Posted by Stamper_WI on 5/2/11 12:34pm
Msg #381907

Another middle name case

Woman never had a middle name. ID has no middle initial. At some point she was told to add the initial of her maiden name as a middle initial on her first home purchase with her ex husband and has been signing that way ever since. She has a really common first and second name. Some how it worked it's way onto her tax returns but not her SS card. First you see it, then you don't. These doc's had the middle initial.
Have a feeling I might do a redo. Although I never heard back about the guy named Whitey on another signing. That was and AKA Whitey after his given name all the way through. Seems he bought a boat in a bar one day and never paid the guy and got taken to court with the agreement signed on a napkin.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 5/2/11 12:44pm
Msg #381908

So what's the problem?

If she uses that middle initial, then under common law that initial has become a part of her name. Even if it isn't on her ID, I would still not hesitate to notarize. The point is that the notary must be satisfied as to the person's identity. Contrary to the popular "ID must have more name than the document" myth, there is no reason to refuse to notarize solely because a middle initial is missing.

MHO

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 5/2/11 1:25pm
Msg #381914

I would refuse.

All state laws are different. One size does not fit all. If the MI is on the docs but not on the ID, You could not make me notarize the bo's sigs on the docs.

Reply by Stamper_WI on 5/2/11 2:02pm
Msg #381919

Re: I would refuse.

WI says to my satisfaction. OK with TC.

Reply by Jodith/WA on 5/2/11 2:43pm
Msg #381922

Re: I would refuse.

In Washington State, the law states: "A notary public has satisfactory evidence that a person is the person described in a document if that person: (a) Is personally known to the notary public; (b) is identified upon the oath or affirmation of a credible witness personally known to the notary public; or (c) is identified on the basis of identification documents."

Satisfactory evidence of identity isn't in the law, but in the state administrative code:
"Satisfactory evidence of an individual identity shall be based on one of the following:

(1) Current documents issued by a federal or state government with the individual's photograph, signature, and physical description.

(2) The oath or affirmation of a credible person who personally knows the individual."

So the state rules don't say anything about forms of the name, but it seems to be considered a best practice among most notaries I talk to that the ID must be equal or longer than the name on the document. In a court of law, these understood practices, if common among the professional's peers, can be considered binding as well.

So each notary has to decide if this common practice, whether based in law or not, is required in their practice. For my part, I am perhaps over cautious, but I tend to follow best practices of whatever industry I'm in. So, yes, I take the form of the name seriously, and if the document has an initial and the ID doesn't, I'm not going to notarize.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 5/2/11 3:32pm
Msg #381935

Or so I thought too, Jodith ...

I don't much care for speculating on such things, so I wrote my SOS years ago, and asked for their written directive on several of the more common ID dilemmas.

MI's statute is worded exactly as WA, "...is identified on the basis of identification documents..."

According to MI SOS's legal division, the key word in there to be taken literally (as intended) is "basis". You begin with gov't issued ID, and BUILD from there with secondary evidence, until satisfactory evidence has been reached.

It's so much easier with loans - you have a lot of identifiers you can cross reference, building upon the basis of gov't issued ID. The loan docs have SS#, address, job, birthdate, name, spouse, etc. If you have no reason to suspect fraud, and you can tie ID with "Jane Doe" to the same SS#, the same job (via paystub), same spouse (via marriage cert), birthdate (ID & birth cert), wallet full of crap - there's plenty of evidence you can select from & ask for until it all adds up to reasonable satisfactory evidence.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 5/3/11 3:06am
Msg #381960

Re: Or so I thought too, Jodith ...

Agreed. I consider middle initials a gray area, in that I might depend on further corroborating items to feel that I have "satisfactory evidence". I've run into that many times. However, like rengel said, I've also run into many examples of family members with the same first and last names. How do we know that someone isn't trying to commit fraud against another family member? This kind of stuff really does happen from time to time. If they can show me lots of other things that backup the "gray area", I'm probably OK with it. [Every situation is unique.] But if they only have a story to tell me about why they can't show me anything to support what isn't on their ID, that's a different story.

Reply by Jodith/WA on 5/5/11 7:06pm
Msg #382302

Re: Or so I thought too, Jodith ...

And the problem with the signing I had was that they were purchasing directly (no loan) so there was nothing in the docs giving SSN or DoB, so I had no other corroborating information to make it clear these were the correct signers.

I'd rather be safe than sued by the title company.

Reply by rengel/CA on 5/2/11 3:06pm
Msg #381928

How are you sure that

Jane Doe is Jane T. Doe without identification stating that she truly is Jane T. Doe? I know several sister's in law who share a first name and married name. Who is to say that one isn't trying to pull a fast one and sign as the other person?

I want to be certain that the person signing is the person who is named on the docs, not any Jane Doe who is signing.

My .02

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 5/3/11 9:34am
Msg #381968

Re: How are you sure that

>>>How are you sure that Jane Doe is Jane T. Doe without identification stating that she truly is Jane T. Doe?<<<

It doesn't matter. It is up to the NOTARY to decide whether or not the person appearing before them has proved themself to be the person signing the document. It is entirely within the notary's discretion. There is NO law - I repeat, NO LAW, that substantiates the myth that the ID must contain "more name" than the name on the document.

JMHO, but feel free to contact your SOS for clarification.

Reply by BrendaTx on 5/3/11 11:26am
Msg #381997

I identify folks like Bob does.

If I really doubt that a person is not the right person to sign the documents after seeing his or her acceptable method of ID sources, then I am going to report him or her to the police.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 5/3/11 11:14am
Msg #381995

As I see it, our function as a NSA is to determine, in

accordance with the law of our commisioning State's laws) if the person signing the
dox is the same person whose name is on the title to the PIQ, and is the party to whom
the lender has determined to extend a loan. It is not a contest to see how well the DMV
matched up their ID to their "real" , full name.
In Illinois , if we do not know the person signing, and if we do not personally know a prospective CW , then we must base our identifying them on a valid state of federal issued ID bearing their picture and signature. Law does not require that we match up name exactly. To the best of my knowledge, no state's laws require that name on ID match exactly the name on the dox.
Further "personally knowing" or a "CW is far from reliable in this instance. Do you really know if your next door neighbor for the last ten years is Bill, Billy, Wiilly, Will or Willard . It is doubtful if you know their middle name, or if they even have a middle name. Your only true knowledge is what they told you when they moved in. For all you know they might be in the witness protection system.
So far a I know this "more not less" bit is an urban legend promulgated by well intentioned notary instructors.
Although there is anecdatal evidence of impersonnation, we are generally meeting these signers in their home. They have been vetted to a fare-thee-well by lender who has checked just about everything but their shoe size to approve the loan.
If you have doubts, IMO, you can use extaneous evidence, such a non-official IDs,
young kids calling them mommy and daddy, wddding pix, and , most importantly, your instincts based on your experience.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 5/3/11 11:59am
Msg #382005

Perfectly stated, Bob_Chicago. n/m

Reply by NJDiva on 5/3/11 12:42pm
Msg #382009

Had same experience with MI...

I had a woman say that DMV told her she had to use the initial of her maiden name as her middle initial. I asked to see a copy of her marriage license. I was confident that she was the person stated on the doc's and accepted it.