Posted by nobhill on 5/9/11 10:46pm
Msg #382703

How Should I Respond To This?

A lady at a very large signing company accused me of ignoring their instructions in big black letters not to change the Notice to Cancel Rescission date, which happened to be wrong. They wanted to maintain the document was signed the day before. I followed the procedure when the rescission date is incorrect to correct it by crossing out and having the borrower's initial the correct dates.

B of A called the company to complain I changed the date to the correct recession date which is my job to do. I told the lady I don't follow instructions that advise me to violate the law and that it is my job to make sure the rescission dates are correct.

The lady was under the belief I didn't follow instructions and left the phone call that she would report what I said to the bank. Should I follow up on this matter since it seems the lady thinks I didn't do my job properly to follow their client's instructions?

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 5/9/11 11:03pm
Msg #382704

read Msg #362074 and responses.

Reply by nobhill on 5/9/11 11:16pm
Msg #382706

Thanks, in my view this bank is asking notaries to participate in a form of fraud. I won't do it.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 5/10/11 3:50am
Msg #382708

I don't think the law is that specific as to how the rescission period is to be disclosed, as I've seen quite a variety of RTC forms. I think the key thing they have to disclose is that the borrower has three business days, beginning on the day following the last of the three events listed at the top of nearly every RTC form. But I agree with you that it is misleading - if not technically outright fraud.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 5/9/11 11:43pm
Msg #382707

Gold Stars post, BarbaraL - Fab Thread with a veritable

wealth of info.

NR rocks, special thanks to our original poster.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 5/10/11 5:55am
Msg #382709

Carefully dissecting the facts ...

1. Under Reg Z/TILA, if the lender provides anything less than the minimum of 3 business days RTC, the 'cure' is that the RTC is extended to 3 years. I point this out because IF (key word = IF) the BOA form actually were shortening the RTC, it would harm BOA & actually benefit the borrower.

2. BOTH dates presented on the RTC form are clearly disclosed as "either/or" dates:

"The date of the transaction, which is [date] OR ...."
"No later than midnight of [date] OR midnight of the THIRD BUSINESS DAY ..."

3. The borrowers are signing and DATING their form with actual date.

In following court cases related to the RTC, I have not found any ruling against the lender for this SPECIFIC issue of dates used on the form; the cases I've found all reached the same conclusion - that the forms all clearly stated their intent (this date, OR ...) and the assumption was made that even an un-savvy borrower would understand the form's intent.

As my own SOP, I always point out the disbursement date on the HUD (because I also habitually check that date for accuracy as a client courtesy). As we know, 999% of our clients want the dates to follow the usual disclosure format, but there's always the rouge - like BOA. I can't begin to grasp their reasons for reinventing the wheel, but I am not in charge and nobody at BOA asked for my input.

Is it "fraud"? I don't see how, and neither does the court. Is it misleading? Well ...if you don't READ even just the sentences containing each date, it could be. When presenting the RTC form, all you - as the SA - need to do is read those sentences to them. When presenting the HUD, you (if you're like me) will have already pointed out the date of disbursement.

Reply by HisHughness on 5/10/11 7:00am
Msg #382710

Re: Carefully dissecting the facts ...

Renee, it is posts like this, amidst all the dross, that make this forum so valuable.

Thank you.

Reply by MW/VA on 5/10/11 7:44am
Msg #382712

Thanks, Renee. This was very enlightening. :) n/m

Reply by Ocean Pacific Notary Services, Inc. on 5/10/11 9:32am
Msg #382715

Re: Carefully dissecting the facts ...

Thank you Renee - well said.
Lender is not committing fraud and they are following guidelines as laid out under Reg Z. Borrowers signing and dating document is what begins the three day RTC date process. Every lender has a different internal process/procedure on how to change dates on RTC - not are all the same, just follow their procedure, not the one you think it should be. I have seen the Bank of America instructions many times and they are clear - do not alter the dates. You are just to have borrower sign and date for the day of signing. That is not fraud and notary went above and beyond. If lender or title co asked the notary to have borrowers to date their signatures for any other date then the day of signing, that could arguably be a case of fraud - that is backdating/foward-dating and not legal. But to say that not changing the pre-printed dates is fraud is a stretch. And since instructions were not followed, this loan may not be funding and will have to go through another recission period again. WHY?
If in doubt, pick up the phone and call whomever gave you the assignment for clarification. That is so much better than putting the borrowers through another loan signing. Thank you

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 9:56am
Msg #382717

Re: Carefully dissecting the facts ...

"And since instructions were not followed, this loan may not be funding and will have to go through another recission period again."

I certainly hope these people didn't lose their rate because of this delay...

