Posted by Buddy Young on 9/16/11 7:57pm
Msg #397696

signing company sent me the following form

signing indemnification

The notary has advised me that by not signing my name exactly as printed on the loan document, I run several risks.

1.) My loan documents may need top be reprinted and signed again by me at a later date.
2.) My loan documents may be invalid which may cause me to lose my interest rate lock.

Both of these risks I understand and accept by signing the documents as I prefer and not as the notary has instructed.


______________________ ___________________
signature Print name

______________________ ____________________
signature Print name


_______________
Date

Comments?

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/16/11 8:01pm
Msg #397698

Re: Hugh, I would like your take on this form n/m

Reply by jba/fl on 9/16/11 10:11pm
Msg #397717

Why? There are other real lawyers here - Huge has been

retired for many years and never practiced in CA.

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/16/11 10:29pm
Msg #397718

Re: Why? OK any Lawyer, n/m

Reply by Susan Fischer on 9/16/11 11:19pm
Msg #397722

Buddy, don't listen to her, Hugh has a fine legal mind and

may or may not chime in. But please don't dismiss him out of hand on her say-so.

Reply by jba/fl on 9/16/11 11:27pm
Msg #397724

Then you chime in Susie - you are almost a lawyer, you are

not such a slacker yourself. I stated facts, nothing more, nothing less. No personal stuff other than my nickname for him.

Reply by bagger on 9/17/11 7:54am
Msg #397730

Re: Then you chime in Susie - you are almost a lawyer, you are

Wasn't Susie a lawyer once?
In one of her 999 positions?

Reply by Les_CO on 9/17/11 2:40pm
Msg #397759

Re: Then you chime in Susie - you are almost a lawyer, you are

999 positions? That’s better than the Kama Sutra! Where is Huge when we really need him?

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 9/16/11 8:07pm
Msg #397699

I would take exception to this only because

it's not our job to "advise" the borrowers about anything. It is beyond our scope to tell them the docs may be invalid, they may lose their rate lock, etc etc. #1 may not be so bad.

Now, who really drew up this form? I don't think a signing company did.

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/16/11 8:17pm
Msg #397702

Re: The signing co. sent it to me and it has their name on n/m

Reply by LKT/CA on 9/16/11 8:16pm
Msg #397701

Bad form IMHO

Two sentences are poorly written <IMHO>.......the Notary is *presenting* the TC/Lender requirements and instructions to the borrower. This "sign your name as printed" issue is NOT between the Notary and the borrower. It is between the borrower and the TC/lender.

<<<The notary has advised me that by not signing my name exactly as printed on the loan document, I run several risks.>>>

Suggested sentence: The notary has informed me/us that by not following the TC/lender instructions to sign my/our name(s) as printed on the loan documents, I/we run several risks:

<<<Both of these risks I understand and accept by signing the documents as I prefer and not as the notary has instructed.>>>

Suggested sentence: Both of these risks I/we understand and accept by signing the documents as I/we prefer and not as the TC/lender instructed.

***I am not an attorney, not giving legal advise and have presented what is my personal opinion/suggestions only.***

Reply by Blueink_TN on 9/16/11 8:29pm
Msg #397703

My guess is the SS has a lender VERY particular about the signature and must have experienced some issues. This little form protects not only the notary, but the signing service. IMO, just another form to pass around the table...

Reply by MW/VA on 9/16/11 9:20pm
Msg #397708

I'm not an attorney, but I wouldn't touch that form. It

reads "the notary has advised me". We don't ADVISE the borrowers about anything, because that's UPL. The document packages contain disclosures, not prepared by us & we don't advise the borrowers about them. I don't know what the ss was thinking except that they see it as a CYA. If it were me I'd CMOA and refuse to do it, citing the wording "advised". Good luck. :-)

Reply by John Tennant on 9/16/11 9:54pm
Msg #397715

Re: I'm not an attorney, but I wouldn't touch that form. It

First of all, who is the signing service. We need to publicize the companies that are requesting unusual, and possibly illegal requests.

Secondly, I agree with Marilynn as it could easly be construed as UPL.

