Posted by JustANotary on 6/23/11 7:39pm
Msg #387480
Signing with Maiden name, but ID shows married name...
This signer uses both names, & her property has always been in her maiden name. Her ID shows the married name. Can I have two credible witnesses say they know her by her maiden name & proceed to notarize the loan docs?
|
Reply by Yoli/CA on 6/23/11 8:07pm
Msg #387482
Credible witnesses are to be used when there is no ID and it is impossible for signer to obtain ID (ie. hospitalized). This person has ID.
Please refer to your Notary Handbook.
|
Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 6/23/11 9:44pm
Msg #387497
Use two credible witnesses
The handbook states on # 3. page 8: The credible witness(es) reasonably believe that the circumstances of the signer are such that it would be very difficult or impossible for the signer to obtain another form of identification.
At this point in time the signer cannot get an ID. It's going to take 2-3 weeks to get a CA drivers license/ ID card or a US passport (you can pay more to get in a few days) and this notarization needs to be done today!
Sure, this woman should have done something to update her ID but, on this date she doesn't have a current ID.
#4. on page 8: The signer does not possess any of the identification documents authorized by law to establish the signer's identity and the credible witness(es) do not have a financial interest and is not named in the document signed.
This woman doesn't have ID to match documents.
|
Reply by JustANotary on 6/23/11 10:23pm
Msg #387502
Re: Use two credible witnesses
Thanks! I appreciate your comments on this! I have been a notary for over 8 years & I have completed more than 5,000 loan packages. But I will admit that I do not know everything so I love being able to come here to get another notary to give me there thoughts on issues. Increasingly when I asks questions on this BB, I am told that I should already know the answer & I should read my handbook etc. Anyway, I really appreciate it when someone like you can just give me their helpful thoughts, so thanks again.
|
Reply by JanetK_CA on 6/24/11 12:02am
Msg #387512
Re: Use two credible witnesses
"#4. on page 8: The signer does not possess any of the identification documents authorized by law to establish the signer's identity and the credible witness(es) do not have a financial interest and is not named in the document signed."
Well, technically - if I understand the OP correctly - the signer DOES possess one of the ID docs authorized by law. It just doesn't prove that she's the same person as the one named in the documents. These types of situations are entirely too common, so I consider them a judgment call.
Am I convinced that they are one and the same person? Can they show me enough other documentation that backs up the maiden name claim? As we all know, CA state law does not allow these as to be used as "satisfactory evidence", but if she can show me a marriage certificate etc., etc., etc., so that it's pretty evident she's the same person, then I'll bring up CWs to satisfy legal requirements.
Most of the time, it's pretty obvious that she's telling the truth, but if she has nothing but attitude, then there's going to be some doubt and I might not even offer the CW option. I believe we each have to make our own judgment in every situation because it's our necks on the line. If I'm not convinced, I'll use the letter of the law to walk away. (That doesn't happen very often, thank goodness!)
Using CWs sometimes makes me a little uneasy. Frankly, I can't imagine a neighbor who knows someone casually ever refusing to act as someone's CW, even though they may not even know more than the person's first name. Most are probably inclined to just want to be helpful and many others will be hesitant to say no to someone they need to get along with, even if they'd rather not. Plus, they have no idea of what's at stake or the potential consequences.
Just my 2 cents.
|
Reply by JustANotary on 6/24/11 12:34am
Msg #387515
Re: Use two credible witnesses
I agree, I become much more careful if I have any doubts about what is going on. In this case the borrower is well know by many people in her bank branch & they know all about her getting married & they had worked with her for years when she had the other name. In this case it is really just making sure I follow the notary law. Most of my work is with loan reps I have been with for many years. Most of them would never try to pull anything. I am more careful if I do not know who I am working with, or if I do know them but know they will cut corners.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 6:33am
Msg #387519
I disagree with you Joan
This, IMO, does not warrant the use of CW's...CW's are used when, according to your handbook, "The signer does not possess any of the identification documents authorized by law to establish the signer's identity "
"This woman doesn't have ID to match documents." Too bad. She DOES have valid ID in her current name - her married name. What she didn't do is update the title to her property, and that is not fixed by using CW's.
