Posted by sueharke on 9/29/10 10:28pm
Msg #354808

Cash call signings

This is my second Cash Call signing and both had multiple signature name affidavits (four for each signer). I think they are getting the names from computer generated forms where it is last name first, truncated names due to lack of spaces for names, etc. In addition, as a California notary they have the wrong jurat wording. In both cases I've had to create four loose attachments on my computer with multiple aka names on each form. Luckily, I found the problem before leaving to do the signing. Has anyone else had this problem? How did you solve it, other than the approach I used?

Reply by janCA on 9/29/10 10:35pm
Msg #354809

What???? You are creating a document? Please explain "Cash Call". Many times the names on an aka statement is generated from the credit report of the individual.

Reply by janCA on 9/29/10 10:40pm
Msg #354811

"names on an aka statement 'are' generated from the credit report of the individual."

Reply by sueharke on 10/6/10 12:28am
Msg #355550

No these are eight incorrectly notarial worded CA Jurats. I just made a loose attachment with the same information before leaving on the assignment.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/29/10 11:41pm
Msg #354814

Not your job to create documents. Attaching a jurat with proper wording is one thing, but creating your own AKA? No. You could be opening yourself up to all kinds of liability not covered by your E & O insurance. You have no idea what spelling is suppose to be on the AKAs, you can only guess. When confronted by such a situation, call and get instructions.



Disclamer, I am not attorney and this is not legal advice, JMHO.

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 9/30/10 12:21am
Msg #354819

"not legal advice" .. But very Good advice

IF Sueharke is actually creating the docs for her clients, unless she is an attorney.

I'm in the same boat as the rest here. I'm not sure if she means that once she meets with them she has to add CA Ack or Jurat due to presented paperwork or if she is receiving e-docs and having issues with them that is causing her to add the additional paperwork.


"Cash Call Signing" ? Do you mean that the signers will be paying you at the table for a closing or General Notary Work? Either way, cash is always good.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 9/30/10 12:23am
Msg #354821

Cash Call = lender; I think they used to do payday advances n/m

Reply by sueharke on 10/6/10 12:30am
Msg #355551

Re: "not legal advice" .. But very Good advice

I do not create the 8 documents! I am correcting the 8 incorrect jurats. I was hired by an agency and was not paid at the table.

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 9/30/10 12:20am
Msg #354818

Yikes, you need to step back and start over

You are not supposed to add AKA names,variations, etc to your notary block!! Just the name on the document as matched to their ID. They are who appeared before you. There is never multiple variations of some ones names or status included in a CA notarial acknowledgement.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 9/30/10 12:21am
Msg #354820

The only thing you need to be providing is ONE jurat - either via a loose attachment or a stamp - on which you fill in the name for which you've identified them. (I use the name under their signature line - the way they are signing the documents, assuming they've got appropriate ID - but others will put the whole name that's on their ID.)

One person appears before you, so you notarize them once per document. The only signature on that form is the one at the very top (on most forms) or wherever it is that they sign off that the content is correct. You do NOT have to notarize every version of how they sign their name.

If you're completing loose jurats (or acknowledgments) on your pc in advance, that's up to you, but I always just keep a ready supply of loose certificates of both types on both letter and legal sized paper and fill them in by hand, as needed. That way I'm always ready for whatever I run into.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/30/10 2:49am
Msg #354823

YOU DO WHAT???

"In both cases I've had to create four loose attachments on my computer with multiple aka names on each form."

Sorry for yelling, but... as the others have pointed out, this is not at ALL correct!

Using proper jurat wording is fine... but the name you put on the line in that form is the name on the ID of the person appearing before you. You do NOT put a list of aliases on there.

I'm hoping we're all just misunderstanding what you mean...

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/30/10 2:53am
Msg #354824

let me add...

As Janet mentioned, some put the name noted on the signature line rather than the ID. Most of the time, these are the same anyway.

