS offices expect? I have to confess that, when I first started as a bank notary, I didn't take it very seriously because I got the impression that I was just a person with a fancy, magic stamp, even after reading the handbook. It wasn't until I started working as an NSA and reading these message boards that I became fully aware of the potential liabilities of placing my "magic stamp" on a document. Now I'm well-versed in notary law and never take ANY shortcuts when notarizing. But at rates as low as 50 cents/signature and, in some states, obscene travel/mileage fee restrictions, how seriously is someone supposed to take their notary duties? At least CA has it right - testing and fingerprinting, etc, but you can charge $10/signature and make some decent extra money even if you don't travel.

As others have said, I don't relish the idea of having to take a class and a state exam to become a notary, but I think it would help notaries take their position more seriously. Oh, and it wouldn't hurt if our SOS offices allowed the rest of us to charge a decent fee for assuming the responsibility of attesting to a person's identity.

Reply by MichiganAl on 3/11/08 4:37pm
Msg #238935

I think more people are starting to realize that there needs to be a higher standard. Whether it's licensing, continuing ed, a standard and comprehensive certification, something. It's a joke. Last week, I declined to notarize a document that had already been signed by someone's husband. He was not present and could not make himself available so I could identify him and verify his signature. A woman in the office I was in walks by and says to the wife, "I'm a notary, I'll do it. I trust you." Good grief. And I won't even get into what I know is done by notaries that work at various title companies. They'll sign and stamp any document that's put in front of them. They look at me like I'm from Mars when I point out the illegality of their ways.

Reply by calipat on 3/11/08 5:37pm
Msg #238943

I just took a class in Feb. to get recommissioned and a friend of a friend was down from Washington. She asked where I was as they were a bunch of them going to have lunch. My friend said she is taking her notary test today. Her friend from WA laughed and said a test?? heck in WA you just have to know how to read and write and be 18 and a resident of the state. My friend then said well I don't know but I know she has to take a test every 4 yrs. WA notarey said oh well everything is more expensive in CA they just want her money. In WA we just stamp and say "Have a nice day". I was shocked to hear this, but I guess if all it takes is to read a handbook you are not going to have very qualified notaries. As it is here in CA with all our laws and such we still have the dingbat notaries that will do anything for a buck!

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/11/08 5:48pm
Msg #238944

Which kinda does beg the question--what good does a test or tests, certification, yada, yada do if, after doing it--they're still dingbat notaries?

Reply by Nomad/OR on 3/11/08 7:20pm
Msg #238972

Hopefully, testing would help drive away the dingbats if they think it's not worth the effort.

Reply by Mike/AZ on 3/11/08 8:29pm
Msg #238987

There will always be ding-bat notaries out there, but I think there would be far fewer if every state had testing requirements. I've had similar situations to those who replied. My two favorites are the back-dating requests and notarizing for people who aren't present. When I refuse, they say "I'll find someone who will," and then some of them actually have the nerve to call back after they DO find someone incompetent enough to break the law and yell at me because they think I'M the idiot and how dare I inconvenience them.

Someone in MA posted a quote from their state legislature saying something like, "No one has ever been harmed by a notary not having a journal." Excuse me? A few years ago one of my old bank notary friends had someone duplicate his notary stamp and forge his signature - not sure how they managed to get it from the stamp vendor - and the FBI came and audited his journal. (Journals are required in AZ). The journal provided proof not only that the notarization was fraudulent but they were able to match the signature of the person performing the fraudulent notarization to a customer who came in requesting his notary services. In this case, the journal was very important to catching the fraudster.

Anyhoo, that's my rant about incompetent notaries and seemingly even more incompetent SOS offices. It's just really iritating when blatant disregard for proper notary procedures just flies under the radar on such a large scale.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/12/08 12:51am
Msg #239012

I think you make some very good points. And kudos to you and MichiganAl and all the others who stand up for what is right.

FWIW, I do think the new laws are making a difference here in CA. BTW, in case you hadn't already read here a bazillion times, as of the first of the year, added to all the other CA notary requirements, is a statement on every ack that the notary certifies "under penalty of perjury" (in bold type) that the statements in the ack are true. The penalty is a $10,000 fine -and perjury is a felony. [And, of course, that means that backdating is a now a felony here!] It seems that someone in the state legislature is taking the business of notarization seriously.

The good news is that I am finally seeing evidence of these laws making a difference. And the fact that it is harder and more expensive to become a notary - or renew - seems to be discouraging people. I've talked to several who have decided not to renew because they don't want the liability and others who haven't passed the test.

Reply by Cari on 3/12/08 12:07pm
Msg #239068

Il notaries can only charge a dollar per 'notarial act'....

I agree with you all, especially you Mike in that ALL states should have testing to become a notary...geez, I've seen some sh!t done by notaries here that'll make your hair curl. And I like you, didn't fully appreciate my role as a notary until I started doing closings.

The most recent change to our notary law was the enacting of a Uniform Electronic Recording Act (which will eventually eliminate our physical stamps, but thank God, not for some time) Actually sounds horrible, but I guess the upside is that Il will eventually adopt e-notarizations - which means more income potential for us...

Good points to all that posted!

Reply by janCA on 3/12/08 1:19pm
Msg #239072

I hope you are right, Janet. The thing is, many notaries do not keep up with the laws that come into effect every year and are clueless about the wording in the notarial certificate.

I had a trust signing a couple of weeks for an attorney and as I was looking over the paperwork, all the old ack wording was on the documents. I stated to her that I will have to attach a loose cert and she wasn't too happy about it but I told her unless she wanted to redraw with the new wording, my hands were tied. They were all acknowledgements. She also stated that she had heard something about their being new wording but hadn't come across any problems with the old wording. And she had already done 2 or 3 of these that same week. So, suffice it to say, all of the trusts she has done since the beginning of the year, the notarial wording is not CA compliant. She didn't seem concerned, but I am wondering if the owner of the trust should pass and something in the trust is challenged for some reason or another and all of the cert wording is wrong, is it going to invalidate the trust? I have no clue and I didn't ask but it does make me wonder.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/13/08 1:29am
Msg #239147

"I am wondering if the owner of the trust should pass and something in the trust is challenged for some reason or another and all of the cert wording is wrong, is it going to invalidate the trust?"

Good question. If I wasn't so tired, I'd check to see if there is anything in the new notary law verbiage that addresses this. Might be interesting to ask the SOS office. In the long run, though, I hope that this negligence catches up with a lot of notaries. Many will probably remain clueless until they try to renew. Maybe more will decide not to bother when they find out about the new requirements and penalties...

BTW, I learned just tonight how right you are. I did a signing for an attorney and his wife. What a messed up package! I won't bother going into all the morbid details (it was a substitute escrow officer - and who knows what was with the loan processor...). The property was in a trust and they had already completed and had notarized the Certification of Trust just a couple of weeks ago. And you guessed it... wrong certificate! I certainly hope whomever notarized this wasn't an employee of this guy!! (He didn't say.) Fortunately, they had it in their email and were able to print another copy for a proper notarization. I'd like to be a fly on the wall he next time he talks to that notary!!!