Posted by GinaKY on 10/9/09 7:16pm
Msg #306878

California Notary Question

I scheduled a loan in California....the borrowers name on the Deed of Trust and loan docs read "Jane Marie Collins" on her ID it states her maiden name of Jane M Rife (she purchased the home when she was single...and never refied)

I have had 2 closers say that they would NOT perform the closing because the name was different.....1 of the closers new the lady personally They stated that it was illegal in California.

The title company and lender had documentation and put a name affidavit saying she was 1 in the same.

Is this an illegal ack to perform this closing, when the docs have slightly different names? Please help. Thanks in advance!

Reply by LKT/CA on 10/9/09 7:22pm
Msg #306880

<<<Is this an illegal ack to perform this closing, when the docs have slightly different names?>>>
YES

<<<I have had 2 closers say that they would NOT perform the closing because the name was different.....1 of the closers new the lady personally They stated that it was illegal in California.>>>

They are correct.

Jane Marie Collins and Jane M Rife are two different people as far as CA notary law is concerned.

Reply by docs1954CA on 10/9/09 7:39pm
Msg #306882

Lisa is correct, I have this happen all the time,

And don't let them tell you it's O.K., it isn't.

Reply by dickb/wi on 10/12/09 5:27pm
Msg #307087

yes and that's pretty basic notary procedure when you don't personaly know the signatory.....we can still notarize on personal knowledge in wi but i think that will end down the line.........

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 10/9/09 7:50pm
Msg #306883

Dear Gina: This is not a case of "slightly diffferent names." This is huge. No way would any sane CA notary do this with the names on the docs and ID as they are.

Also, CA law no longer allows "personally known" as a method of ID. Even my best friend needs to show me her ID now. It's now DL, passport or military ID, basically. The CA notary has another option: using 2 credible identifying witnesses, both of whom have to be ID'd by the notary, sign the notary journal and take an oath (as set forth in the SOS handbook) that they know Jane Marie Collins personally, they have no interest in the transaction at hand, know that she has no ID in that name, etc. etc). But lots of notaries don't like to do this for obvious reasons ....
A one in the same name affidavit is completely useless - we have to ID the person based on her name on the ID. Sounds like a redraw to me, possibly with an accompanying GD .... . Unless the lender would allow her to cross out Marie Collins, write M. Rife and initial on every signature line where her name is printed so that she could sign: Jane M. Rife. But that's a long shot --- and a picky county recorder might balk. But I have seen it work that way.

Reply by John_NorCal on 10/9/09 9:03pm
Msg #306894

Sounds like Gina runs a SS.......

kudos to her for taking the time to look for the right answer rather than trying to bulldoze this signing through.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/9/09 9:17pm
Msg #306898

John...any bets if she keeps making calls

she finds someone to do it?? That's the sad and scary side of it..

Reply by Debra-owner California Cartazs on 10/9/09 9:06pm
Msg #306896

I agreed this is a "HUGH" problem. I would not want to sign off on this because the notary that personally knows this person is not willing to use 2 credible identifying witnessess to identify this person and the risk is low for this notary. Why would you take on this "Hugh" risk of using 2 credible identifying witnesses. When it would be less risk for all involved to draw up new doc?? it just smells!

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/9/09 9:16pm
Msg #306897

Re: California notary Question...Debra

I don't believe you can use CW's in this instance - the signer has ID...just not in the name to match the docs...CW's aren't even a consideration here.

Reply by Debra-owner California Cartazs on 10/9/09 9:24pm
Msg #306899

Re: California notary Question...Debra

You can use CW for this see below: How this does not pass the smell test.



Alternative forms of identity

Credible Witness

Suppose Susan Jones recently married William Taylor and chose to assume "Taylor" as her new married surname. Also suppose that there has been insufficient time to receive a new driver's license with her new surname so the only proper identification documents Susan has lists her surname as Jones. Perhaps Susan and her husband William Taylor have chosen to purchase a property and take title as William Taylor and Susan Taylor, husband and wife... When the loan documents are presented to the notary, they will require that Susan Jones is properly identified as Susan Taylor!

If someone is requiring notarial services but lacks the proper identification, we can use a procedure called a obtaining a credible witness. In California, a notary may rely on the oath of either one or two credible witnesses as a proper form of identity. If only one credible witness is used, that credible witness must personally know the signer and be personally known by the notary. The credible witness must swear the following oath or affirmation:

That the person making the acknowledgment is the person named within the document.