JMHO

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/16/11 10:33pm
Msg #397719

Re: I'm not an attorney, but I wouldn't touch that form. It

I will let you know who it is. I have the signing tomorrow

Reply by Buddy Young on 9/17/11 12:43am
Msg #397727

Re: Finish Line, Inc. Rocklin, California n/m

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 9/17/11 5:45am
Msg #397728

Buddy, you might want to read the Ratings and Comments

in Signing Central on this company -

Reply by Les_CO on 9/17/11 10:06am
Msg #397738

Re: Finish Line, Inc. Rocklin, California

I’ve actually worked with this company, although over a year ago, they did pay me my fee with no hassle, but I’ve never seen that form.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/16/11 9:53pm
Msg #397714

Nope wouldn't touch that one ..... but that being said

When we do our NSA work, it's our job to make sure the BO signs as printed on the documents. If the BO messes up and it cannot be fixed on the first document, then go to the BO's copies and use the document found there and make sure it's right.

As far as the legal implications, I'll leave that to the lawyer in the group.

Reply by LynnNC on 9/17/11 8:52am
Msg #397735

our job to make sure the BO signs as printed on the document

As you know, some borrowers sign with a scribble, and I haven't had a problem with that in the past. When a person's signature is legible, I have them sign as typed.

Could be a problem in the future though. I had 2 companies, Quicken and Finity, this past week reiterate that borrower must sign as typed.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/17/11 3:31pm
Msg #397762

Well, that's a different issue. ..

I have performed closings for both companies recently and have not had anything come back. And I had better not for that reason.

If the name on the docs is John Herman Doe, and when they sign that name and it looks like a seismograph chart of the Japan earthquake, but that is how they historically sign their name, it's a slam dunk. It's their signature by their sworn hand (you did give an oath, right?)

In fact, if I insist that a person signs a legal document with a signature that is not historically his / hers, whether it's legible or not, it's THAT signature that can be contested, not the person's historical signature, and if I make them sign a signature that is other than their historical signature of those names, then I personally could be held responsible for any financial damages that occur due to my actions. Not Quicken, Not Finity, not any other lender, title or escrow company, but me.

"Signing as printed" does not legally mean legible, or block lettering (that would be the literal meaning of the term "sign as printed" would it not?). It means their full names, or however their name is represented below the signature line as long as that is one of the names they have historically used.


Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, but rather than rely on common sense, which should actually be enough in this case, I did see mine after we had that discussion a few days ago because I close on occasion for companies that have "sign as printed" in their instruction packet and I wanted to get clarification. But don't take my word that my attorney said that, see your own attorney. I see mine often as we have been friends since Vietnam and I trust him far more than a desk clerk who writes instructions at any loan / escrow / title company.

Phew!!!! 'Nuff of that ..... Time to go golfing .... 2:30 PDT Tee-time.

Reply by Les_CO on 9/16/11 11:26pm
Msg #397723

Wow…Signing companies are now preparing the docs? I too would sure like to know who sent you that form.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 9/17/11 8:52am
Msg #397734

I don't think the ss prepared that doc

It is very similar to one I use.
I got mine from PAW years ago.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/17/11 11:08am
Msg #397742

Re: I don't think the ss prepared that doc

How's it worded? I just looked at his data base and I could not find any similar form.

Reply by MistarellaFL on 9/18/11 10:07am
Msg #397802

Almost verbatim, doesn't say indemnification n/m

Reply by jnew on 9/17/11 11:21am
Msg #397745

If this is the sign of the times for witnessing documents, I certainly dislike the direction that the closing process is going. I would like to know if this is a lender, title or signing service requirement. As far as signing service requirements, they tend to add some requirements to the process that are not part of the closing and at times make no sense. The title companies, as far as I know, do not require any "style" requirements to a signature and rely strictly on the notarial act to fulfill all title requrements. Which leaves the lenders. They may be reacting to the recent robo-fraud controversy. I would like them to define, how anyone can determine the adequacy of a signature. I would also like them to define the point at which an adequate signature becomes an inadequate signature. I would also like them to point out the consequences to the law or established lending procedures, if the signature is not compliant. This whole matter seems to be arbitrary and difficult for the notary to comply with effectively.

Reply by JandB on 9/17/11 1:41pm
Msg #397749

What to do?

I think if I see that form in a package I will contact the title company and request a rewrite of the first sentence. I think it could read "I have been advised by the lender" and leave the notary out of it. Then it would be up to the borrower if they want to sign it with the scrawled signature or contact their lender to discuss it and request instructions.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 9/18/11 1:07pm
Msg #397812

Re: What to do?

Agreed, that is something that should come from the lender