Posted by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 11:31am
Msg #300006

CA Notaries......How Would You Handle This

1 page, non-loan doc to be filed in Massachusetts
JURAT - not compliant for CA

The customer informed me he already had it notarized but the company would not accept a loose certificate added and demanded the Notary's signature and seal be on the original doc. There was enough space, height and width wise, for a jurat stamp and notary seal. Here's the problem: One of the spaces had PLACE notary seal HERE and the other was clear.

What I did do - perfectly ok and legal for CA - was to hand write the compliant jurat wording and place my seal in the space that was clear. As neat as I tried to write, it still looked tacky (to me). The only important thing is whether the company will accept it, not how it looks.

Here's my question: With all the talk about white out on docs being a no-no would you use correction tape to GET RID OF worthless wording taking up space with no useful purpose that should not be there in the first place? Would you have used correction tape to get rid of the worthless PLACE notary seal HERE words and place your jurat stamp there? Would you use correction tape to get rid of useless wording taking up space in the only place you could place your seal?

Any thoughts? TIA

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 8/14/09 11:47am
Msg #300012

No...if it's in the notary block just line through and

initial - no correction tape or white-out....at least with a line-through they can see what was removed...removes any doubt about what's deleted.

MHO

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 3:48pm
Msg #300050

Re: No...if it's in the notary block just line through and

<<<initial - no correction tape or white-out....at least with a line-through they can see what was removed...removes any doubt about what's deleted. >>>

When there's plenty of space, I just leave the PLACE notary seal HERE wording untouched and place my seal in any open area. Sometimes, the only place to put the seal has that useless wording right in the middle, then I'm stuck using a loose certificate, since I can't put the seal over wording or a signature.

Reply by PAW on 8/14/09 11:52am
Msg #300014

If the document hasn't been signed by anyone and there are no other annotations on the page, then I would make a copy of it, correct the copy with white-out, correction tape or whatever, and make another copy. Then use the final copy as a new original. (This is the way we did it at the bank and the title company.)

Reply by Cam/CA on 8/14/09 11:58am
Msg #300016

If it was a jurat then it would have been signed when the first Notary added the loose certificate and then again when Lisa notarized it. I'm with you PAW, but first I would see if the client could get a blank copy, then do as you suggested.

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 3:50pm
Msg #300051

<<<If it was a jurat then it would have been signed when the first Notary added the loose certificate and then again when Lisa notarized it.>>>

The customer said he just trashed the rejected notarized doc that had the loose certificate and started over with a fresh form.

Reply by rengel/CA on 8/14/09 12:04pm
Msg #300017

I'm with PAW, legal and financial papers should NEVER have white-out or correction tape on them. They will definitely get rejected with either one.

My .02

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 8/14/09 12:19pm
Msg #300020

Agree with Paul as to unsigned document

I was going under the assumption that the doc was signed. Mea Culpa

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 4:08pm
Msg #300055

Excellent idea, PAW. The doc was blank and the customer filled it out and signed it in front of me. I do have a lightweight copier in the car at signings in case the borrower didn't make copies of their ID's. The customer and I met at Starbucks. This is the first time I've run across such a demand by a doc originator, though I've heard about some government entities having that same demand. From now on, I'll just take the copier (w/inverter) to the general notary jobs too.

Reply by MrEd_Ca on 8/14/09 12:22pm
Msg #300021

How about putting the Jurat stamp/certificate, & your notary stamp, on the back of the document? With a reference on the front that it is there. Would that work in your situation? (Yesterday I notarized signatures on a commercial bill of sale that had the notarial certificate pre-printed on the reverse side of the document.)

Reply by Michael Muse on 8/14/09 1:11pm
Msg #300026

I believe I would have signed and sealed as long as I wasn't certifying his/her capacity.
(Somewhere around pg 10 0r 12 in the handbook)

Reply by JAM/CA on 8/14/09 3:25pm
Msg #300048

Last month I had to do a signing for a South Carolina property for a visiting nurse. South Carolina is an attorney only state. The attorney was telling me to notarize the witnesses signature on the Mortgage and the Title company in Maryland was telling me to Acknowledge the borrower's signature. The attorney was insistent that the Mortgage would not record if I did it the way Title wanted it. I decided to go by whomever put it in writing first. Title put in writing to acknowledge the borrower's signature. They were the ones paying me, not the attorney. It did not record and had to be resigned.

The Mortgage had a statement saying Subscribed and Sworn on the signature page. Along with wording along the lines of "Before me came #1 witness who saw borrower sign the document and delivered to me as the second witness. The attorney in SC was telling me to stamp on the page, it was simply the Witness "acknowledging" that they saw the borrower sign the document. We went round and round about this being a Jurat. I called the CA SOS and found out there are states that don't even know what a Jurat is. They don't have Jurat's. Just because the words Subscribed and Sworn were on the document, doesn't mean for that state that it is a Jurat. The SOS said, "If they say it's an ACK for their state, go ahead and sign and stamp, especially if it will be recorded in South Carolina".

I was confused about the words "Subscribed and Sworn" and California being adamant about the correct Jurat wording. Turns out, it wasn't a Jurat. I believe Massachusetts is also an attorney only state.

Just wanted to let you know about a new revelation I had.

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 4:14pm
Msg #300059

<<<I believe I would have signed and sealed as long as I wasn't certifying his/her capacity.>>>

No you wouldn't....see my first post.

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 4:10pm
Msg #300057

<<<How about putting the Jurat stamp/certificate, & your notary stamp, on the back of the document? With a reference on the front that it is there. Would that work in your situation?>>>

I'm not sure that this particular company would accept that. He said they were very picky, but this is a good tip to remember for other situations.

Reply by LKT/CA on 8/14/09 4:19pm
Msg #300061

Thanks to All for your Feedback n/m

Reply by MikeC/NY on 8/14/09 6:02pm
Msg #300087

My guess is that the "PLACE notary seal HERE" was intended to identify where to place the crimping seal, which hardly anyone uses anymore. Obviously, you can't affix your stamp in that area, so why else would the verbiage be there?

I like PAW's suggestion - white it out and copy, then use the copy. Odds are they'll never even notice, and it doesn't affect the integrity of the document.