Posted by Laurie Worley on 5/19/11 4:29pm
Msg #383747

This is a new one for me...

Did a signing back in February that was in a trust....borrowers had to sign as individuals, as trustees for trust dated such and such AND as trust settlors. Borrowers were a little ticked to say the least as on everything they had to sign 3 different ways. Title is now coming back saying they need a new ack from me notarizing for them as trustees on the deed also. Obviously I did the ack for them as individuals but now 3 months later they need another notarized ack from me for them as trustees.....first thought was to say sorry no can do I did the proper ack for them as how I identified them. I don't run across alot of signings in trusts and never one that they had to sign 3 different ways so what are your thoughts on this?

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 5/19/11 4:44pm
Msg #383752

That's up to your state's notary laws as to

whether or not you can notarize in a representative capacity. If you can't in MO then you can't (like CA)...

Also, here in FL, if a correction is to be made to our certificates after the fact it requires a new visit with the signers - all new signatures - we can't just amend our certificates after the fact. I would think that you'd at least want to ask them to send you the deed for correction if allowed by law. I would not provide a loose ack without a document to attach it to.

JMO

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 5/19/11 4:47pm
Msg #383755

Re: That's up to your state's notary laws as to

Linda's right... this totally depends on your state laws. Can you certify a signer's capacity? As she noted, in California, for example, this is a BIG no-no.

Reply by Sal Servin on 5/19/11 4:44pm
Msg #383753

They could have signed coma trustee on all.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 5/19/11 5:02pm
Msg #383758

"signed coma trustee"

If signer is in a coma, you probably should not be signing them.
Seriously, I have seen loose acknowkledgement forms ( which I sometimes use) that
have a section "below the line" which states "Capacity claimed by signer" which blanks
for such things a Trustee, Attorney in Fact, partner, corporate officer, etc, etc. As the notary,
you really have no actual knowledge of the truth of their claimed capacity. I have used these on several occaisions with no problems.
Again, subject to state law AND lender requirements.

Reply by Saul Leibowitz on 5/19/11 5:35pm
Msg #383763

Re: "signed coma trustee"; Bob is right

I have done several of these and the title co.'s/lenders have treated them differently. Some have had the core docs signed multiple ways and the ack. stating different capacities; other deals have spelled out the different capacities in the core docs but the ack. has just had printed language showing the individual names.
Please note these were in Illinois and Wisconsin; you need to check your State's laws.

Reply by bagger on 5/19/11 7:35pm
Msg #383789

Re: "signed coma trustee"; Bob is right

I have had both ways bounce back to me.
Since then, I ALWAYS check with the hiring party as to how they want me to have them sign.

Reply by Les_CO on 5/19/11 6:07pm
Msg #383775

Sorry not enough information for me to answer or even have an opinion how, and in what capacity the borrowers would sign the documents. These stipulations would come primarily from the lender (maybe some title docs) and they can vary greatly. Also your States notarial law also comes into play. What deed? QC deed? DOT? Did they sign ‘individually, and as trustees of the trust’? I would doubt if any ‘notary’ can give you an (credible) answer, and probably no attorney that posts here either. I would call them and ask EXACTLY what they want, and why, and what it’s worth to them for you to go back and something resigned.

Reply by PAW on 5/19/11 7:59pm
Msg #383790

When property is held in trust and the lender does not want to take it out of trust for the purpose of refinance, then the homeowners sign individually for some things, as a trustee for some and as settlor for yet some other things. Often, the signer must sign as all three on one instrument.

I wonder why the 3 month time. Seems to me this should have been caught 3 months ago and rectified.

When it comes time to redo the acknowledgment, follow the sample described in the Revised Statutes of Missouri - 486.330. Form of acknowledgments, item (5).

Reply by Julie/MI on 5/19/11 10:00pm
Msg #383801

Putting the old county recorder hat on for a moment

As ya'll know I was a former employee of the macomb county register of deeds office, where it was my job to reject any and all docs that did not meet the state of michigan's recording requirements.

