Posted by Sylvia_FL on 3/3/11 6:21pm
Msg #375043

NJ notaries

I read in the NJ handbook that notaries are required to keep journals.
But when this was pointed out to a NJ notary on another forum she replied that they are not and cited:

http://www.ehow.com/list_6719365_new-jersey-notary-requirements.html

as her source for information. Hmmmmmmmm

Any NJ notaries here that can confirm? The NJ handbook I have is a few years old and I guess notary laws can have changed.

Reply by ME/NJ on 3/3/11 6:25pm
Msg #375045

You do not need to keep a journal in NJ.

Reply by LindaD/NJ on 3/3/11 6:33pm
Msg #375046

Hi Sylvia and Michael. Michael is right, it is not required. But good practice.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 3/3/11 7:00pm
Msg #375054

Thanks guys.
As I said, the handbook I have is from 2003 - and when I searched the net today I couldn't find an updated one. The one from 2003 states under the requirements for taking an acknowledgment (and also the requirments for a jurat)

"Make a journal entry. The journal entry provides evidence and an audit
trail thereby protecting both the Notary and the general public. Required
information includes: 1) date and time of notary act, 2) type of act (i.e.,
acknowledgment), 3) title of document, 4) date document was signed, 5)
signature; printed name and address of each signer, and if applicable, each
witness, and 6) form of ID -- e.g. identification document, personal
knowledge, or credible witness.
Note: Journals should be bound to prevent tampering. Journals may be
obtained from stationers or professional associations."

So, it sounded like a journal was a requirement.
Do any of you have an updated handbook in pdf format you can send me? (I like to keep updated on various state notary laws)

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 3/3/11 7:05pm
Msg #375055

Hmm I just went to the New Jersey website and it has the same info.

http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/revenue/dcr/geninfo/notarymanual.shtml#Acknowledgments

It is confusing when it says to make a journal entry and what is required information - yet there is no requirement for a journal.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 3/3/11 7:23pm
Msg #375057

ASN says it's not required except in the case of a

protest, in which event a bound journal is required.

According to ASN...

Reply by C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 3/3/11 8:12pm
Msg #375060

If its a legal requirement for NJ notaries to keep a

journal, for protests, or whatever type of notarial act, then I would recommend for NJ notaries to use a journal for ALL notarial acts.

Think of using the journal as an excellent "CYA" tool...

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/4/11 7:04am
Msg #375083

Same thing in Ohio... journal only required for protests

and since 99.9999% of notaries never have and never will do a protest, at least a lawful one anyway, this statute is pretty much pointless.

I think eventually the entire union will require journals. Lord knows we certainly need it in Florida - a great deal of this robo-signing/foreclosure fraud may have been prevented if journals were required.

Reply by MW/VA on 3/4/11 7:28am
Msg #375086

VA law is similar also, no stamp or journal required. I

just started keeping a journal because I switched to Signing Agent E&O and they wouldn't insure me unless I keep a journal. I'm sure we all know that the journal is the evidence required in court matters.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/4/11 7:43am
Msg #375088

Florida legislature has passed journal requirement twice and

it was vetoed both times by the governor.

Why, I will never know.

Reply by PAW on 3/4/11 9:30am
Msg #375098

Why?

Governor Crist vetoed the last bill because of personal privacy issues. The bill as passed by the legislature did not address the Privacy Act requirements for personal identifying information protection.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/4/11 10:25am
Msg #375101

Great... they don't even trust us to record D/L numbers n/m

Reply by PAW on 3/4/11 12:04pm
Msg #375112

That's not the issue

The issue is the safekeeping of signer's personal identifying information that is recorded in our journals. Information security is a major concern with many organizations and individuals.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/4/11 12:16pm
Msg #375116

OK, well then they don't trust us to keep it secure

Bottom line is, if we are going to keep journals (as many of us on this board do), the D/L number needs to be recorded. That is a very crucial item because it proves exactly what ID was inspected.

I know you had ID-theft issues with your D/L, but that is an exception. D/Ls are not part of privacy regulations in Florida, and if notaries are inspecting the D/Ls anyway, we should be able to record the ID number as well.

I'd rather have no journal requirement at all and be able to keep journals as I please, than to have the law not allow us to record very basic information like this. We already have the Florida Bar not trusting us, as I revealed in a previous thread, now it is evident that our former governor didn't trust us all that much either.

Reply by PAW on 3/4/11 1:58pm
Msg #375127

Re: OK, well then they don't trust us to keep it secure

The bill, as I remember, required the recording of the ID serial number in the journal. That means recording the DL number if that's what was used as ID. If a military ID card was used, then the serial number from the ID card is recorded, which may be the holders social security number. SSN's are considered personal identifying numbers in and of themselves. The combination of name, address, phone and DL is also considering to be "personally identifying" and therefore must be safeguarded. The bill had no provisions nor instructions on how to ensure the personally identifying information was protected from "prying eyes". There also wasn't any information on who or how documented information from a notarial journal was to be obtained, since the legislature and Governor's Office considered the journals as "public records" without restrictions.

Two years ago, after the veto, I submitted a modified bill expanding on the securing of the information, following the CA model, to both my state rep and senator. Nothing ever came of it.

Reply by Victoria_NJ on 3/4/11 2:43pm
Msg #375139

2003 Manual is the last on file with the NJDOBI

It says you ARE supposed to keep a journal. Specfically, a "bound" journal. I always kept one.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/4/11 7:24pm
Msg #375164

QTIP, Robert...

Quit
Taking
It
Personally.

It's not about you not be trusted.

In Texas, notaries are no longer REQUIRED to collect a signature and they are actually discouraged, if not forbidden, from collecting fingerprints. I got an attorney's opinion, as well as the SOS's opinion on this...a bill passed a couple of years ago that took out the fingerprint option except under extremely tightly bound and guided by the law PITA kind of security for only certain businesses, of which notaries are not one.

I don't feel the least bit like this is a matter of me being trusted. It's more about me not having to be responsible for such critically important information should it get stolen or lifted by "legal" means such as by a request for entry out of a journal.

Reply by BobbiCT on 3/4/11 7:54pm
Msg #375166

No journal in CT because ..

"It's more about me not having to be responsible for such critically important information should it get stolen or lifted by "legal" means such as by a request for entry out of a journal."

In addition to other reasons, same here in CT Brenda. Objections to putting the burden on NO charge and $5 notaries public to keep this information secure from others; i.e., thieving co-workers, family members, etc. Notary would be the "last man standing" when an identity or fraud suit was brought claiming information was taken from notary's journal. Notary in position of having to "prove a negative" (impossible situation). With over 50 thousand notaries and most employed by lawyers, insurance companies, hospitals, nursing homes, and banks performing "free" in-house notarizations, employers don't want the expense and hassle of providing secure "locked up" places at the office for each individual notary's journal ... forces employer into the position of monitoring that each notary secures his/her journal and liability issues for employer. Particularly because journal is personal to notary, not employer and not "employee" (public official journal becomes under control of private employer, which neither wants, yet employer wouldn't want journal with customer's personal data riding back-and-forth to work in car each day, either). Too many layers of issues under our current state laws.

Reply by MW/VA on 3/4/11 10:10pm
Msg #375182

Re: QTIP, Robert...

I like the "QTIP" acronym, Brenda. We can use that frequently here, can't we?

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/4/11 11:04pm
Msg #375186

Re: QTIP

My ego is so well gelled that I assume that if someone is not nice to me that it is because he or she is simply not a nice person. Can't be me!