The person making the acknowledgment is personally known to the credible witness.
That it is the reasonable belief of the witness that the circumstances of the person making the acknowledgment are such that it would be very difficult or impossible for that person to obtain another form of identification.
The person making the acknowledgment does not possess any of the identification documents named above.
The witness does not have a financial interest in the document being acknowledged and is not named in the document.
Since the credible witness is personally known by the notary, and the credible witness personally knows the document signer, this establishes a reasonable chain of knowledge regarding the identity of the document signer according to California notary law. If the Notary does not know the Credible Witness, then two Credible Witnesses may be used whose identities are proven to the notary. Please note that credible witnesses may not have any financial interest in the document, nor may they be named within the document!

This sounds complicated but let's return to our example of Susan Jones and William Taylor. Susan must prove her identity to the notary as Susan Taylor but has no identification documents acceptable under notary law with her new name.

Now suppose it so happened that Susan's long-time friend, who knew that Susan had recently married William Taylor also happened to be a long-time friend of the notary. The notary could use his or her friend as a credible witness in order to verfiy the identy of Susan Taylor.

You might wonder why the notary could not use the Marriage Certificate as proof of identity but since this certificate does not comply with the requirements for identification, it may not be used.

Of course, the chances of the notary personally knowing the credible witness are slim and in California, in such a case, two credible witnesses may be used as long as both prove thier identities to the notary. Perhaps two long-time neighbors would agree to identify Susan Taylor. As long as the credible witnesses personally know the document signer and will not directly benefit from the document being notarized, they may be used.














The Credible Witness(s) do not sign the document but must sign the notary journal. Remember that a single credible witness must personally be known by the notary and must personally know the signer, so the notary will not use identification documents to verify identity, but with two credible witnesses, identity documents are used for the credible witnesses since the notary does not personally know either credible witness. Of course, if the notary knew either one of the credible witnesses, only one would be required.
Tutorial Home Page | Next Page

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/9/09 9:31pm
Msg #306900

Here are the key words in your scenario....

"very difficult or impossible for that person to obtain another form of identification".
It is neither very difficult and certainly not impossible to obtain the proper form of identification.
I wonder... has any notary ever conducted a loan closing at the wedding reception--which is the only circumstances I can imagine where it would be very difficult to obtain a new DL between the wedding and the reception. Not impossible, tho'. Anybody? One notary?

Reply by John_NorCal on 10/10/09 9:15am
Msg #306922

Re: Here are the key words in your scenario....

How about- it's Sunday afternoon. DMV is closed, papers need to be signed and shipped out the next morning, looks like it's impossible to obtain ID in that case. Even if they can get to DMV the only ID they get will not meet notary requirments because there will no picture on it, picture ID will not be available until the signor gets their permanent license in 4-6 weeks. Looks like a case for CW to me.

Is CW a perfect solution? No, I don't believe so, but as with any tool when used judiciously it can be a valuable tool. Just have to CYA.

Reply by PAW on 10/10/09 10:25am
Msg #306932

Re: Here are the key words in your scenario....

Problem is that there is no determination of time in either CA or FL concerning the use of CWs. In your scenario, being a Sunday, does that qualify? I don't know. It would be possible for the signer to obtain proper ID, just not within the time limits artificially being imposed. IMO, it's just best to avoid using CWs in general, unless the signers cannot obtain ID within a "reasonable" period of time. (Of course, the word "reasonable" is subjective at best.)

Reply by John_NorCal on 10/10/09 10:51am
Msg #306936

True...

There is no determination of time. Aside from my example of it being Sunday, it could be any day of the week. The fact remains that it would be impossible for the person to obtain a picture ID without waiting for 4-6 weeks, same for a passport. If it's a situation where they just forgot their ID, the ID is on the other side of town, then sorry about that, no notarization. In all my notary career I have had occasion to use a CW twice. I would prefer not to use it, but I will if it makes sense and meets the requirements of the law in that particular situation.

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/12/09 2:14am
Msg #307014

Re: True...

"The fact remains that it would be impossible for the person to obtain a picture ID without waiting for 4-6 weeks, same for a passport."

In my experience in these situations it has NEVER been an issue of not having enough time to get a new ID reflecting their married name. The issue has been that they never bothered to change their ID when they got married 2 or 3 years ago, or that they never bothered to change the name on the title when they got married 9 years ago, and the 3 times they've refinanced since then the 2 different names were never even questioned or mentioned by the notary.

And to the original poster, WTF? 2 completely different last names is not a slight difference. "Jane" vs "Jayne" is a slight difference. Jane Seymour and Jane Fonda are 2 completely different people.

Reply by CF on 10/12/09 9:29am
Msg #307022

Just got to love CaliNotary!!!! BTW- this person's

signing service is a very slooooooow payer and in some cases, reported, no-pay.

Reply by PAW on 10/12/09 10:12am
Msg #307027

Re: True...