Let me tell you it's a royal pain in the patootie to reject a document as we had to type a letter and explain what was wrong so there is absolutely no benefit for the lowly employee that has to create more work for herself by rejecting a document. That said, when the lowly employee has been doing a the same job for many years, the employee can remember which law firms and lenders and title companies have precisely perfect documents on a regular basis and those envelopes are opened first and the companies that always have incorrect documents go to the bottom and remain there as long as possible as there is so much work involved in refusing a document.

So, in michigan, the first line or mortgagor line, the signature line and notary acknowledgment verbage must match. It's a recording requirement. In michigan, we don't have the silly little capacity law that CA has and the original poster may want to check the recording laws to see if that's why the recorder may have rejected the document.
Now I have no doubt that some Michigan poster will say they never put the trustee/poa verbage in their acknowledgements and they have never had a problem, but that could be the recorder just let it go, or someone could have added the verbage to the notary block at the title company. And 3 months does not seem too long for a mortgage to come back.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 5/20/11 4:47am
Msg #383805

The 'right' way is pretty subjective IME

I don't know if I'm the one you're thinking of, Mrs. Williams, but I am guilty regardless - I won't "certify" anyone's capacity.

If we take just the example of mtgs signed in a Trust - I've seen them prepared in every possible combination, and of course I'll get title's directive on how they want the signatures. The reason I have to ask is BECAUSE it's so subjective - no one right way, though usually each person giving the directive seems to think their way is the only right way. I've been directed to have trustees sign as individuals, even though below the signature line is printed with Trustee, or even the entire Trust verbiage. I've been directed to have them sign as Trustee AND Individual, or as Trustee when the whole Trust verbiage is printed. It must depend on the lender, the title agent, the relative humidity & if it's a month with an R in it?!

But that said - the MI recording statute requires "the name of each person" on the front, signature line & notarial cert to match - "a discrepancy does not exist between the name of each person ..." Capacity isn't part of a person's name, and neither is marital status.

When I was in lending, we prepared the mtgs with full trust verbiage on the front, name & trustee on the signature line, and name only in the notarial cert. As long as they came back recorded, it didn't matter what title or notary did to alter the cert - and some of them did come back altered (trustee added to cert, or marital status added to cert). Still, the majority came back just as they'd been prepared - recorded. My experience would cover over 100,000 recorded mtgs, enough to establish a pattern (or lack of!).

Think about this - the front of a mtg has each person's marital status, right? The signature line NEVER has it, nor does a person sign their name plus marital status. How does including marital status within the notarial cert make everything match? It doesn't - it leaves the signature line as odd man out. It cracks me up that so many title agents INSIST it must have the marital status in the cert so it "all matches, or it won't record." [sigh] Makes me want to have people sign "John Doe, a married man" just for cheap thrills.

Reply by Julie/MI on 5/20/11 7:19am
Msg #383811

Re: The 'right' way is pretty subjective IME

No Renee, I was not directing my post at any michigan notary in particular, I just know I'm not the only one and I know many will say they never do things blah blah......

Marital status is not the same as being a trustee of a trust, so it's not apples to apples because marital status is just about being a individual. But when you have a corporate acknowledgement or trustee verbage, it may matter in court if the person was signing individually or in a capacity. Must have been some controversy along the way that lead up to our laws as they are now.

There are other things that are subjective to the county's corporation counsel's interpertation of the MCL such as the stupid blank ink drama that varies from county to county. I had one come back because we it was the first of the month and I put the previous month in, crossed out and wrote the proper month in. Title said it was rejected because I didn't initial the change. There is nothing in the notary laws or recording laws that state the notary must initial. I called the county and the admitted I was right and off it went back and recorded unitialed.

I was a title person first, a notary second and a reader of notary message boards third. And I don't overthink and inteperate what has been working for me since 1983 when I was instructed by the owner of the title company I worked for.