IMO CW's are not acceptable in this situation.
|
Reply by Yoli/CA on 6/24/11 9:52am
Msg #387529
I'll disagree with Joan.
Credible witness(es) must swear/affirm to the five (5) points in our Notary Handbook.
#4 (in my humble opinion) cannot be met as the signer DOES possess valid ID. It's just not in the name on the docs. Her current valid ID is in the married name. Docs are in her maiden name.
It is my opinion that credible witnesses are disallowed in this case as one stipulation is void.
JMHO
|
Reply by FlaNotary2 on 6/24/11 9:56am
Msg #387531
Completely disagree, Joan
This signer HAS identification. This disqualifies the use of a CW.
CWs are intended to be for circumstances that are so exceptional that the average notary will never use it. California notaries seem to toss around CWs very liberally, but that is not the intent.
This woman has an ID, it just doesn't match the name on the documents. Even then, there is nothing in California law that says the ID has to match or even partially match what is on the document. The intent is for the notary to be satisfied, on the BASIS of the ID.
|
Reply by Calnotary on 6/24/11 1:25pm
Msg #387573
Joan STOP giving bad information...
You can not use CW if the signer showed you a current ID. If the current ID is not what the docs shows, and they neglect to change their names, well that's not our problem! You are making yourself look bad as a NOTARY INSTRUCTOR.
|
Reply by Mark/SanJose on 6/26/11 3:54pm
Msg #387754
Joan is Right
CW's are perfectly correct to use in this case. In addition, but not required, you may ask for info to support her previous last name, but this is only to assuage any concerns on the part of the notary that something is not right. While this is not required or legally pertinent, it helps address the fact that we are not to notarize anything that we believe to be crooked.
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 6/23/11 8:37pm
Msg #387489
Read paragraph "B" page 8 of YOUR handbook then
paragraph "C".
FWIW most of the answers to question you may have will be in THAT book. Notary work is state specific and getting a yes or no answer here may not be the correct answer for you.
|
Reply by JustANotary on 6/23/11 8:53pm
Msg #387492
Re: Read paragraph "B" page 8 of YOUR handbook then
Thank you for the reminders to read my handbook, that I have done.
She can not have two California ID's. So she must deed the property to the name listed on her ID, or go to DMV & change her ID to reflect the name on the current deed?
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 6/23/11 9:10pm
Msg #387493
Re: Read paragraph "B" page 8 of YOUR handbook then
There is an alternative to that but the TC should be making that call so you won't be guilty of UPL. IMO
|
Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 6/23/11 10:11pm
Msg #387498
Listen to Joan Bergstrom n/m
|
Reply by LKT/CA on 6/23/11 10:11pm
Msg #387499
I would suggest to the borrower that she update her ID to include maiden and married last names. For example: Maiden name is Jane Marie Doe, ID shows name as Jane Marie Jones.
Update ID at DMV to read Jane Marie Doe Jones - then she'd have no problems getting her signature notarized in the future.
|
Reply by jba/fl on 6/23/11 10:42pm
Msg #387504
Excellent, Lisa. Great solution for the situation. n/m
|
Reply by Alz on 6/23/11 10:56pm
Msg #387507
Yes, it is; but I personally would hesitate making suggests
or giving advise to the BOs. Don'ts want any misunderstanding that could get me into legal hot water......
|
Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 6/23/11 11:34pm
Msg #387510
Lisa advice is very good
The problem with women's ID in CA is the woman is using the husbands name as her married name and hasn't gone to the DMV and changed her "maiden name" to the married name.
Whenever I have run into this problem the woman always assumes that if she shows her Marriage Certificate, it will solve the ID problem.
I teach notary classes in CA, and I always tell the students "don't look at the certificate" as it is not on the list of acceptable CA ID and don't let them leave the room to find it.
The other problem with a woman's ID is when she has put her maiden/married together and hasn't changed her name on the drivers license.