Reply by BarbaraL_CA on 5/10/11 11:32am
Msg #382731

Great response, Renee! n/m

Reply by nobhill on 5/10/11 12:10pm
Msg #382735

Re: Carefully dissecting the facts ...

Thanks for the helpful info, I'm including some of it in a letter to the company.

Reply by nobhill on 5/10/11 12:11pm
Msg #382736

Re: Carefully dissecting the facts ...

Thanks Renee, very helpful. I'm actually including parts of this post in a letter to the company.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 7:34am
Msg #382711

"I followed the procedure when the rescission date is incorrect to correct it by crossing out and having the borrower's initial the correct dates"

Who told you that's the procedure? Obviously, that was NOT the procedure, since you stated that, "in big black letters" you were told not to change them. The rescission period is triggered the date the borrowers sign, despite the dates in the body of the form - yes, as Renee said, it can be confusing, but that's the rules. I don't think they wanted to "maintain" anything, nor was any fraud involved - worse would have been if they'd asked you to have them backdated for the day before.

"The lady was under the belief I didn't follow instructions and left the phone call that she would report what I said to the bank. Should I follow up on this matter since it seems the lady thinks I didn't do my job properly to follow their client's instructions?"

She's right - you did not do your job properly. You took it upon yourself to decide the lender and title were wrong and you were right, and even though you were told not to alter their docs, you chose to do so. The term UPL comes to mind, and those are dangerous waters to tread.

IMO they have every right to be irritated and I'll be surprised if you're paid.....I'm sure you won't be getting any calls from them again.

Reply by SouthernOK on 5/10/11 7:56am
Msg #382713

If you didn't like it give the job back.

Linda has made a very good point, altering docs which don't need to be altered based on the wording would make anyone mad.

If it was that big of a deal, call them and if they won't correct the docs then give the job back.

Reply by nobhill on 5/10/11 12:15pm
Msg #382738

You'll Be Famous on 60 Minutes One Day

Actually, you guys just great the law and procedure as you go. Our job as signing agent is to make sure the recession dates are correct.

If you want to work as a robo signer and become famous on 60 minutes, you're well on you're way. You just do whatever a bank tells you, to leave their deliberate mistake in place? No wonder the notary profession is such on the decline.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 12:21pm
Msg #382741

Excuse me?

You were told not to change the dates - who are you to do that?

It's not necessarily a mistake...remember, the RTC says "the LATTER of the date of the transaction, the date you receive this Notice of Right to Cancel * OR* the date you receive your Truth-in-Lending....it's covered.

By the way...it's "rescission"....not recession...

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 12:24pm
Msg #382743

BTW, I'm no robo-signer...but I do know my position

my job and my responsibilities...and changing lender docs is not one of them unless that change is approved BY the lender...

Reply by nobhill on 5/10/11 12:13pm
Msg #382737

Thank God you're not my boss. I spoke with the NNA who agreed with me.

Reply by jba/fl on 5/10/11 1:50pm
Msg #382760

Knobhill - you spoke to the NNA? They agreed with you?

Wow - the blind leading the blind. That's rich. They give misinformation all the time, even in print. They will agree with you so that you will give them your money to keep their business in business.

Good for you! You showed them! (whoever they are)

BTW - I know I spelled your name wrong; it was intentional. Nobhill gives one an impression of class, status and tradition. Knobhill gives one the impression of backwoods, in the gully aspiring to move up on the hill; it fits better.

Reply by MW/VA on 5/10/11 2:48pm
Msg #382774

Re: Knobhill - you spoke to the NNA? They agreed with you?

I agree with the thing about the NNA here, too. What difference does it make that they agreed with you? Your contract was with the hiring party, which you violated by acting in direct contradiction to their instructions. If you felt strongly about it, the thing to do would have been to contact them BEFORE making the correction, rather than ASSUMING it was a mistake you needed to correct. I hope your E&O Insurance is up to date, even though that wouldn't cover this situation anyway. It was not an "unintentional" error on your part.
I would apologize to your hiring party for the mistake in judgment. Not easy to hear, but that's what needs to happen IMO. You can stand firm in your "rightness", lose the relationship with your client, or accept responsibility for the situation. Good luck.
BTW, thanks for the post. I think we all learned something very important through it.

Reply by shannon carter on 5/10/11 9:36am
Msg #382716

I have come across this kind of problem many times and I would have borrowers sign one right to cancel just as it is and then take another copy of the right to cancel (you should have multiple copies), cross out the incorrect dates, write the correct dates, have them initial and sign. You can let the title company pick the right to cancel form that they want to use. I don't believe this goes against the notary in any way because we are there to perform notarial functions, which means to verify the identity of the borrower, make sure that person is the person signing the Affidavits, etc. and notarize any Acknowledgements, etc. We are not the loan officer or an employee of the lender. We are subcontracted by the title company to show the borrower where to sign and to perform notarial acts.

