Posted by PA_Notary_II on 12/22/10 1:40pm
Msg #365752

Signing docs with a "without prejudice" stamp

A new one on me. This bwr insisted he use this pre-inked stamp for ever one of his and his wife's signature. He said it would protect him if there was anything illegal in the legal documents. He also said if the TC would not permit it, he would use another stamp that said "signed under duress"
I called the TC and they were at a loss so they called their atty and he said not to use ANY stamp on the docs. They couldn't get the lender on the phone to query them so they told the bwr to simply sign it and use the 3 day RTC to determine if he wanted it to stand as is. After the bwr talked to the TC rep and hung up, he insisted on using the stamp. So I told him, it's his loan and if he doesn't mind jeopardizing the funding, it's his call. He stamped every signature. When I got back to my office, I googled the term and found that using this wording means that the document cannot be used as evidence against you in a court of law?? Why would a lender agree to this? Not being an attorney I am wondering if any NotRotters have come across this in the past and what your opinions are?

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 12/22/10 1:45pm
Msg #365753

I've come across this

... It is basically used by a bunch of the same loonies who go around trying to get notaries to do these illegal "protests" (aka notary acceptor/default method).

Whether or not it will hold up in a court of law is questionable. It sounds to me like an urban legend.

I wouldn't worry about it. Like you said, its his loan, not yours. That is something signing agents need to keep in mind ... don't assume too much responsibility. Just make sure you get the docs signed. If a borrower wants to refuse to sign certain documents or wants to sign them "without prejudice", it will be their own fault if the loan is delayed.

Reply by JENNY/TX on 12/22/10 2:02pm
Msg #365759

I have had the actual documents with this wording printed under the signature line for the wife.

Reply by SharonMN on 12/22/10 3:32pm
Msg #365772

Weird. I've heard of cashing a partial payment check and writing "without prejudice" on it so that the person that owe money can't claim that by accepting the check, you agreed to accept it as payment in full, but makes no sense in the case of a loan signing.

I'm more interested in the "under duress" part - I would never notarize something if someone claimed they were "under duress" as that is supposed to be part of the check we do (understood what they were signing, of sound mind, signed of their own free will).

Reply by Doris_CO on 12/22/10 5:56pm
Msg #365795

If this borrower was about to go into foreclosure and was given a choice of taking the new loan or loose the house, then this would make sense, especially the "under duress" statement. They're signing of their own free will, however, they don't like it.

Reply by MW/VA on 12/22/10 10:02pm
Msg #365837

I wouldn't have let them add any wording to the docs, including their signature line, without approval from the tc & lender. I might have explained to them that one of the roles of the notary is to test for "willingness & awareness" and that by signing in your presence it was a given that they weren't signing under duress. We can't witness a signature executed under duress. Just some tools for further situations if they arise. Also, sometimes a gentle reminder that this is a loan & the lender makes the rules (those that have the gold make the rules). Most people understand that if they want the loan they will sign what is required. There are always those who just want to be difficult. Sigh....