If both of her names are on the document to be notarized, (she might have a passport) the notary is probably left with 2 credible witnessess to ID her.
The issue with men: when a man with Jr, in his name ages, and his father passes, the man goes to to the DMV and drops the Jr from his ID and now the notary can't use that drivers license.
In this case alway ask if he has a passport as the Jr should be on the passport.
|
Reply by SueW/Tn on 6/24/11 4:14am
Msg #387518
Re: Lisa advice is very good
"The issue with men: when a man with Jr, in his name ages, and his father passes, the man goes to to the DMV and drops the Jr from his ID and now the notary can't use that drivers license."
Huh? Why would a man drop part of his birthname?
|
Reply by FlaNotary2 on 6/24/11 9:58am
Msg #387532
Agree, "JR" is a legal suffix that appears on birth
records in Florida. To drop a part of your legal name requires a court order or an amendment to your birth certificate here in Florida.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 6:36am
Msg #387520
Think you mis-read the OP, Joan, if that's what you're
referring to:
"The problem with women's ID in CA is the woman is using the husbands name as her married name and hasn't gone to the DMV and changed her "maiden name" to the married name"
Yes, she did change her name at DMV - to her married name. What she didn't do was change her name on the property records.
|
Reply by rengel/CA on 6/24/11 12:32pm
Msg #387558
And to throw another log on the fire.........
I am on my second marriage. I still have my car and a few other things in my first husband's name, and I also have things in my maiden name, but have long since changed my name to my current married name. My DL says Jane Smith Jones - My pasport says Jane Smith Jones but I have ownership in other things that say Jane Smith Doe.
Do I need to go back and get my ID's with Jane Smith Doe Jones???????? Yikes!
|
Reply by Bob_Chicago on 6/24/11 1:19pm
Msg #387570
Do I need to go back and get my ID's with Jane Smith Doe Jon
Depends if you transfer title with an "Urban Myth " Notary or a
pragmatic NP.
Plan ahead , and get personally known to a few NP who know it is really you in all of your personas.
Believe that is the main reason that my wife has stayed with me for so long. Too complicated to
change names.
|
Reply by JanetK_CA on 6/25/11 3:13am
Msg #387658
Won't work in CA... ;>)
We can no longer use personal knowledge... 
Seems to me that there are two solutions to these types of problems - in CA, which is the only state I can speak to. When a person changes their name, they can make sure they change how they hold title to any and all property that will require potential notarization while they still have the ID in the name in which they took title. Here, that will require a Grant Deed (or somesuch) to be recorded.
The other option is to keep allALL names on at least either a DMV issued ID and/or Passport. With that option, they're covered and don't have to worry about how they took title to anything.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 6/26/11 2:28am
Msg #387717
Agree with Bob and Robert on this one in a general
sense. Not going to parse Florida's or California's law. Texas law is not that much different in my opinion, but who am I to opine?
I have a different perspective on IDing that people generally do not agree with. A person appears before me for the purpose of signing a document, not to judge him or her for not having DLs, Passports, etc. that match a certain document.
If the person before me has provided adequate government issued identification documentation I make a determination whether or not he or she is the person that he or she purports to be. I might use other information to make that determination, along with my diving rod (whoa...that's a joke for the humor impaired) and my own deductive reasoning (not a joke). If I believe that person is not who he or she purports to be, then he or she is attempting to commit a crime and I call the police. (Have never called them.)
I have holdings in various names like Rengel mentions. I am not going to go get ID in all of those names, ever, ever, ever to satisfy a notary's personal requirement to see a certain name on my DL. History happens and notaries (in my not so humble opinion) must adapt to that concept and be able to use deductive reasoning to determine whether or not the documentation I provide shows that I own one of those holdings.
My mother's will names me as Brenda XXXXXX (not Stone). Must my mother change her will? Must I wrangle a contrived ID so that I may inherit or manage her affairs in certain circumstances? No. I do not. Texas attorneys (plural) have said that I do not and that she does not.
To me, this is as far fetched and impractical as saying that someone does not own a home or a car because a name has changed over time.