Reply by OR on 5/10/11 10:03am
Msg #382718

Re: Shannon your right on.

I like your idea to send one corrected and one not corrected signed to Title. I've done that too. I is much better then a call from Title or the SS and a trip back on my dollar.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 10:12am
Msg #382719

"we are there to perform notarial functions, which means to verify the identity of the borrower, make sure that person is the person signing the Affidavits, etc. and notarize any Acknowledgements, etc. We are not the loan officer or an employee of the lender. We are subcontracted by the title company to show the borrower where to sign and to perform notarial acts. "

Exactly - so why would you take it upon yourself to have 2 *DIFFERENT* RTC's signed - in the circumstances of this OP, they had specific instructions in big bold letters - DO NOT CHANGE THE DATES - why would you even question it?? And how do you explain this to the borrowers? "I'm sorry - the dates they gave are not correct so I'm going to have you sign one wrong one and then have you correct another and sign that correct one too"...?? Correct in whose opinion? The lender, and title, have told you what is correct...you have no say in "correct" here..

Sorry, but this is MHO but jeez, people, do what you're told - ESPECIALLY when told in writing - stuff like this is why we have more and more hoops to jump through and why companies don't trust us any more..

Reply by jba/fl on 5/10/11 10:58am
Msg #382727

And lower fees as we exhibit stupidity and unwillingness to follow simple directives.

Reply by Notarysigner on 5/10/11 11:13am
Msg #382728

Not to mention calls like

Did you print out the Docs?
Did you finish the signing?
Did you drop off the Docs?

Reply by nobhill on 5/10/11 12:19pm
Msg #382740

Re: Were You Raised Catholic? Guilt Tripping?

Do what we're told? I'm taken back by your style of communication and very punishing tone. Banks are corrupt and so will you be if you do whatever they tell you to do. You're robo signer material, just do whatever they say.

Don't lay your guilt trip on me, go find someone else to bang on lady.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 12:28pm
Msg #382745

Me guilt-tripping? Not hardly-I'm not the one who

overstepped their bounds..

I'm done...you won't step up and own your own guilt - I'm not owning it for you...

Hope you've paid up your liability insurance..

Reply by indaberry/LA on 5/10/11 3:51pm
Msg #382787

Is there any chance that nobhill is

Cheryl Meril of Nob Hill Notary in CA? If so, that explains it all. If not, my apologies for the association.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/10/11 4:29pm
Msg #382796

yep..that's her.. n/m

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 5/10/11 1:03pm
Msg #382751

Take a deep breath, Nobhill

Nobhill - In your orignial post you asked for "any advice," and you got a load and then some of invaluable responses (Thanks, NR!) on how to effectively and properly deal with this particularly vexious BofA RTC policy - all of which you have rejected in the most narrow-minded and rude manner because you believe you are right. Nothing wrong believing you are right unless you walk right off a pier.

As Ocean Pacific said in the politest way possible - you have gone overboard. You stated in your original post you thought you were violating a law. The only laws you must follow are those contained in the CA SOS notary handbook. And I guarantee you that a how-to guide on filling out RTC forms is not found in there.

As a SA you are paid to follow lender's written instructions. Yes, as you wrote: "Do what we're told." When you don't, you tick off the lender, you jeopardize the loan, you may not be called again for jobs, and worse, you make it bad for the rest of us - many of whom have been doing this for years, and guess what?!, haven't landed in jail for failure to properly fill out a RTC - nor even been investigated for such. It is not up to you to interpret lender instructions, to pick and choose the ones you want or don't want to follow. You remind me of other notaries I am familiar with who have this inflated sense of importance and appear to be on a power trip - that somehow your interpretation of things supersedes that of everybody else.

Your "Go-to-hell-all-of you" reaction to all the well-reasoned advice/information posted here indicates you should slow down, look at yourself and wonder why you're the lone wolf out there huffing and puffing around saying things like "find someone else to bang on" (UGH!) and "you're robo-siging material" and then dragging the Catholic Church into it (and no, I am not Catholic). As Your Hughness advised a poster the other day, maybe you need to find another line of work. Good luck.

Reply by kathy/ca on 5/10/11 2:18pm
Msg #382764

I have to agree with the others, no way w/o permission from

the hiring company TC/SS would I have made any changes, no way!

Reply by JanetK_CA on 5/10/11 4:24pm
Msg #382795

It's not just state law at play here, it's federal law

The very existence of a Right to Cancel period is due to federal law, so that is the ultimate source that should govern the "right" thing to do on this issue - not the bank and especially not the NNA. HOWEVER, the BofA instructions regarding completion of the RTC form DO comply with the law. This was skillfully explained by Renee, one of the most knowledgeable and experienced people on this board, along with references to the TILA and Reg Z (the laws that dictate the RTC), and then reiterated by others.

