Posted by RJE/MI on 3/17/10 8:34pm
Msg #327781

Advise Opinions Please

I'm doing a Signing tomorrow for a new to me client. This document is required to be signed by me. This doesn't look like something I want to sign. In SC and by using the Search button I see that some very well respected NSAs on this board accept signings from the company that sent me this form. I wondered if anyone has seen this and what they though of it.

The undersigned Closing agent certifies that he/she has completed the following

1. Verified the identities of the persons signing the loan documents, and notarizing that the signatures on
the note and security instrument are genuine.

2. Explained the loan documents to the borrower and outlined the responsibilities involved in entering into the
loan transaction, including the consequences if the borrower defaults on the loan and insurance claim is
paid by HUD.

3. Provided additional instructions on loan terms and procedures for repayment furnished by the lender.

4. Made available the HUD-1 Settlement Statement on the secured property improvement loans.

5. Returned the signed documents and the initial payment to the lender.


By: __________________________________ Date: _________________________

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 3/17/10 8:37pm
Msg #327782

I'd sign it as to 4 and 5 only...

maybe #1 in part...2 and 3? Nope..

Reply by RJE/MI on 3/17/10 8:57pm
Msg #327788

Thanks a lot for your help! n/m

Reply by desktopfull on 3/17/10 8:40pm
Msg #327783

#3 totally out of the question, and based on #2 alone I wouldn't sign this form. In Florida that would be practicing UPL unless your an attorney, the mortgage broker/lender or a TC.

Reply by Claudine Osborne on 3/17/10 8:44pm
Msg #327784

I would have a hard time with this form. Do I want to sign saying I was practicing law?? No way!

Reply by cawest/PA on 3/17/10 9:12pm
Msg #327794

Many points are UPL ... big NONO in PA

Reply by Ilene C. Seidel on 3/18/10 6:16am
Msg #327833

Or a licensed TPL. It is a requirement we explain the loan package to bo.

Reply by jfs/IL on 3/17/10 9:23pm
Msg #327796

1. Verified the identities of the persons signing the loan documents, and notarizing that the signatures on the note and security instrument are genuine..... Patriot Act Information Form???

2. Explained the loan documents to the borrower and outlined the responsibilities involved in entering into the loan transaction, including the consequences if the borrower defaults on the loan and insurance claim is paid by HUD........A BIG NO NO!!!

3. Provided additional instructions on loan terms and procedures for repayment furnished by the lender....... It states provided.......... The letter for monthly repayment?????

4. Made available the HUD-1 Settlement Statement on the secured property improvement loans.

5. Returned the signed documents and the initial payment to the lender.

Reply by KODI/CA on 3/17/10 9:47pm
Msg #327802

I agree with all. In any state this would be upl.

Reply by KODI/CA on 3/17/10 9:52pm
Msg #327806

OOps, meant to file in previous thread. Sorry.

Reply by Notarysigner on 3/17/10 9:56pm
Msg #327807

Iwould NOT sign the form...they can't tell you how to do the job unless you're in employee...

Reply by cawest/PA on 3/17/10 10:17pm
Msg #327809

Did you look him up on SC

and are you in a position to share the name?
Maybe we all know who it might be and share experiences with you.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/17/10 10:48pm
Msg #327811

1, 4 and 5 are essentially harmless... and basic, obvious duties of the job. WHy they want you to sign that is really odd.... it's just kind of implicit given the job. For example, you go to a restuarant and order a salad with sliced grilled chicken. You're going to assume, given the nature of what they do and that they offer that the chicken will, in fact be grilled chicken. Isn't pretty stupid to ask, "Oh, there are no bones in that, right?" Can you imagine the look they'd give you?

This is the same type of thing --- They order a signing, but then say, "Hey, you showed them the HUD and you're returning the documents signed, right?"

Uh..........


I would NEVER, EVER sign this because of 2 and 3.... but mostly #2. It is absolutely against the law for us to do that...

I will pass along information from the lender by prefacing it as just that -- information from the lender. But that's where I leave it. NSAs should never give the borrowers the impression that they are giving them advice or instruction that could be construes as advice.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 3/17/10 11:22pm
Msg #327816

Dittoes. There they go again, trying to make it "legaler"

snf, a few CYAs in there to boot with 2 & 3.

This one reminds me of another that says, basically, I did my job, then asks for my stamp as "proof of Commission." No can do in Oregon. I'll jot the number down, exp. date, and that's it.

Oh. And do you want chicken with that?

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 3/17/10 11:24pm
Msg #327817

I agree. I would NOT sign this. Just send a post-it note along with it so that they know you saw it and explain that you cannot/will not sign.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 3/17/10 11:19pm
Msg #327815

I would definitely strike #2 - that's way beyond the job you're supposed to be doing, unless they provide you with a script to be read verbatim. I don't think it's UPL, but there's no way I would be telling the borrower what the consequences of a default might be - the lender should just give it to them in writing and be done with it.

#3 is iffy - as long as all the info is furnished by the lender, all you're doing is passing it along.

The other three are fine

Reply by LKT/CA on 3/18/10 12:32am
Msg #327827

#2 and #3 are the LO's responsibility.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/18/10 2:45am
Msg #327829

I agree with the consensus here. No problem with 1 (although I'd prefer to see it worded a little differently), 4 or 5.

What you might consider is to unmistakably strike out and initial 2 & 3 and then sign it.

Reply by MichiganAl on 3/18/10 4:09am
Msg #327830

I'm okay with 1, 4, & 5

3 - I just don't like the wording "provided additional instructions on..." Of course we show them loan terms and procedures for repayment. I might line it out and write the word "disclosed" instead.

2 - I can't see any way of prettying this one up. I'd line it out completely. They really are trying to dump the liability onto the signing agent with this one.

Reply by RJE/MI on 3/18/10 7:57am
Msg #327840

Sent the form back to SS with

Notes on it pointing out my concerns and she just sent me an email that said no problem you don't have to sign it. I wonder if it's not a big deal to them why is it in my package? Oh well I have it in writting anyway.

Thanks for all your insight. I love to hear all the different thoughts and ideas that come out over just 1 subject.

Happy Signing!

Reply by Julie/MI on 3/18/10 7:53am
Msg #327836

Although, I didn't read any of the responses, I know I'll be the only one that would sleep at night if I signed my name to the form. I've signed it and would not hesitate to do so. Not worried about upl in the least. Telling a borrwer that if they default on the note that doesn't have a prepayment penality and the home and the land is the collateral is common knowledge according to a Michigan Supreme Opinion rendered a few years ago.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 3/18/10 8:01am
Msg #327841

All due respect, Julie, but you *should* have a problem signing this form and *should* be worried about UPL, especially this language:

" outlined the responsibilities involved in entering into the loan transaction, including the consequences if the borrower defaults on the loan and insurance claim is paid by HUD."

Way beyond the scope of your duties unless you're a LO, escrow officer or attorney.

MHO

Reply by MrEd_Ca on 3/18/10 9:41am
Msg #327849

Closing Agent or Notary Signing Agent? ---

--- This document sounds like it it for a Closing Agent ('The undersigned Closing Agent certifies...') and not a Notary Signing Agent. Could that be the case? Most of these points are clearly outside the normal realm of responsibilities for a Notary Public/Notary Signing agent.