A person who acts as a witness in Texas must be known by me and known by the notary. I don't know that I could come up with that person in my current city.
Practical is the word of the day. I feel that humans, not computers, are notaries so that we can use our human reasoning...a computer cannot do that. A computer wants precise information with only slight variations. Humans take information and make judgment calls. To me that is a critical part of our jobs as notaries.
No disrespect meant by having a different opinion than others.
|
Reply by BrendaTx on 6/26/11 2:30am
Msg #387718
Correction: divining rod, not diving rod n/m
|
Reply by HisHughness on 6/26/11 2:44am
Msg #387719
Re: Agree with Bob and Robert on this one in a general
I think Texas law permits the practical approach Brenda has outlined. If the law does not, then certainly the <administration> of the law does.
My impression, though, is that our casual/pragmatic approach here in Texas has been specifically addressed and specifically prohibited in other jurisdictions. More's the shame.
|
Reply by FlaNotary2 on 6/24/11 9:54am
Msg #387530
This has been discussed many times before .... Msg #381907
#1) No, you can NOT use credible witnesses. If the person has any acceptable form of ID - even if it has the name wrong, even if they left it at home, etc. - then a CW can not be used.
#2) The law does not say that the name on the document must match the name on the ID or have "less names" than on the ID.
A lot of California notaries get hung up on this. They think if the document says Jane Marie Doe, and the ID says only Jane M Doe, they can't notarize. WRONG!!!!!!!!
I repeat - WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!
This is a MYTH. There are NO laws in ANY state that ratify this myth.
As long as the NOTARY is satisfied, that is what is important. See Msg #381995. In California, and Florida as well, identity must be proved on the ****BASIS**** of satisfactory evidence. That means that you can use a state-mandated ID to make that basis/foundation, and then use other documents to meet your satisfaction.
|
Reply by Cari on 6/24/11 10:46am
Msg #387536
love how some post on state notary laws not of their
own state and giving the appearance of legal-speak IMO....I dunno...
|
Reply by FlaNotary2 on 6/24/11 12:16pm
Msg #387553
I was going to respond to your snide remark but decided
that you aren't even worth it.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 10:58am
Msg #387539
I completely disagree with you on this Robert
"As long as the NOTARY is satisfied, that is what is important.... In California, and Florida as well, identity must be proved on the ****BASIS**** of satisfactory evidence. That means that you can use a state-mandated ID to make that basis/foundation, and then use other documents to meet your satisfaction."
From our manual:
"From Subsection 117.05(5) of the Florida Statutes
A notary public may not notarize a signature on a document unless he or she personally knows, or has satisfactory evidence, that the person whose signature is to be notarized is the individual who is described in and who is executing the instrument"
Note the words "and who is described in...the instrument' -
"They think if the document says Jane Marie Doe, and the ID says only Jane M Doe, they can't notarize. WRONG!!!!!!!!"
Not wrong - IMO Jane Marie Doe may equal Jane M. Doe...however, Jane M. Doe does not necessarily equal Jane Marie Doe...and adequate, acceptable ID must be obtained. You can't accept an ID in another name and use other documents to make up an ID that is acceptable to you.
|
Reply by Bob_Chicago on 6/24/11 11:34am
Msg #387545
Mark this date on your calendar, Robert, the Bobster is
about to support your position.
I am neither in FL nor CA, but going to venture an opinion anyway.
Linda ( who I respect) quoted the FL statute as follows:
"A notary public may not notarize a signature on a document unless he or she personally knows, or has satisfactory evidence, that the person whose signature is to be notarized is the individual who is described in and who is executing the instrument"
I believe that the operative phrase is "has satisfactory evidence"
Illinois statute is basically the same with the addition of the following:
"identification documents are documents that are valid at the time of the
notarial act, issued by a state or federal government agency, and bearing
the photographic image of the individualʼs face and signature of the individual"
Nowhere, does either statute, (nor California's nor any other state, to the best of my knowledge),
require an exact matching of name, or the myth of "Less but not more, or more but not quite as much
or whatever"
IMO, so long as the NP can view ID documents in accordance with their respective state's statutes, then
the NP can make a reasonable determination , based on whatever factors, the NP reasonably deems relevant and acceptable, that the person signing the doc in question, is the same person as is named in the document to be signed.
