Posted by NotaryMot/CA on 9/3/11 10:30pm
Msg #396242

Real Life POA Horror Story

I wanted to start a new thread on the POA issue if I may. First, I'd like to know of anyone ever hearing of a notary getting in trouble for asking to see a copy of a POA? Because it seems to me if so many notaries I've learned don't even bother to give the Jurat oath why is this POA issue so anal since checking a POA could prevent a serious crime against an innocent person? Please allow me elaborate real life scenario.

There's a growing trend of crooks in corroboration of criminal banks and corrupt courts getting their foot into the door owning a property by 1) sending someone to a notary to sign the grant deed as attorney-in-fact 2) victimizing the home owner by sending a contractor to ransack and destroy property in the home the police will do nothing about 3) when it goes to the court, in one case even when it was proved the deed was unlawfully signed, the judge overlooked it stalling the case because the bank would not give back the property of the ownership.

When the home owner, Sunny Sheu, began to look into the background of the judge who was helping steal his property from him on behalf of the bank, he was murdered after he disclosed in this video the judge's improprieties. This is one of many similar cases.

The Unbelievable Story Of The Queens Man Who Fought Foreclosure And Wound Up Dead

http://www.businessinsider.com/sunny-shue-killed-queens-foreclosure-judge-joseph-golia-2011-6#ixzz1Wx0RjG2A

Related YouTube Disclosure by Sunny Sheu weeks prior to his being murdered:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Tr3QChAy4Y

So, in closing, unless the corrupt courts want a trend of crooks stealing properties on behalf of banks, I would really look closely at the circumstances of each attorney in fact that wasn't a typical loan signing, such as "strays" coming in out of the blue without other paperwork, and also noting any suspicious behaviors.

I know most of you will be screaming at me, but it's a fact the courts are becoming more corrupted each day, especially in Florida and California. They so disregard law and procedure in fact that I wouldn't be surprised if they began interpreting the law to make the notary a fall person.

I personally think the law should be changed to allow Notaries to request a copy of a POA for all deed transactions and I'm going to send it into the California Secretary of State and Congress people to get this law on the books.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/3/11 10:41pm
Msg #396244

"Because it seems to me if so many notaries I've learned don't even bother to give the Jurat oath why is this POA issue so anal since checking a POA could prevent a serious crime against an innocent person?"

Simply put? It's because it's against the law in California to determine or certify representative capacity.

If you want to change the law, that's one thing... but to do it now is putting your commission at risk, among other things --- you risk being hit with a UPL conviction... which can put you in JAIL for up to a year for each conviction. It's no joke.

From Page 6 of the current handbook:

"California notaries public are prohibited from performing any duties that may be construed
as the practice of law. Among the acts which constitute the practice of law are the preparation,
drafting, or selection or determination of the kind of any legal document, or giving advice in
relation to any legal documents or matters. If asked to perform such tasks, a California notary
public should decline and refer the requester to an attorney."


See also: http://law.justia.com/codes/california/2010/bpc/6125-6133.html

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/4/11 3:05am
Msg #396270

What about Capacity? Why is that so taboo in CA? In my

state, for instance, one's Capacity is up-front and the sole responsibility of the claimer of such Capacity. The Notary's responsibility is fulfilled as to disclosures, whatever those may be, and the jurat was given to the Notary, confirming the signer isn't a rat per his own sworn act.

As for my state, I'm glad OR's laws put the onus where it belongs, on the signer. Not UPL here. We can see the powers of the POA, for instance. It's a clue to the entirety of the situation.

In general Notary work, circumstances are quite different than the Signing Agent, (often NSA) in the Lending Industry, where we have so many contingencies and contacts for direction and trying to deal with so many states' laws.

I see this important issue as a good argument for Uniform Notarial Code, or some system of standardization. That could cut a lot of loopholing for the notorious, couldn't it?
jmho, adr

Reply by John Tennant on 9/3/11 10:43pm
Msg #396245

You really need to read, study, learn, and abide by the state manual.

Also, you need to get a life.

Reply by NotaryMot/CA on 9/3/11 10:50pm
Msg #396247

Re: Say what?

