Posted by HisHughness on 3/30/11 8:49pm
Msg #378056

Name affidavit amendments

Lender kicked back a name affidavit for resign. The affidavit listed "Jo Doe" as one of the names by which borrower Jane Doe was known. She wrote above the name "I have never used the name Jo Doe."

This is something I have done in hundreds of closings for dozens of title companies and lenders. It is what I have always been advised to do when I query. When I first started 9 years ago I had the borrower strike through the objectionable name and initial, and was cautioned against that (Actually, a lender facing the expiration of a rate lock threatened to relocate my butt to the back of my shoulders if I ever did it again).

Has anyone else ever had a name affidavit kicked back for a similar reason?

Reply by sealed/CA on 3/30/11 9:22pm
Msg #378061

If the BO is not known by that name, I too have them write: "Never known by this name" and then have them initial next to their statement.
Most of the time the name has been linked through the credit report. Many times it's just a misspelling of their name. However, they should not swear to a name that is not theirs, misspelled or otherwise. IMHO Who knows, there just may be a person with that name and it has been linked to them in error.
I personally would not swear under oath that I am known by a name that is not mine.
These usually have jurats, hence the swear to.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 3/30/11 11:58pm
Msg #378068

Agreed. In this day and age of ID theft run amok, I'd never

agree to a Name just because someone "found" it associated with "me." It's not me - never was, never will be - and that's that.

As an aside, I'd just as soon not do business with anyone who would require me to sign off on a name that wasn't mine - and when borrowers balk, I simply ask, "Have you ever gone by that name as typed right there?"

If the answer is "No," I suggest the "Never known as," or "Never known by this name"/Initial remedy. If the answer is a nod, then I ask that they sign as typed.

If HisHughness were my Notary, and I were the wrongly-named borrower, I'd tell him at the confirmation call not to bother, that I wasn't interested in signing someone else's name, but bless his heart for following through with the Lender/TC's aka 'thing, and commiserate (sp?)again about the entire process, which of course, has been in the works for months on end...

Anyway, good posts, YourHughness, and Sealed.

Reminds me of the "J Initial" snittyfit of some lender awhile back: docs had her initial in sig; she ~never~ signs with initial. Needed to add initial to a doc. Met her at work, she added J on faxed-to-her-work/faxed back new Original.

Get a call on the highway North to Lincoln City from Salishan, and the SS says the lender lady doesn't like the "J," and to go back and do it over. ["Two loops! It must have T-W-O loops!" or, "NO WIRE HANGERS..." raged Mommy Dearest.]

"Not me," says I, chortling to SS gal, "~YOU~ tell Pammy she Must Have Two Loops, I'm going to lunch."

Munch.

Reply by NS35/CA on 3/31/11 12:45am
Msg #378071

So, what did the lender want you to do on that form again? Is it ok to tell who is the lender? I have been done the same as you did, but have not had one kicked back.

Reply by desktopfull on 3/31/11 2:25am
Msg #378073

If a borrower tells me that they have never been known by a name put on a document I definitely have them strike through the name and initial stating that they have never been known by that name. Otherwise, they are signing a false affidavit. Just because someone at the credit bureau messed up doesn't mean they have to accept the error and acknowledge a falsehood.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 3/31/11 6:26am
Msg #378074

Affidavits are sworn statements signed under penalty of perjury. Those who knowingly participate in the false signing are co-conspirators in the perjury. Maybe someone should run that past the title company.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 3/31/11 6:34am
Msg #378075

Furthermore, if the perjured document is given to a lending institution for the purpose of obtaining funding it constitutes Bank Fraud. I know someone that was sentenced to serve 9.5 years in federal prison for making false statements to a bank.

Reply by snoopdogMs on 3/31/11 8:12am
Msg #378078

Hugh I just had this happen also

I received a call that I had allowed the borrower to strike out a wrong name and the lender had said it would not fund if borrower alters that document. I told the individual that in my 4 and 1/2 years I have always allowed the lining through and initialing of an incorrect name if the borrower is adamant that they are not that name. They also had an issue with a correction within my block on that particular document that did not comply with state wording. I said I follow my laws and would not budge on that one. They ending up dropping the idea that I would go back and have the borrower agree to those names.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 3/31/11 8:50am
Msg #378080

How/why this can get sticky ...

Generally, when the A/K/A Aff is pre-printed with variants, those variants were pulled into the Lender's software directly from the borrower's credit report, and/or inserted intentionally by Lender as a result of something (paystub, some letter of explanation, whatever) within the file that uses that variant.