Me? I always use the name on the ID. I don't always write out an entire middle name, though. If the the signature line says, "John H. Doe" and the ID says, "John Harrison Doe" -- then I will likely put "John H. Doe" on the name line, just as long as it is consistent with the ID presented.

Reply by CopperheadVA on 9/30/10 6:11am
Msg #354825

Sue, I agree with the others.

I have no way of notarizing aliases (such as maiden name, former married last name, etc), so on the Sig/Name Aff all I put in my notary certificate is the ONE name of the person that appears throughout the package (I have already identified the signer as having that name, or we would not have commenced with the closing). With Sig/Name Aff's, that name is usually listed at the top of the page, with a signature line for them to sign it as they've signed all the other docs.
Any aliases listed in addition to that, those do not go in my notary certificate.

Reply by Vic/CA on 1/7/11 2:34pm
Msg #367496

I think you all ae not familiar with what she is refering. CASH CALL is a loan company who has their own way of doing things. I have done 60 in the last 3 months for them.
Their AKA page is made out from names they got off the credit report which could be very incorrect. The AKA wording in the Juart states all the names on your credit report, right or wrong. Then they say in the Jusat: as speaken to "Cash Call Inc." The person signs off on all the names that are correct, N.A. next to all that are wrong. Not N.A. next to intails or reversed inital. Then sign or attach a loose Jurat.
The very next page Cash Call gives you is your AKA sheet. The person signs there name in all the possible ways, as they tell you. In the Juarta you list all their names and forms of names in the second opening of Jurat and your name in the place that says did they tell this to: your name.
CASH CALL has their own way of doing things and I think they have very good reasons for it. Please do not redo their Jurat. They know what they are doing. The credit report sometimes list the client's as first name last, or just initails. Cash Call is only verifying what the credit report states. Do not undo that. They know some will be wrong. That's what the N.A. is for.

Reply by C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 9/30/10 8:32am
Msg #354831

Why didn't you just call them and have them redo the forms? n/m

Reply by James Dawson on 9/30/10 9:11am
Msg #354837

From what I read, she is putting every name on the Acknowledgment /Jurat and typing it out so it will be neat! I use the name on the ID (like everyone else) and explain to the borrowers about the "other" names; what an AKA is.

Reply by Stoli on 9/30/10 11:08am
Msg #354846

Good job members. She asked and got the answer she needed. n/m

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/30/10 11:14am
Msg #354847

The comments are excellent, and I'll add: How in the world

can you use an AKA as the "person before you" unless (s)he has valid ID for that name?

If an AKA is some weird name on a credit report (we've all seen that) - i.e., 'Susan Fischer' as 'Susan Fisher' - you're good with that? In a normal loan package, the Name Affidavit often lists odd names found on credit reports, but the borrower signs as properly identified, that the AKAs are indeed AKAs, or, conversely "never known as" as the cases may be. We either acknowledge or take an oath of the person identified - not as an AKA for which there was no ID.

The whole thing sounds fishy to me.

jmho.

Reply by Stoli on 9/30/10 11:34am
Msg #354853

Good morning, Susan

Good comments, but...

My Signature/Name Affidavit AKA Statement might look as follows:
Katrina Rae French-Arnaud
Katrina R. French-Arnaud
Katrina French-Arnaud
K R French-Arnaud
K R Arnaud
K Arnaud

In which case, all of my name variations would be represented, and verifiable, from my driver license and could be notarized in any of the above forms. However, the Signature/Name Affidavit AKA Statement does not require notarization of each name variation; but, the form, in and of itself, is self proving that all of the above name variations are, in fact, one and the same person, verified by the affiant by oath.

However, what I understood her to say was that some names were truncated, and that was what she was struggling with. Her instincts were correct; she shouldn't be notarizing all of the name variations.

As far as generating the documents, I believe she is typing her jurats, as do I.

