Posted by Richard L Silver on 1/24/09 10:36pm
Msg #275518
California Naotaries
Currently, in California notaries pay the state $40 to apply for or to renew their commission. The term of the commission is 4 years.
What if the term was 5 years and the fee was $100 with any extra money used by the SoS to hire a few investigators for the notary division to follow up on complains about notaries?
Richard Silver
415-370-7479
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/24/09 10:59pm
Msg #275520
Well, you make it sound so inexpensive!
$50 - $300 for the 6 Hour Class (this varies a ton by vendor and course type)
$40 for the Exam/Application (If you fail the exam, you pay $20 each time you take it again)
$10 for the passport photo to attach to the application
$70-$80 for the Fingerprinting and Background Check
$40 for the $15K Bond
$33-$80 (or more) to actually file the bond and oath with the County Clerk, the price varies by county
$60-$100 (or more) for required supplies like the seals, journal and thumbprinter
And that doesn't even begin to cover the optional things like E&O, loose forms, pens, ID Reference Guide, etc.
From the point of view of the notary all of the state required elements, whether the money goes to the SOS or not, is a whole lot more than $40.
I would love it if the state would be more diligent in punishing the bad notaries out there, but right now... that's a tall order. I mean, those of us in CA are getting our state tax refunds on a 30-delay as it is, if we get one at all. The state is cutting back big time and I highly doubt that increasing the application fee for notaries would fix anything at the notary division. Although $20 does seem kind of cheap.... but that's $7.2 million (360K notaries) to run the division over a period of 4 years (more or less). It wouldn't bother me if they doubled the application fee to $40, so that the application and exam cost $60. Pricing it much more than that might mean a sharp drop in notaries, though. The SOS may not see the money directly, but right now it costs a minimum of about $300 to get a notary commission in CA (new or renewing) and that's probably on the cheap end of it. So, even though you say it's $40, it's a lot more than that.
| Reply by janCA on 1/25/09 12:50pm
Msg #275543
I agree with Marion on some points but why would anyone go elsewhere, other than NR for the 6-hr. class. It's FREE people. Zero, zip. I did my own passport photo with my camera. I'll be going to the sheriff's dept. tomorrow to get my print scan done for $10.00. These fees are minimal, it's the insurance, as always that is costly. I stock up on journals, thumbprinters, etc as you always get a discount if you buy more than one (1). I would like to see the extension of the commission by a year or two but $100 would be extensive, maybe another $10, $20. With the state in the condition that it is in, all fees will more than likely increase anyway. Be prepared.
| Reply by Richard L Silver on 1/25/09 12:55pm
Msg #275544
Re: California Notaries
What you say is all well and good, but if you expect any improvements in the SoS office you're going to need to get it more income. The fee hasn't gone up in over 20 years. Just with inflation it should be higher.
Remember, as part of the increase in the fee there would be an increase in theterm of appointment from 4 years to 5. That would both provide a savings to the SoS and the notary.
As for the fees you list, I would question some of the prices you listed (who pays $300 for the 6 hour class? and besides you only do that once. The 3 hour classes should be cheaper, and what county in California charges $80 to file the oath and bond?).
But all that aside, the Notary profession has seen an increase in fraud by NP's ( just ask the LA Sheriifs office). In fact there is such a problem that so called "minor" complaints never get followed up.
Being a Notary today is a profession, and it's time that we start acting like professionals and that we expect other notaries to do the same.
Increaseing the registation fee to $100 (and exptending the appointment by one year from 4 ro 5 years, that will create a saving for a notary both of time and cost) will help to insure the.
Richard Silver
415-370-7479
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/25/09 10:57pm
Msg #275564
San bernardino charges $79+ for filing. n/m
| Reply by Gary_CA on 1/25/09 10:28am
Msg #275533
Not just no, HELL NO!
First off, Marian has it right about expenses. But that's not the issue.
I just got notice that Real Estate License fees are going to be doubled. DOUBLED!
Another department where some investigation and enforcement would do the public a lot of good. Is that the explanation for the fee increase?
NOPE.
Turns out that in years past with the RE market got hot and every idiot from every villiage got his license the Dept of Real Estate would create a reserve for the year that was sure to come when the idiots didn't renew and the department would be short of funds.
Then somebody got the bright idea of "borrowing" those funds for the GENERAL FUND... and now guess what, the RE fund is short.
Same thing here... increase the SOS notary funds and they will leak just as sure as dawn follows night.
No, I don't want to pay any more general taxes in the form of industry specific fees. I pay enough taxes on the money I earn in the industry and everything I buy with what's left over of my earnings after taxes.
ENOUGH ALREADY.
Here's an idea, want money to investigate fraudulent notaries? Start small, maybe with a personal loan from Arnold, investigate and when you find the bad apples FINE THE CRAP OUT OF THEM and pay for further investigations with their money, not mine.
Sorry, this drifted a tad political, but it's work-politics.
| Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/25/09 12:17pm
Msg #275537
Re: Not just no, HELL NO!
