Posted by Linda Juenger on 9/24/10 9:52pm
Msg #353885

Unbelievable.

I was told to pick up and send back a subordination agreement that was overnighted to borrower in advance. No problem, have done this several times. I get to borrowers and she gives it to me and tells me they signed it already. I look at it and it was already notarized too. I ask her if she took it somewhere and that I would have done it for her and she told me it came already notarized and all they had to do was sign it. What????

This is just soooo wrong and soooo illegal. How in the world does a TC get by with doing this. This borrower is also a notary and she knew it was wrong also. I've had a long day and I'm tired and haven't thought this through completely on what I am going to do with this. Talk to me.

Reply by Blueink_TN on 9/24/10 10:05pm
Msg #353887

"I was told to pick up and send back a subordination agreement that was overnighted to borrower in advance."

Are you just being paid to transport the docs from the borrower to the UPS/FEDEX box?

Reply by Linda Juenger on 9/24/10 10:36pm
Msg #353891

I also did a complete re-fi with them.

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 9/24/10 10:46pm
Msg #353893

I assume you mean on a prior trip? n/m

Reply by Blueink_TN on 9/24/10 10:48pm
Msg #353894

Wow, sorry this happened to you Linda. I think I would send the refi package back as planned, however for the notarized in advance doc, I would return to the client and let them know that you cannot handle that one.

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 9/24/10 10:45pm
Msg #353892

Even if just being paid to be a courier wouldn't she be at some risk knowingly aiding this illegal act? I'm not an attorney, just asking. It probably would be a different thing if she just showed up and the document was already in a sealed envelop (i.e. she had no knowledge of what was going on).

If they were going to be that blatant about breaking the law why didn't they just send her an envelop and label to send it back? Not trying to give hints on how to help break the law, just saying...

Also, as a public servant is she now responsible to report this illegal act? I'm not sure if we are, but I think I might if for no other reason than to protect myself if they had put me in that situation. I can't believe the notary actually signed the pre-stamped document. Wow!

Reply by Linda Juenger on 9/24/10 11:01pm
Msg #353896

To make this more clear: I went to borrowers home this morning to do a refi with a full closing pkg. My instructions were to ALSO pick up a suborination (sp) agreement that was sent to them in advance. This was not in the pkg that I printed. I get to the borrowers and she hands it to me and tells me they (the borrowers) already signed it and it was already notarized. I asked her where she took it to be notarized and that I could have done that today with her. She said she didn't take it anywhere, it was already notarized when they received it. The notary that notarized this doc did it in advance of being signed and shipped to borrower.

I already shipped the docs back and included it in with the rest of the pkg.

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 9/24/10 11:58pm
Msg #353905

Linda, they really put you between a rock and a hard place

on this one. Could the agreement have actually come from the lender and was being sent to the TC? Either way, they should not have done it, but if the TC or SS that called you didn't do it at least you can feel a little better about them.

If it happened to me, I might have gone with Blueink's advice ( Msg #353894 ) and probably not sent that one doc in. But that is just me and also because of the area I live in. It is one of, if not the, most litigious areas of the country per capita. I know that at one time it was listed as #1. We almost have to play CYA just to drive to the grocery store around here. Ads for law offices are on every channel literally every 10 min.

I do think that especially since they put you in that position, you might ought to report it to cover yourself in case anything comes up in the future. I would also make lots of notes and put them away just in case as well. Again, I'm not a lawyer so this is just us talking.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/24/10 11:28pm
Msg #353901

I believe we are mandatory reporters. Our main function is

to prevent fraud.

See something, say something, to the proper authorities. No muss, no fuss, just reporting accruately, in accordance with the duties of our commissions.

jmho.

Reply by Hugh Nations Signing Agents of Austin on 9/24/10 11:48pm
Msg #353903

Re: I believe we are mandatory reporters. Our main function is

Since the signer herself is a notary, out of sheer self-interest I might defer any report of improper certification to her. The poster did say she did a refi for the same title company.

The other side of that coin, though, is whether you'd actually want any more business from a TC that would do something that far beyond the pale. If not, report away: TC's that do that sort of thing -- and who don't have any qualms about asking US to do them -- pee in everybody's milk.

