Posted by JanelWI on 10/19/11 8:23pm
Msg #401023

California AIF Notary Public Wording

Just wondering if any California signing agents could point me in the right direction for some online resources on how the notary public should be notarizing an attorney-in-facts signature for a Deed of Trust. I have done some searches and all I come up with is POA Affidavits for POA forms, nothing specific to a Deed of Trust. I want to make sure I understand this correctly. Thanks in advance.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/19/11 8:58pm
Msg #401036

I think this is something that is determined by the lender, not by state law. I recommend you try to get an answer from your client. I've seen a variety of different ways of having this done - and imo, we shouldn't be the ones to decide. You also might want to check the closing instructions to see if it's specified there.

Reply by Alz on 10/19/11 9:02pm
Msg #401037

I have a signing for tomorrow where the wife is the AIF, but

the TC provided the verbiage on the documents and restated this in the instructions on how the BO is to sign for her spouse. PM me.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/19/11 9:12pm
Msg #401041

Re: I have a signing for tomorrow where the wife is the AIF, but

Just a warning... there is more than one right way. What one lender wants will not do for another lender. Unless the tc has provided instructions, I always call to check how they want it done. (Sometimes, I've seen the verbiage all typed under the signature line, in which case I wouldn't bother calling. I'd just have borrower sign as typed.)

Reply by Notarysigner on 10/20/11 1:56am
Msg #401063

JanetK and Alz are correct, look for the answer in the closing instructions even a seperate sheet with an example included. That has been my experience.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/20/11 5:37am
Msg #401067

Okay...am I misunderstanding the question?

You're asking about "notarial wording" - that's not up to any CA regulation or any SS or TC - if the signing is occurring in WI then WI notary law is the only governing authority for you, and CA has to accept it...

According to the WI handbook, the wording for an ack in representative capacity is:

"State of....
County of....

This instrument was acknowledged before me on (date) by (name(s) of person(s) as (type of authority, e.g., officer, trustee, etc.) of (name of party on behalf of whom
instrument was executed). ....

(Signature of notarial officer) (Seal, if any)
....Title (and Rank) [My commission expires:....]"

Good Luck.

Reply by JanelWI on 10/20/11 9:50am
Msg #401079

Re: Okay...am I misunderstanding the question?

Linda, you are understanding the question correct. I had a cert rejected by a CA title company because I adhered to the specifics of my state. The property of course is in CA. They claimed that I was not to put the capacity of the signer as attorney in fact as she signed. I was just to put her name as the person signing. I was asking because this does not make sense to me for an acknowledgement and we don't do it that way here in WI. The person subscribed in the instrument is the person that the AIF is signing on behalf of. The AIF is not subscribed in the security instrument as the ack wording reads, yet the title company wants it changed anyway. I notarize many things for other states including POA's for many service men and women; I have never had one rejected over this reason, including CA. I feel my cert as originally done should stand, but the title rep won't accept it. She said CA will reject it.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/20/11 10:22am
Msg #401085

Thanks, Janel - I think you're right

Would it still be an acceptable cert in your state if you DO omit the capacity language? I'm thinking not simply because your SOS (or whatever dept it is now) has taken the time to address issue by developing a form certificate for representative capacity...however

How sneaky are you feeling??...

Call the recorder in the county where the property is located - explain to them what is going on (property in CA, notarization does in WI pursuant to WI law) and ask them if they'll reject it or accept it. I believe it's a federal regulation that they must accept it, (the exact quote of the regulation escapes me now) but at least then you know..

Or, cut your losses and do it title's way...depending on what mood they catch me in I, personally, would more than likely be making the calls....

Good Luck.

Reply by Les_CO on 10/20/11 10:29am
Msg #401088

US Constitution Article 4 section 1 n/m

Reply by Alz on 10/20/11 10:24am
Msg #401086

Thanks for clarifying. I misread/misunderstood your post. n/m

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/20/11 2:20pm
Msg #401126

Ditto.

That's what I get for posting in a hurry on the fly...

It was probably a knee-jerk rejection from the Recorder's office, missing that the ack cert was from an out-of-state notary. If it was from a CA notary, the capacity would, of course, not be allowed in the notary cert.

Reply by Notarysigner on 10/20/11 10:49am
Msg #401091

Re: Okay...am I misunderstanding the question?

I did misunderstand also..I also think that person gave you the wrong info and like Linda said, I'd call the county clerk where the property is located and get clarification. Then I'd politely let that TC person know.......my findings.

Reply by Les_CO on 10/20/11 10:59am
Msg #401092

Re: Okay...am I misunderstanding the question?

I’d call the Title Company and tell them to look up the Wisconsin Law on Notarial acts 706.07 sub paragraph b-3 , then the US Constitution article 4 section 1. Or to quote to the “authority” they are operating under when making their statement/ request to you. The person at Title may know some things, but I can tell you from years of personal experience that many don't even know their own States laws, let alone others. JMO

Reply by HisHughness on 10/20/11 12:02pm
Msg #401097

You probably are going to lose this argument...

...whatever you do.

The title rep, as others have pointed out, doesn't know her asterisk from a wholly owned subsidary. However, here are your choices:

1. Tell the title rep the certificaton is adequate, and you won't change it. Result: Deed gets recorded; you never get called by that title company again because you did not accede to title rep's request.

2. Call the county recorder, put her and the title rep on a three-way phone conversation, and have the recorder tell the title rep that he/she will accept whatever your jurisdiction regards as an adequate notarial certification. Result: Deed gets recorded; you never get called by that title company again because you have shown that the title rep did not know what she's talking about.

3. Just do a new certification without the capacity language. Result: Deed gets recorded; you never get called by that title company again because <you> didn't know your business.

If you find this sort of contretemps unpalatble, you might want to check to see if Wal-Mart has any openings for greeters. Or, since you won't be hearing from her again in any case, you might suggest that the <title rep> call Wal-Mart.

Reply by JanelWI on 10/20/11 1:23pm
Msg #401112

Re: You probably are going to lose this argument...

Well, I was very specific with the signing service that there were no special instructions...if "title" wanted it a certain way they should have specified it. You know, they, meaning title reps, may know what is going on in their heads, but they have to clearly communicate that in an email or specific critical instructions if the situation warrants it. News flash, the good signing agents do read them and the lender instructions too.

However, this is the first one I have ever had rejected and it is not the only CA one I have done. So obviously, it must change from title company to title company. There was nothing in the lender instructions about it either. So, either way Hugh, this is on them, and I don't worry about getting called back. I know what was done was correct. I think the SS and the title company understands where everything is, they were not rude about it. I just like to make sure I understand things correctly and when rare or "contretemps" situations like this happen...I choose to learn from them and be open minded (I also learned a new word today because of you, Hugh:-)

On a funnier note Hugh, a Wal-Mart did open near my area and I applied thinking I could get an administrative job. This was about 8 years ago now....they told me I was over qualified....and I might expect too much from my job in terms of pay and appointment. My administrative and customer experience was more than what they were looking for......talk about unpalatable!

Thanks for everyone's response, I appreciate the insight very, very much!