Gary, I had actually written that any excess funds would just be borrowed for the general fund anyway... but then deleted it. I'm sure we're not the only ones thinking that.
When do the RE fees double? ugh. I was thinking of applying for exam/license this summer since some of my potential VA clients had expressed wanting a licensed assistant. It's already pricey enough... to double it would probably make me abandon that idea. From $125 to $250 (or more) is nuts.
I'm sure it's because there has been a super sharp drop in the number is exams/license requests in the last year. The number of notaries dropped by 30,000, about 4-5% I guess.
Per the stats on the DRE website, in November 2007 they issued 2,425 salesperson licenses. 12 months later, November 2008? Down to 849. But the total number of licenses didn't fall that much: from 398,716 to 381,283, which is nearly the same percentage drop as notaries, 4-5%. That's still a lot for a single year, though, but obviously the real hurt is in that there aren't many NEW people coming in as old licenses and commissions expire. I'm guessing that over the next couple years, the numbers will probably continue to drop a bit, especially if the double the fees.
It's good in some ways because it helps eliminate some of the opportunists, but it's will also eliminate those who truly love the work but can't justify the fees.
| Reply by Gary_CA on 1/25/09 12:38pm
Msg #275540
Public Hearing March 6
$245 is proposed fee for Sales License, $300 for Broker.
I'm not just guessing at the general fund thing... this from their own statement of reasons...
The Department of Real Estate (DRE) is dependent upon revenue collected from license and subdivision fees to support its operations. With the cyclical real estate market, it has long been the practice of DRE to set aside revenue excesses to fund the department during times of revenue decline. Because real estate funds had been used to offset general fund deficits, the real estate industry successfully introduced legislation in addition to Section 10226.5 discussed above, that, as enacted, requires DRE to lower fees whenever a transfer or loan is made from the real estate fund to the general fund. These events and requirements, coupled with market fluctuations and increased license requirements, have led to real estate fund instability draining the reserves.
Right from the horses, er, mouth.
Read all about it here, scroll to bottom of page http://dre.ca.gov/gen_regs.html
| Reply by Gary_CA on 1/25/09 12:43pm
Msg #275542
About the number of licensees
I didn't bother to look up the statistic, but by 2007 it was already way down.
I took my test in 2004 in a ballroom at the Oakland Marriott. There were 1500 of us in that room. I was in the morning session, there was another after lunch. One day...not a special day... had to schedule my exam like 4 months in advance.
| Reply by LKT/CA on 1/25/09 2:43pm
Msg #275548
Re: About the number of licensees
<<<Turns out that in years past with the RE market got hot and every idiot from every villiage got his license the Dept of Real Estate....>>>
That is why the law changed as of Oct. 2007...to take the state exam, one must have taken and passed 3 classes - R.E. Principles, R.E. Practice, and an elective. According to my instructor, many people got the license simply to "get rich quick", which equated to lower standards, unethical behavior and a higher degree of fraud.
I had my R.E. license in 1991 and the rules were different. Back then one could just take the Principles course, then take the state exam. Within 18 months, the licensee would have to have taken the R.E. Practice and an elective. People weren't doing it. Too many fly-by-nighters.
So exams/license are definitely down as the "get rich quick crowd" was filtered out when the law changed in Oct. 2007. I decided to take an Escrow class at the local community college since I have the time but the R.E. Principles class was a prerequisite to all elective classes. So I thought, "what the heck" I might as well get my license again. I'm taking the Practice and Escrow classes now.
If the R.E. license fee changes, I hope it does after I take the exam in June or July.
| Reply by Glenn Strickler on 1/25/09 5:09pm
Msg #275553
Richard, you are not looking at the big picture .....
When you consider all taxes that are collect in this state, we in California are the highest taxed people in the nation. Yes, even higher than New York (that is until they get their new tax plan passed). There are also billions of dollars in fees that are designated for certain uses, but they aren't used that way. There are vehicle registration fees and fuel taxes that are suppose to be used on our road. Only 25 cents on the dollar actually is. For us motorcycle owners, we pay an extra 5 dollars per year that is suppose to go to motorcycle safety programs. The program has been unfunded for 3 years, yet they still collect. That CRV that you pay at the grocery store for your returnable containers get's paid to the state first, then paid back to the recycler when you redeem your cans and bottles. Since all containers aren't recycled through the program, the state keeps 45% of that. It's suppose to be used to clean up programs in the state .. It isn't. The state collects an extra tax on ammunition that is suppose to be used for wildlife management. It's not. The state has not funded it's portion of the program for 5 years. There are hundreds more examples, but I think you get the picture. As the old saying goes, it looks good on paper.
You want to give them more money?? I think not. Yes, I know, they would pass a law mandating that the money be used for investigators. See above .. they are all law. With all the higher income people and businesses moving out because of our tax policies, how long do you think the state can actually ask for more?
|
|