Mr. Tennant, I'm afraid I don't understand the last part of your message that was some kind of personal insult. I rarely post on this forum.

Reply by John Tennant on 9/3/11 10:58pm
Msg #396251

Re: Say what?

Rarely Post!!!

Since mid July you have posted many times, some times very rudely to long time members, and many times with your post lacking knowledge.

You need to go away

Reply by NotaryMot/CA on 9/3/11 11:15pm
Msg #396257

The Truth Hurts

I don't think so, I post here very rarely considering many people post here daily and live on this forum. I visit once a week and sometimes not for weeks at a time. Who do you think you are telling me to go away, this is a member paid service. I don't believe I've never conversed with you before on this forum. If you don't like what I post why don't you go to another thread? Why are you attempting to dominate and control me? I paid for this membership like everyone else.

I see you're acting predatory checking up on my post history like a police officer, while making false accusations when I raise issues. I know notaries like the status quo and to feel harmony as such, but we are living in very trying evil corrupt times and I'm one of those notaries who raises issues and pushes for change.

If you want to be a "robo signer" that's all up to you, appear on 60 minutes on behalf of LSI like a fool obeying whatever the banks tell you. In the meantime, if you don't like my posting here, why don't you complain to management at NotaryRotary and see if you can get me kicked off if I'm such a problem instead of harassing me unlawfully. I consider your post harassment.

Move on to another thread before I determine you hold grudges and are an obsessive compulsive personality I'm sensing you are. I don't believe I've ever conversed with you on this forum.

Reply by John Tennant on 9/3/11 11:20pm
Msg #396258

WOW

Predatory, false accusations, evil, "robo signer", fool, obsessive compulsive. Are you sick???

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/3/11 11:32pm
Msg #396260

Re: WOW

I hesitated to post this... but what the heck...

http://notarymotion.com/

Click "About"

Looks like somebody has multiple NotRot accounts.

Reply by John Tennant on 9/3/11 11:35pm
Msg #396261

Thank you Marian. Explains a lot of things.

Harry needs to do something about this.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 9/4/11 8:14am
Msg #396273

I thought the "writing" style sounded familiar!! n/m

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 9/4/11 10:09am
Msg #396286

Is this legal???

"Per Sig. Notarization* - $10 "

The * states "two signature minimum" - is this legal??

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/4/11 10:27am
Msg #396287

Re: Is this legal???

I would think if one person asked her for a notarization and she refused because it was only one signature she could have a problem with California.

Marian could probably clarify - I am 99.9% sure that she can't refuse a lawful request for a notarization whether it is one, two or a dozen signatures.

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/4/11 11:11am
Msg #396289

No. It is not legal.

If she was traveling to them, she could add a hefty travel fee if the other party agreed to it. There are no limits on that in CA. (I used to be a CA notary before I moved to AZ.)

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/4/11 11:19am
Msg #396291

While we're on the subject.......What's an E-Bike? n/m

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/4/11 7:12pm
Msg #396353

Re: While we're on the subject.......What's an E-Bike?


http://www.ebikestore.com/

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/5/11 8:27am
Msg #396375

Re: While we're on the subject.......What's an E-Bike?

Thank you Sylvia. I never heard of that before!

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 9/5/11 8:57am
Msg #396378

Re: While we're on the subject.......What's an E-Bike?

Neither had I but I googled it when you asked what it was

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 9/4/11 12:10pm
Msg #396306

Re: Is this legal???

Technically, no it's not. However... if you're mobile and people want you to go to them, you can dictate any terms that you wish.

HOWEVER... if you publish an office address (as she does with nob hill) and people meet you there? Yes, it's very illegal.

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/3/11 11:21pm
Msg #396259

Re: You do need to get a life!!!!!!!!!!! n/m

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/3/11 10:48pm
Msg #396246

Can we move on please? n/m

Reply by NotaryMot/CA on 9/3/11 10:51pm
Msg #396248

Re: Have a problem with the First Amendment? n/m

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/3/11 10:55pm
Msg #396249

You've already been told what CA law is.

If I were you I would listen to Marian. She's a smart cookie and knows CA notarial law backwards and forwards.

There is no need to talk any further.