Robert, as a law office employee, may have access to Nexus/Lexus. Might be a good project during his
spare time to research this question.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 11:45am
Msg #387546
Bob, thank you..you may wish to see this..
In FL - page 36 of our manual: http://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/notary/ref_manual23-40.pdf
"Satisfactory Evidence
“Satisfactory evidence” means the absence of any information, evidence, or other circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to believe that the person making the acknowledgment is not the person he or she claims to be, and any one of the following:
(1) Sworn Written Statement of a Credible Witness
(2) Sworn Written Statement of Two Credible Witnesses
(3) One of the following forms of identification: Description and itemized list of acceptable ID has been deleted to save space.
Please note, satisfactory ID is defined as the absence of information to refute the ID....AND...one of the following forms of paper ID...not or...not plus....not put all together and come up with a name...it's absence of information or evidence *AND* one of the following forms.
JMO
|
Reply by FlaNotary2 on 6/24/11 12:13pm
Msg #387551
Linda - read the actual statute carefully
117.05(5)(b):
For the purposes of this subsection, “satisfactory evidence” means the absence of any information, evidence, or other circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to believe that the person whose signature is to be notarized is not the person he or she claims to be ***and*** any one of the following [...]
Docs say Jane Marie Doe; ID says Jane M Doe. This fact alone is not evidence that would "lead a reasonable person to believe that the person whose signature is to be notarized is not the person he or she claims to be ". The evidence must be SATISFACTORY... to the notary. But there is no law, in Florida or in any other state that says you can't notarize for "Jane Marie Doe" if the ID says "Jane M Doe" or even "Jane Stevens Doe".
The statutes list certain acceptable forms of ID. OK, great. Jane Marie Doe presents me with an ID that says Jane Stevens Doe. This is the basic evidence required by law. I *may* (not have to, but could if I wanted to), ask her to show me some other documentation (marriage certificate, for example), which substantiates her claim that she is Jane Marie Doe a/k/a Jane Stevens Doe. I have notarized in this circumstance many times when the middle name on the doc didn't match the maiden name on the D/L... because I, a reasonable person, have not been given any evidence that might lead me to believe that Jane Marie Doe and Jane Stevens Doe are not the same people.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 12:36pm
Msg #387559
But you've also not been given any evidence
that Jane Marie Doe *IS* one and the same as Jane Stevens Doe - right? And you can't just assume they ARE one and the same. I am a reasonable person, most of the time... I cannot and will not assume and make the jump that they are one and the same without proof.
Jane M vs. Jane Marie, sure, you could make that leap...but Jane Marie and Jane Stevens? No..you can't. Thankfully FL provides for this...
|
Reply by jojo_MN on 6/24/11 1:21pm
Msg #387571
Re: But you've also not been given any evidence
In this case, I would also ask to see the birth certificate to verify the middle name in addition to the marriage license, etc.
|
Reply by JanetK_CA on 6/25/11 9:40pm
Msg #387712
Re: Linda - read the actual statute carefully
I'm kind of in the middle on this one and I don't agree with anyone who interprets any absolute right answer or "always" on how to proceed on this issue. Here's what I see as the key words:
"The evidence must be SATISFACTORY... to the notary."
On this point, I heartily agree. HOWEVER, because, as Robert and Bob (hmmmm...) have indicated, this is a matter of interpretation as to what is considered "satisfactory". And I believe each notary is free to determine where the line is drawn. So if Linda feels that if the ID does not show all of a middle name that's on a document that someone is about to sign, that it isn't satisfactory, then she's within her rights to interpret it that way. Conversely, if someone else feels that they're OK with the first letter being the same, or with some supportive documentation of the middle name, then I suppose that's their right, as well.
Again, we're all entitled to have our own standard as to what is considered satisfactory (barring any laws to the contrary) - and if that means that someone wants to use the "more not less" rule, then so be it.
