Posted by CJ on 3/26/08 12:37am
Msg #240749

When people are taken off title.

A little kevetching here.

I don't like it when whomever includes a QC or GD or Interspousal to take someone off title, and they don't include a GD or whatever to put them back on. Yesterday I did a signing, and the couple was in their 80s, and the loan people wanted to take the wife off title. The husband was the only one listed on the DOT, but there was no GD. The wife said they were going to take her off title, and she was fighting back tears. She was VERY scared. I told her I would bring it to her people's attention.

Well, they did forget to include the interspousal, so I have to go back (they will pay: their fault), but they are also including a GD to put her back on. When I made the second appointment, I told her that there were two, one to take her off, and one to put her back on. She began crying on the phone and saying "Bless you, bless you", becuase she was so happy.

It bugs me that who ever makes these decisions don't take into consideration how they are messing with people's lives. Maybe it makes the paperwork easier of one person is off title, but that jeapordized things so much. Same with taking it out of a trust: people have paid a couple of thousand to protect their property from probate, and loan people want to take it out of the trust and say, "Don't worry, we will put it back in later". I have had people refuse to sign until they email or fax us a second GD at the signing.

I think the stupidist thing I ever saw (along these lines was) this: a (young) unmarried couple was going to borrow the money. The woman owned the house, but the boyfriend had the income. So, without even discussing it with the borrowers, toe loan included a GD where the woman just gives the whole property to her boyfriend. She was shocked, and of course, that was a no sign. He could just throw her out and change the locks, and she would have no recourse.

That reminds me: another time I signed a woman, and she was chatting about her divorce. She said that her husband had been cheating on her and was planning on leaving her, but she did not know it. So one day, when they were doing the taxes, the tax man came over, with a notary, and buried in the tax documents was a Grant Deed that gave the property to her husband. She signed it, not even aware of what it was, and it was notarized. Then, when her husband said he wanted a divorce, she said she would get half the house, and he said no, she had signed it over to him. How cruel of him (and how unethical for the notary).

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/26/08 1:11am
Msg #240754

A very big "Amen" to ALL of that!! n/m

Reply by sue_pa on 3/26/08 7:09am
Msg #240761

Personal responsibility is what comes to my mind here. Maybe it's just me but I would NEVER trust 'loan people' to take care of transferring real estate for me - that's what a lawyer is for.

Your unmarried couple situation shows that some borrowers do have brains and use them.

As for the lady who signed a deed amongst tax paperwork, doesn't she have eyes? I don't know what a CA deed looks like but in PA a deed and tax paperwork look NOTHING even remotely similiar.

By the way, I would NEVER get in the middle of asking about removing and adding people to a property - as a 'signing agent' that's so far removed from the scope of my job.

Reply by CJ on 3/26/08 9:29am
Msg #240775

I never give advice or opinions.

You are right about the Grant Deed and the tax papers, they don't look at all alike. But if I were the notary, I would have told her to stop and read it. (Or course, the evil husband never would have brought an honest notary like me.)

When I see a grant deed, or anything else that transfers property, I slow down and show it to the borrowers so they can take a good look at it. I don't give advice, I just let them read the words for themselves. As a notary, I don't want them signing anything that they don't want to sign.

I was showing this couple the DOT and the vesting becuase they told me they both owned the property. It was at the beginning when I was acessing who was going to sign. The wife said she was going to sign a couple of things, but her husband was going to sign most of it. So I figured she was either co-owner, or maybe signing a GD. So I looked at the DOT. They believe they both own the property, but the vesting said, "Sole and separte property." I showed it to them. That was when she told me they were going to take her off the property and she started crying. I know chagning the vesting takes a notarized document, so I kept an eye out for it, but I did not see it. I am very careful never to give advice or opinions, and I even say, "It is a crime for me to give my advice or opinion, becuase only an attorney can do that, and I am not an attorney". But that does not mean I am ignorant about the papers that I see, and how some things need to be set up. I make mental notes, and report stuff when I do my status. I told the SS that the vesting was sole and separate, but the borrowers believed they both owed the property, so I think a GD is missing. And if they are going to generate a GD (so the loan can be funded), could they please make two, one to take it out and one to put it back in? And they did.

One time I signed someone and there were two GD, both to take it out, and none to put it back in. The people would not sign. I called the Loan People and told them there were two GD, but they both took it out. They said I was wrong, and one took it out and one put it back in. I told them no, look it up on your screen. "Oh yes, I see it now". So they had to make one to put it back in and email it to the borrowers. (It scares me to think how sloppy these loan people can be with other people's money and property.) I did not give the borrowers advice, I merely told the Loan people about a problem with the paperwork.

I am always amazed how us notaries are very careful not to give advice or opinions, but loan people do it freely. "Just go ahead and sign it". "Don't worry, we will take you off title, and put you back on later", "It's okay if we take it out of the trust", "This loan is good for you, it is what you need", "I promise I will refinance you when the prepayment penalty is up, so it is okay to sign this one now". I would faint if I said any of these things: criminal proceedings, fines, lose of liscence, jail, etc. I know as a non-attorney, we can't fill out paperwork which means we can't even check the boxes on the prelim. The borrowers can, but we can't, and I DON'T. I am not about to slip and give any advice or opinions.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/26/08 11:36am
Msg #240795

Re: When people are taken off title - sue

**By the way, I would NEVER get in the middle of asking about removing and adding people to a property - as a 'signing agent' that's so far removed from the scope of my job.**

That's me. I think it is our background. We have learned enough to know how dangerous we would be if we started using what we think we know.

I have worked for attorneys off and on for many years. The most important lesson I have learned is how little I actually know. I am involved in working on deals daily which are over $1MM. I know so little it amazes me...when I think I have a concept down about finance/real estate and title, another nuance of the business appears and I am yet again put into my place.

I handle signings the same way. I know about printing the docs. I know where the information is. I know the number of the loan officer and title company. I don't know why about a lot of things that go on.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/26/08 11:59am
Msg #240798

Re: When people are taken off title - sue

**I handle signings the same way. I know about printing the docs. I know where the information is. I know the number of the loan officer and title company. I don't know why about a lot of things that go on.**

Hit the button too quickly.

What I mean is that if I see something that doesn't have to do with with me, I don't question "why". There are a lot of egos out there which do not care for that question "why?"

Reply by jba/fl on 3/26/08 12:03pm
Msg #240799

Re: When people are taken off title - sue

"We have learned enough to know how dangerous we would be if we started using what we think we know. "

What you have done is more complex: you have attained wisdom. Many do not and must be mourned.

Reply by NCLisa on 3/26/08 8:09pm
Msg #240864

Attorney's in CA don't transfer property unless it is a

commercial closing. TC do all the deeds and conveyances of properties, and all the title abstracting. As an EO, I don't know how many hundreds of deeds we prepared as a "courtesy" for divorce attorneys.

I got my paralegal cert in CA while I was an EO, and in between jobs did a 6 month internship at a "real estate" law firm in Oakland. Huge law firm. The only real estate they did was buyers suing RE Agents for non disclosure, agent suing agent for non payment of commission, etc. It is all lawsuits that have to do with real estate transactions, nothing else.