But if Jane Seymour (maiden name) marries Henry Fonda and takes husband's name, then Jane Fonda is the same person as Jane Seymour. Her ID may simply read "Jane Fonda" or "Jane S Fonda" or "Jane X Fonda" (where "X" is her middle name initial instead of maiden name initial) or even "Jane Seymour-Fonda" which may solve all the problems.

But this is a digression of the issue in this thread.

Reply by CaliNotary on 10/12/09 11:29am
Msg #307039

Re: True...

Yeah, but that gets us into issues of necrophilia, which, while not specifically mentioned in the CA notary handbook, I'm pretty sure is still illegal. Maybe Jane Seymour could marry Tom Hayden, I'm pretty sure he's still alive.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/12/09 2:50pm
Msg #307071

Re: True... Oy vey! ;>)

Yeah, but then that gets into issues of bigamy... I'm pretty sure Jane Seymour is already married - and I think Tom Hayden, too.

Reply by Linda Hubbell on 10/9/09 9:34pm
Msg #306901

Re: California notary Question...Debra

Right here...

" it is the reasonable belief of the witness that the circumstances of the person making the acknowledgment are such that it would be very difficult or impossible for that person to obtain another form of identification. "

It fails here..."very difficult or impossible for that person to obtain another form of ID"..

Not that it's inconvenient or she just hasn't taken the time or bothered to do it ..it's "difficult or impossible"...

I'm not in CA but we have similar wording in our statutes here...and with the "difficult if not impossible" wording I don't believe CW's could come into play here.

MHO

Reply by Debra-owner California Cartazs on 10/9/09 9:41pm
Msg #306902

Re: California notary Question...Debra

lots of notaries don't like to do this for obvious reasons .... as stated previously....

Reply by Debra-owner California Cartazs on 10/9/09 9:51pm
Msg #306903

Re: California notary Question...Debra

2 CW in California is a perfect recipe for a lawsuit and it was probably written by a California lawyer with this in mind.

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/9/09 9:53pm
Msg #306904

I'll agree with that! n/m

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/9/09 10:32pm
Msg #306907

Re: California notary Question...Debra

I ran into a situation the other day where the CW rule might have been applicable. The person in question had recently lost his ID at the airport and had already applied for his replacement DL. He showed me the paper extension and his very expired previous DL. No good. This was for general notary work and it turned out, fortunately, that the document in question didn't need his signature after all the discussion. But I would have accepted CWs in that situation. Other situations where I've found CW ID to be appropriate was with individuals who were seriously ill, but mentally competent who were unable to get to the DMV (or elsewhere) to get an ID renewed.

The problem with the CW rule is that it is interpreted very loosely by many as a way to get around ID issues, as someone else aptly mentioned here.

Reply by janCA on 10/10/09 12:17am
Msg #306910

Okay, I'm missing something here.

You state that you "scheduled" a loan in California but your post states that you are from Kentucky. You cannot perform any notarizations in the State of California. If you are, in fact, conducting a signing in the State of Kentucky for a property in California, you have to follow your state laws on ID. I don't know them, but only Kentucky notary laws apply here. What am I missing?

Reply by GF_CA on 10/10/09 12:24am
Msg #306911

You missing that probably Gina own a signing service. n/m

Reply by janCA on 10/10/09 10:32am
Msg #306933

Yep, I totally missed that. n/m

Reply by Doris_CO on 10/10/09 8:25pm
Msg #306957

From what I understand from the original poster, the borrower bought the property while single and has since changed her name by marriage or something. She has ID in her new name but never changed her name on the title to property. The borrowers situation is the opposite of what was quoted in a previous comment regarding CW's It seems that the name must be changed on the property by QCD first so it matches the ID. Whether or not it can be done at the same time as the closing and the notary can ID according to state laws, I don't know, since I don't know CA law, but just using a CW won't change the name on property and this problem will occur every time the borrower has a transaction on this property.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/10/09 8:34pm
Msg #306958

Not quite, Doris...and now it's more confusing..

"the borrowers name on the Deed of Trust and loan docs read "Jane Marie Collins" on her ID it states her maiden name of Jane M Rife (she purchased the home when she was single...and never refied) "

Name on ID is her maiden name...meaning name on docs is married name...however she took title prior to her marriage.....now either the poster mis-spoke and she means ID is in "married" name..or for whatever reason lender and/or title put married name on docs...

Also, if she has title in maiden name, ID in married name, who signs the QCD? Unless do it via f/k/a...and they notarize that way...

<<shaking head>>....ugh

Reply by Dave_CA on 10/11/09 11:05am
Msg #306996

I had one like this just 2 days ago. When I informed the escrow company their solution was to send a QCD with her new name and who took title as her old name. They had her sign both ways but I only notarized the signature for the new name which she had proper ID for.
I don't know if this will record but escrow is happy and the rest is not my concern.