I’m glad she asked the question and we answered her.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/30/10 12:49pm
Msg #354864

Re: Good morning, Susan

sueharke wrote this: " In both cases I've had to create four loose attachments on my computer with multiple aka names on each form."

That's pretty clear that she is creating her own form because the names were truncated. This could actually be a flaw in the document creation software from the lender. However, if the names taken from credit reports are truncated, how does sueharke know how the names were spelled on the credit reports unless she calls and asks? So when the BO signs the documents, the BO is being asked to swear that they are also known by these names listed on the created document. The legal problem here is the BO could be swearing to information that may be incorrect. When sueharke is creating this document herself, she is taking the liability upon her self that the document is indeed accurate. What if it's not correct.

The only name we check to make sure is identifiable is the line where the BO signs swearing to the accuracy of the AKA names. The AKA names do not concern us do not concern us as NSAs. The only flag is if the BO says "I have never signed a document with that name." Then we should make a call. There are all kinds of things in play here, including possible identity theft. If a funny name shows up on your credit report, that is a sign of possible identity theft. Nope, call for instructions, get instructions then have the borrower correct each AKA name, line through, initial or have the lender send a new doc, but never, never create your own AKA document or any other document in the package .. ever. You are putting all your personal assets on the table when you do such things.

Susan is correct, here. I smell plenty of unrefridgerated fish here. JMHO, I am not an attorney, but I consult frequently.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 9/30/10 2:25pm
Msg #354877

Re: Good morning, Susan

I interpreted it differently. When she said "attachments", I assumed (correctly or otherwise - and hoped) that she meant the notary certificates. If that's the case, then the AKAs are irrelevant to the notarization and are not something we should address at all. The borrower has to simply decide for each one whether or not it is a proper AKA for him/her. (As Stoli said, the person may very well have ID for all AKAs - or not - but that isn't something we need to be concerned with.)

The notary notarizes one signature per document - the one that matches how that person is signing all the other docs in the package - and the name in the cert should be the same as on any other notary cert in the package. Whether that notary cert is prepared on a pc in advance or handwritten is beside the point. I don't see a need for multiple loose attachments.

Reply by SANTA CLARITA MOBILE NOTARY on 9/30/10 8:08pm
Msg #354920

I have to agree with Stoli...

I too came across a couple CashCall signings with the same issue. I attached loose jurats to each affidavit with the borrower's name as contained in the loan package. The issue I have is some of the name affidavits did not contain any names - just the one signature line where they sign as they did the rest of the documents. I don't know about you, but I do not like notarizing blank documents and in fact on jurats, I think it's not legal in California. Therefore, I usually will have the borrowers write across the blank area, "N/A" and then have then initial and date it.

In any case, I always write in the exact name on any notarial certificate that is contained in the document(s) being signed.

Thoughts, comments, opinions?

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 9/30/10 10:39pm
Msg #354927

Re: I have to agree with Stoli...

<<<In any case, I always write in the exact name on any notarial certificate that is contained in the document(s) being signed. >>>

I totally agree.

I also agree that it is illegal for CA notaries to notarize sigs on blank docs. But that doesn't necessarily mean every area has to be filled in. Some areas on the doc may be blank and remain blank because they don't have to be filled in. In the example you gave - name affidavits - if all that is needed is one signature, then the remaining sections are fine left blank, because there's nothing required there. If no lender has squawked about your signers lining through and writing N/A, then I guess you're good to go. I just don't think it's necessary to comply with CA law. Of course, anybody can write anything in there at any time, but you could say the same thing about a lot of other docs, including acks. I've read on NR over the years that notaries will go back and look at their acks, and see that TCs, lenders, whoever have added names of people who weren't even at the signing?!?!?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/1/10 12:38am
Msg #354943

Re: I have to agree with Stoli...

I usually have the borrower put "NA" on at least the next line after the last one filled in - whether it's pre-filled or is an AKA they add - to make it clear where it ends. The idea is to prevent any changes from being made once the document has been notarized.