Posted by DeeDe/CA on 9/28/10 2:30pm
Msg #354601

Changing the verbiage on an acknowledgement

I am notarizing some out of state docs and the bank said to just line out the incorrect verbiage (personally known to me) on the document and not to add my own page. I told her I couldn't do that and I needed to add my own CA acknowlegement. Has anyone run into this? I guess they are charged for the filing by the number of pages filed.

Reply by Maureen Lazar on 9/28/10 2:42pm
Msg #354605

If the docs are being recorded in a different state you are not responsible for the verbiage. In our State of California we have to add the correct CA Ack or Jurat. Ex: I notarize deeds in Ca for property being recorded and bought in Nevada I don't add a California Ack because its not being recorded in Ca.

Reply by DeeDe/CA on 9/28/10 2:45pm
Msg #354608

Thanks Maureen. I think I remember that from training but it's been a long time and I've not notarized anything that is being sent out of state.

Reply by JAM/CA on 9/28/10 2:52pm
Msg #354610

Maureen is correct regarding an Acknowledgment going out of California to be recorded, as long as it doesn't ask us to do something illegal for our state (i.e. claim capacity). However; a Jurat whether in the State of CA or going elsewhere to be recorded, must have the correct notarial verbiage, which is compliant with the California Jurat.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 9/28/10 2:51pm
Msg #354609

Are you sure???

If you're notarizing in CA, do you not need to use CA compliant wording, which would mean lining through the "personally known" wording as that's not allowed in CA?

I may be reading this wrong but you're notarizing in CA, you most certainly ARE responsible for the wording in the cert.

MHO

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/28/10 3:13pm
Msg #354613

Re: Are you sure???

The lone exception to the required certificate wording in California is for acknowledgments that are required in another state, so long as the wording does not ask us to do something that isn't otherwise against CA law.

Page 11 of our current handbook notes:

"A notary public may complete a certificate of acknowledgment required in another state or jurisdiction of the United States on documents to be filed in that other state or jurisdiction, provided the form does not require the notary public to determine or certify that the signer holds a particular representative capacity or to make other determinations and certifications not allowed by California law."

So in this case, it does no harm to just write a line through"personally known" and then leave it as is, so long as you're sure the document will be filed out of state.

Jurats must comply with CA wording no matter what.

Reply by RickG/CA on 9/28/10 3:20pm
Msg #354616

Re: Are you sure???

Another example where the handbook is somewhat contradictory...

"A notary public may complete a certificate of acknowledgment required in another state or jurisdiction of the United States on documents to be filed in that other state or jurisdiction, provided the form does not require the notary public to determine or certify that the signer holds a particular representative capacity or to make other determinations and certifications not allowed by California law."

Here's the sticky note (CAPITALIZED for emphasis)...

"ANY certificate of acknowledgment taken within this state shall be in the following form:" <<shows the acceptable format>>

I don't have any answer for the origninal post. My best practices include using a loose certificate in this situation.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/28/10 3:27pm
Msg #354617

Re: Are you sure???

I'm always uncomfortable when asked to use ack wording from out of state. The reason we have the wording we do (in CA) is for our own protection.

The thing that I like to point out is that the paragraph about using out of state acks says that the wording is REQUIRED in that state or jurisdiction. Well, to me, that's our out... I know of no state in the country that actually requires specific acknowledgment wording on documents filed. Even California must accept acknowledgments from other states.

So, while it's fine to use the odd wording... for me, I like to ask, "Is this wording required?" I've never had anyone tell me it is absolutely required.

So in that case, we're free to use a loose form.

If companies were so concerned about the cost per page when filing documents, you'd think they'd be diligent enough put CA compliant wording on the documents. It's no big secret in the lending industry... they all know California has strict wording. It's just that none of them really care.

Reply by janCA on 9/28/10 3:35pm
Msg #354621

Re: Are you sure???

And how many CA notaries know that the certificate which is on the document is the correct acknowledgment for the state the document is to be recorded? I certainly don't know the correct verbiage for any other state except CA. I always attach a CA acknowledgment.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 9/28/10 9:35pm
Msg #354669

Re: Are you sure???

I think you make a very good point, Jan. I interpret the statement about verbiage "required" in other states to mean that it meets that state's guidelines of what an acknowledgment should say.

If the state where my document is going to be recorded has an online handbook with that info and if it matches what's on the DOT/mortgage in my package, I'll use what is provided - if it doesn't conflict with the exceptions stated about capacity. Short of that (and if I don't have an opportunity to check it out in advance), I always default to the California verbiage, because I know that will work.

However, I'm sure I'm not the only one who has seen several different versions of acknowledgment wording within one loan package. Just because the package is for an out of state property doesn't mean I'm going to automatically use whatever is provided. We need to be careful of making assumptions about what is OK elsewhere - or that what is in the package is automatically correct for that state.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/28/10 5:50pm
Msg #354632

Re: Are you sure???

Many companies are worried about the extra charge for the loose certs. Where there is room, I use a stamp with the proper wording, and there almost always is room. You can buy the stamp on this site. The wording in the handbook is contradictory on a lot of subjects, so if I err, I always try to err on the side of "CYA". I have never been told an out of state document hasn't recorded. By the same token, I have done split signings where the document was going to record in CA other signer was out of state, usually Nevada or Arizona, and those documents have recorded with the out of state wording on it.

The handbook seems to be quite clear on jurats, however. CA's way or the highway.