Reply by NotaryMot/CA on 9/3/11 11:01pm
Msg #396252

I'm not arguing, just raising issues law needs to changed

You think I'm arguing, I'm simply raising issues why the law needs to be changed. I never ask for copies of a POA, they're always offered to me however.

The law should be updated based on the times we're living in. Things change and so do the laws. I encourage all contentious notaries to request this POA copy issue be the law so the banks and police can't allow innocent people's home and belongings to be ransacked.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/4/11 2:10am
Msg #396269

But Shoshana, he knows what the law is, the question

he's raising is about the concept of Capacity. We're all in different states, and it's an interesting discussion to have.

There are many voices here.

Reply by CJ on 9/3/11 11:09pm
Msg #396255

I read the story, and it was pretty crazy.

First, "Sheu refinanced his home in his brother's name". How did that happen?
Then mortgage broker forged "the bother's signature" on a POA. And where did he get the stamp to notarize that?
Then the broker got a mortgage on the property. Again, how did THAT happen?
Then Centex bought the property FOR Amy Cheng (who did not exist). So who notarized that?
Then after Sheu (the wronged person) contacted the police, he started his own investigation and started meddling. He should have called an attorney.
Then they bonked him on the head.

It's not just one crooked POA; the whole thing is a mess. Either the broker has a notary stamp that he does whatever he pleases with, or he has a crooked notary. I can't see this guy calling up a signing service to send over one of us to do it.

Every time I have done a POA, the title company tells me that is how this signing is going to go. They have already cleared the POA. When a borrower says they want to use a POA, and it has not been cleared with title, the answer is ALWAYS "no".

Reply by Shoshana/AZ on 9/3/11 11:14pm
Msg #396256

Re: I read the story, and it was pretty crazy.

From what I hear, NY is a whole other world!

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/3/11 11:59pm
Msg #396265

Having not read the thread, my take for your closing

question: I'm liking Oregon law's admittedly full of "mays, shoulds, coulds" etc, I could suspect a rat, note that rat-alert in my journal, and sleep like a baby, not to mention swear in court under Oregon Law that I was justified for refusing to Notarize.

"The notary is not required to judge whether the power of attorney is valid for that particular transaction. However, if something is blatantly wrong, such as the document is obviously expired, or clearly says it is not to be used for the type of document being notarized, then the notary should not notarize, and should make a notation to that effect in the journal."

I have a right to protect myself in my state.

As to changing laws, that's a long, windey road. It takes more than one person, a sponsor on the appropriate legislative committee, and exquisite arugmentation skills, to name a few challenges.

First, you have to overcome the intent of CA law regarding Capacity. If I were you, I'd start there.

Best of luck.

Reply by HisHughness on 9/4/11 1:11am
Msg #396267

Despite the many fractious paths this thread has taken...

...the subject is worth discussing.

A title company is not always available to review a POA, because not all transactions involve real estate.

Any notary would be well-advised to walk away from any transaction in which there is an obvious problem. As, for example, an instance in which the principal is lying in a coma next to you, and you are presented a POA for him dated the day before. Would I walk? So fast I would scorch shoe leather.

Nor would the situation have to be that extreme. If a transaction goes south, any competent lawyer suing over it is going to cast a wide net, a net that surely will include the notary public who certified the signatures. If your name is not on the certification, that notary public won't be you.

Reply by LKT/CA on 9/4/11 11:25am
Msg #396292

The A.I.F. still has to present ID, sign the journal and give a thumbprint for a grant deed. If the crooked A.I.F. has no ID and uses two CWs, all must sign journal and the crook must leave a thumbprint. In cases like what you presented, there's collusion on all fronts - including the Notary. And if the crook goes to an honest Notary who notices the red flags, the crook will just dump that Notary and find one who can be bought.

Again, typically fraud of this magnitude has everyone on board with the scheme.

Reply by Claudine Osborne on 9/4/11 6:44pm
Msg #396352

Re: OMG Hugh too funny!


If a signer is signing with a POA then it is up to TC to review the original, not me. I would not want to be responsible for notarizing for a possible scheme nor would I want the liabilities.

This discussion has been an interesting read!