The ones pulled in from the credit bureau are often the ones with cut-off or transposed names, misspellings, etc.

Consequences to altering the A/K/A (particularly removing a variant - not so much with adding another one) are subjective - some Lender's might actually use common sense, others might be far more arbitrary, and they have that discretion either way.

What I do is point this out, whenever a borrower disagrees with a variant. I let them know how/why the info got there, why the lender is asking for this, and I ask the B to consider if there could be ANYTHING that shows that variant attached to their own identity. Almost always, they'll recall something ...many times it's a pre-approved credit card (that they accepted, and forgot about) that used that variant.

On the other hand, I've also had just as many B's who knew a particular variant was on their credit report, and knew WHO it really belonged to (usually a same-name/similar name child), and were certainly not going to pass up a chance to say "NOT me!" I do try to make the point with these people - GET THE REPORT FIXED, and lose the problem!

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/31/11 8:55am
Msg #378082

Re: How/why this can get sticky ...

Yep, Renee, that's exactly how I handle it....with the same results you get.

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/31/11 8:52am
Msg #378081

OK... who is the squirrelly lender who wants this?

I, too, have done as everyone here does when B says 'that ain't me'. Also with no problem for some 18 years. Nor would I try to talk a B into signing a name they insist they've never used. It's just not right.

Reply by Kevin/Ct on 3/31/11 9:01am
Msg #378083

Not Right? It's illegal n/m

Reply by DD/OR on 3/31/11 10:17am
Msg #378092

Re: I don't understand this.

First off, I tell the Borrower never to add or write anything on the documents, except their signature and date. If there is any kind of discrepancy, I have them write on a sticky note and stick it to the front of the document in question. Then I advise them to call their LO to discuss it.

2nd... the name affidavit usually has a list of names that the B has or has not used. The B signs across from the name that applies to them and they do not sign across from the name that do not apply to them. I hope this helps.

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/31/11 10:33am
Msg #378095

Re: I don't understand this.

I'd be willing to bet that it goes into a file completely signed.

Reply by DD/OR on 3/31/11 10:37am
Msg #378098

Re: I don't understand this.

How can it be completely signed if B didn't sign by the wrong name? The B ONLY signs by the correct name that they go by.

Reply by Jodith/WA on 3/31/11 5:12pm
Msg #378176

Re: I don't understand this.

I think the suggestion was inferring that some unknown person may have forged the other names. It's not unheard of in the banking industry.

Reply by HisHughness on 3/31/11 11:47am
Msg #378106

The real story behind the name affidavit...

...was that the lender had left out a waiver of escrow in the signing packet, and wanted that signed. If the lender acknowledged that the waiver was not in the original packet, though, a re-sign fee would have been required. So the lender cooked up the excuse about the name affidavit to get a free re-sign.

Didn't work.

There ought to be a special term for signing services, TCs and lenders who try that sort of thing. Something like maybe "chickensh!theads."

In response to a couple of other posts:

1. I no longer line out AKAs. The reality is that the borrower had to have been known by that at some point, or it would not appear on the affidavit. Disavowing the AKA accomplishes the same purpose.

2. I also am quite specific on the wording of the disavowal. It is: "I have never <used> the name John Doe." To say "I have never been <known> as 'John Doe'" would be incorrect if the party is identified by such somewhere. The borrower, though, was not the one who actually used that name; it was another person.

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/31/11 12:01pm
Msg #378107

Aha!

Good hair-spliting on the verbiage, too, Hugh.

Reply by MikeC/NY on 3/31/11 5:52pm
Msg #378195

Re: The real story behind the name affidavit...

"...was that the lender had left out a waiver of escrow in the signing packet, and wanted that signed. If the lender acknowledged that the waiver was not in the original packet, though, a re-sign fee would have been required. So the lender cooked up the excuse about the name affidavit to get a free re-sign."

Nice. I can just imagine that part of the conversation...

"So you have to go back and get that signed correctly, because the loan won't fund without it. Oh, and while you're there, would you mind having them sign this other document?"

Reply by docs2go/ca on 4/1/11 12:28am
Msg #378237

I have not had one "kicked back". However, I have been advised to consult with the Signing Service or Escrow Company - whichever situation applies - to clarify what should be done in each instance. Some Lenders want a single line struck through the name that is not correct. Some do not want a line but want the Signer to enter the entire wording, "Not applicable" next to the name does not apply. As rules seem to change so quickly these days, I usually ask for clarification.