Reply by Moneyman/TX on 9/25/10 12:03am
Msg #353906

Re: I believe we are mandatory reporters. Our main function is

Hugh, as a former attorney, could a person be in any trouble themselves for knowing what occurred and then 'helping' by sending in the paperwork after they knew that the document (signature) was not properly notarized? Just asking a purely hypothetical question for future general reference.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 9/25/10 12:59am
Msg #353911

Linda, are you sure it wasn't the ...

subordinating lender's signature that was notarized?

Reply by James Dawson on 9/25/10 2:34am
Msg #353918

Re: Linda, are you sure it wasn't the ...

I was thinking the same thing...I "see" this quite often.

Reply by MW/VA on 9/25/10 9:25am
Msg #353935

Ditto. n/m

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/25/10 11:19am
Msg #353953

In that case, it's horse of a different color, of course.

But why would borrower sign?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 9/25/10 7:49pm
Msg #354032

Re: Linda, are you sure it wasn't the ...

That was the first thing that popped into my head, also. If the borrower wasn't familiar with these docs, she might have jumped to conclusions.

However I've also seen a Subordination Agreement where the bank's notary completed both cert's - the one for the bank officer AND the one for the borrowers who were in a different state. This was back a few years, but I remember posting about it here and making some noise about it. I've since seen at least one other Sub. Agrmt. notarized by the same guy from the same bank - and it was done right this time.

This guy must do tons of these, so I don't know if he finally his head straight on this issue or if the old one was just a fluke. Regardless, I'm glad I spoke up.

Reply by Stoli on 9/25/10 1:32am
Msg #353912

Hugh, correct me if I'm wrong...the burden of proof belongs

to the person making the accusation.

I can only speak for California... so take it for what it's worth.

First, you have to PROVE that there was an inpropriety; meaning, get a copy of the recorded document from the country recorder's office.
Secondly, you can determine who the notary was from her/his seal.
Request a copy of her journal entry.
She/he won't be able to produce a copy of the signature or thumbprint from her journal.
Only when you can prove that there was an error should you file the complaint with your SOS.
The oldest trick in the book is to say that the notary journal was lost or stolen. Then ask for a copy of the police report. Check closely to make sure it wasn't the corporate signature that was previously notarized.

By the way, I was told by our SOS that I wasn't the injured party, therefore, I was not the correct person to file the complaint.
No, Susan, it isn't a matter of no muss no fuss---not in California.

Reply by Cari on 9/25/10 3:48am
Msg #353919

report TC to IL SOS, then to the state where the business

is located, that SOS AND the Business Services unit for where that TC's licensed was issued.

Absolutely no way Linda would I let that go by. Especially, with all of the mortgage fraud that has been reported in Illinois.

Its your duty to uphold the law Linda.

Reply by GA/Atty on 9/25/10 5:43am
Msg #353920

Having borrowers sign a subordination agmt is unnecessary

anyway.

I know a lot of lenders do it that way, but the only party who needs to sign these things to make them effective is the lender who is dropping their lien position into place behind the new lender.

Reply by Stamper_WI on 9/25/10 6:36am
Msg #353922

Re: Having borrowers sign a subordination agmt is unnecessary

Beat me to it GA. It's a lender doc.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 9/25/10 9:08am
Msg #353932

This appears to be an innocent mistake by the notary
CLEARLY no fraud was intended.
These forms usually have have a bunch of filled in acknowlements.
I have nearly notarized for one of the lenders on several occaisions.
How many here have gotten ready to notarize the lender's signature on an assignment.
Other than , perhaps, a polite inquiry to the TC, I do not feel that involving outside officials is
warranted in this case

Reply by Terri_CA on 9/26/10 2:25pm
Msg #354128

I have recently done a refi, where there was a subordination agreement in the package. The lenders signature was already signed and notarized. All Subordination Agreements that I've seen have both the lenders and the borrower's signatures and both are notarized.

It could be that it was the lender's signature that was notarized. Did you review the document before sending it off?

Terri
Lancaster, CA