Robert, I find that more and more I respect your opinions, although I may not always agree with all of them. But I think it would be helpful to express opinions as such vs. making statements of fact when it comes to some of these issues, especially across state lines. I feel that this issue, in particular, is very much a matter of personal opinion - and whether the notary is focusing on the "absence of information..." or on "AND one of the following". Like Florida, California doesn't define what the "AND..." is supposed to say.
My personal opinion on this is that the middle name DOES matter and I don't consider an ID that doesn't show *everything* that's on the document as full proof of ID (especially with more common names). But I might be willing to consider additional corroborating documentation when making a determination about a middle name or maiden name. Another example could be a Latino name where the mother's family name is added after the father's - or a husband's name is added before a "maiden" name (or whatever). If it's there, I'm not going to be concerned about the order, in most cases. But that's just mho...
|
Reply by HisHughness on 6/24/11 12:38pm
Msg #387562
Just having to agree with him isn't such a big deal...
...Hell, I had to <apologize> to him this week. I'm still constipated over that.
|
Reply by jojo_MN on 6/24/11 11:16am
Msg #387542
I have run into similar situations a few times. In fact just yesterday I had a signing where the wife was on title as Jane Doe (maiden name). There was a Quit Claim deed changing title from Jane Doe, grantor to Jane Smith and John Smith, grantees. All of the loan documents with in the name of Jane Smith and John Smith.
Since I needed to notarize the Quit Claim as Jane Doe, I had her show me her (expired) drivers license with the name Jane Doe, her marriage license showing the change of names, plus her current two forms of ID as Jane Smith. I sent copies of all with the documents to show that I did ID her past and present names.
This is how I've handled it in the past and was told by the hiring entities that was the correct way to handle it. In most cases, they didn't have any friends that could act as credible witnesses because they did not know the women by the prior names.
|
Reply by kathy/ca on 6/24/11 11:24am
Msg #387543
Was her expired DL issued within the last 5 years, if not I
couldnt do it here in CA!
|
Reply by jojo_MN on 6/24/11 11:31am
Msg #387544
Re: Was her expired DL issued within the last 5 years, if not I
The current name has a current license. Maiden names wouldn't have a current license because by law (at least in MN, WI and IA) you can't have more than one.
How does the state of CA handle these situations? (name changes due to marriage, divorce, re-marriage, etc).
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 6/24/11 12:25pm
Msg #387556
Ok.anybody ever hear of a Preliminary change in owner...
form? This signing is NOT a hardship, it's because the borrower was negligent. It can be corrected very easily!
|
Reply by JustANotary on 6/24/11 12:30pm
Msg #387557
Re: Ok.anybody ever hear of a Preliminary change in owner...
Everyone is talking about her neglecting to change her name to her "new Name." But in California is is OK to have two names. Many people use both their original name & also that of their spouse. You can have two names, but only one DMV ID. This borrower intends to go on using both names. She wants to keep the property in her original name.
|
Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/24/11 12:38pm
Msg #387561
Well, she's going to continue to have a problem then
You can lead a horse to water....
|
Reply by Notarysigner on 6/24/11 12:42pm
Msg #387563
Re: Ok.anybody ever hear of a Preliminary change in owner...
I don't have a problem with that, I was pointing at eliminating potential problems. All the "ducks" need to be lined up so their are no future problems.
Funny story..When me and my wife first got married she changed her name. Ten years down the road she started using her maiden name after mine. Twenty years down the road she reversed it, maiden name then my name. Everytime we go thru customs now, big problems, she gets pulled out the line while me and the kids whiz thru. IRS , problems, Bank, problems. That's why I was making the suggestion all the"ducks" need to be lined up. My post was just a suggestion, in the end we all must do what we thing is right.
|
Reply by Bob_Chicago on 6/24/11 1:04pm
Msg #387566
Henry Kissinger, was named Heinrich at birth. Anglicized it
to Henry, when he became a US citizen, friends call him Hank.
The question is , I wonder who's Kissinger now?
Note to youngsters: don't worry about it, old phart joke. .
|