This isn't just someone's opinion, it's documented fact. So I'm amazed that there should continue to be discussion about other options or any further action about this. Their instructions are legal. And while I don't think it's the most up-front way of addressing this issue, I DO comply with BofA's instructions about not correcting wrong RTC dates (in case that wasn't clear from my other post).

I agree that it's our first job to follow our state and federal laws. But beyond that, our next responsibility is to follow instructions from the lender or title co/settlement agent. And if there's any doubt, the best way to know that you understand the law correctly isn't to ask the NNA, imo, but to read up on the actual laws themselves. If you're not willing to plow through the volumes of federal law on these issues, my next choice would be to listen to someone I respect who has read them - like Renee or PAW, or a few others here...

It might be helpful to keep in mind that just because someone stands in front of a group of people. claims to be an expert and teaches it to others doesn't mean that they are infallible. I've seen too many comments here referring to something they remember from their training as gospel. It's also possible that they don't remember it right, didn't catch it all the first time or didn't really get it right. That's normal when being exposed to lots of new information at one time. That's why it's so important for us all to later go back to the ultimate sources and fine tune what we think we know!

Reply by LKT/CA on 5/10/11 5:23pm
Msg #382800

Re: It's not just state law at play here, it's federal law

<<<Their instructions are legal. And while I don't think it's the most up-front way of addressing this issue, I DO comply with BofA's instructions about not correcting wrong RTC dates....>>>

Something just seems odd/deceptive/sneaky about written instructions to NOT correct the RTC dates to reflect the current day it is signed and the correct 3rd business day. It may be legal, but it is misleading. I don't believe too many Notaries are used to seeing instructions that say DON'T change the RTC dates to reflect the current/correct dates. Typically we line thru the incorrect dates and write the correct dates and have the borrowers initial the corrections.

So now the Notary has to FURTHER explain to the borrowers that even though the transaction date on the form says <for example> May 9, 2011, they actually signed the RTC form on May 10, 2011 and because each received their two copies of the RTC and a copy of the Truth-In-Lending disclosure, the RTC period begins today May 10, 2011 and NOT as of May 9, 2011 even though May 9, 2011 is typed on the form as the transaction date.

If the rest of the loan docs have the date of October 23, 1942, so be it but the RTC form transaction date and its corresponding 3rd business day date should reflect the date the borrower actually signed it. Written instructions to NOT correct the wrong dates on the RTC form to reflect the TRUE transaction date and correct 3rd business day is just underhanded and a way to deceive people, in my opinion.

Reply by jba/fl on 5/10/11 5:39pm
Msg #382801

Re: It's not just state law at play here, it's federal law

"So now the Notary has to FURTHER explain to the borrowers "

If the notary does, then the notary is interpreting - does that cross the line into UPL?

Reply by Pat/IL on 5/10/11 6:12pm
Msg #382804

For the sake of argument

TILA/Reg Z states in relevant part:

226.23 (3)
The consumer may exercise the right to rescind until midnight of the third business day following consumation, delivery of the notice required by paragraph (b) of this section, or delivery of all material disclosures, WHICHEVER OCCURS LAST. [emphasis mine]

226.23 (4) (b) (1)
[In part] The notice shall be on a separate document that identifies the transaction and shall clearly and conspicuously disclose the following...

...(v) The date the rescission period expires.

I regard the job of the notary signing agent to be an extension of the duty of the title or escrow company. The title agent is not liable, as far as I know, for any failure to follow unlawful instructions of the lender. And, so should not be the signing agent.

That is my opinion. I typed text from Reg Z that I find to be relevant. I have not read case law, but it seems clear to me. I would encourage anyone interested to read the TILA for yourself, and reach your own conclusions.

I am not an attorney and this is not legal advice. Only internet banter.

Reply by LKT/CA on 5/10/11 10:53pm
Msg #382824

Re: It's not just state law at play here, it's federal law

<<<If the notary does, then the notary is interpreting - does that cross the line into UPL?>>>

How is it interpreting (or possibly UPL) to CLARIFY to the borrower that the RTC midnight of the third business day starts from the day they sign the RTC even though the transaction date shown on the RTC is NOT the current day they are actually signing the RTC?

If I were a borrower, I would question why the transaction date is a date other than the day I am signing the RTC and I would be concerned that my 3 day RTC is shortened because of that transaction date - and would therefore be reluctant to sign the RTC as it is written. I'd want that date corrected and initialed on the spot.

Clarifying something is not IMHO interpreting or UPL.

Reply by janCA on 5/11/11 7:00pm
Msg #382931

If they have a problem w/lender instructions...

then tell them to contact their LO. Plain and simple.