Posted by Carol Graff on 4/13/12 11:19am
Msg #417801

The saga goes on with Provident loans

Had to go to back to the borrowers twice yesterday--long story. Finally got it to UPS and thought I was done. 7:25 am today I get a call from SS---I did not notarize their certs! I attached one as they said they would accept that (just not my ACK stamp). So they scanned me the two notarized forms and I had to notarize their cert (not CA compliant wording) and they would also use my att'd loose cert for CA!!!!!!! I told them I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS BEFORE NOT EVEN FOR OUT OF STATE PROPERTIES. God forgive me, I did it just to get rid of this loan. NO MORE PROVIDENT FOR Me. I think the borrower is going to report them for all of his problems too.

Reply by Carol Graff on 4/13/12 11:21am
Msg #417802

Forgot to mention original post was 4/11/12 when this loan from h....... started.

Reply by SReis on 4/13/12 11:33am
Msg #417804

Only ever had 1 which resulted in 3trips.. Never again!!!

Btw IMO you should not have notarized the ack that was worded incorrectly. They have NO control over your notary section. If it does not meet your states stnds then it's your resp to make sure it is correct. Hopefully you wrote in your loose ack what form it was for because I would be uncomfortable with them having it otherwise since it could be attached to any random form.

Reply by Luckydog on 4/13/12 11:58am
Msg #417809

Re: Only ever had 1 which resulted in 3trips.. Never again!!!

Not to worry...one mistake with them you are off their "preferred" signing list and will not use you again. I had a closing 8:00 AM on a Sat. and the buyer's did not have an additional witness available that early on a weekend. I used myself as one, and that's the best we could do. Typically title will fill in the loan officer's name or take care of it when they get it back. They need to relax.

Reply by jba/fl on 4/13/12 3:49pm
Msg #417839

Re: Only ever had 1 which resulted in 3trips.. Never again!!!

"Typically title will fill in the loan officer's name or take care of it when they get it back. "

Now I am amazed...totally so that I cannot even think of how to put it right now.

Reply by desktopfull on 4/13/12 1:46pm
Msg #417820

Can't pay enough to do one of their loans. n/m

Reply by Carol Graff on 4/13/12 2:09pm
Msg #417824

Re: Only ever had 1 which resulted in 3trips.. Never again!!!

yes, I did write the name of the form--thank goodness.

Reply by Cynthia/CA on 4/13/12 12:06pm
Msg #417812

Provident loans are not worth the time or money - period.

Reply by desktopfull on 4/13/12 1:44pm
Msg #417819

I hope you don't get into trouble for using the "not CA compliant" acknowledgements. I recently had a run in with a company that insisted I use the "CA compliant" acknowledgements because the property was located in San Diego, I flatly refused because they wouldn't allow me to strike the "under penalty of perjury of CA law" phrase. I responded that I attached an acknowledgement compliant with FL notary statutes. She called back a hour later and told me that I had to sign the CA acknowledgement since the property was located in CA. I informed her that I had to follow the laws of the state where the documents were being signed and wanted to know when the state of CA stopped accepting other states notary compliant acknowledgements. She slammed down the phone without responding. Never heard from her again. I did get paid, too.

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 4/13/12 3:10pm
Msg #417834

"under penalty of perjury of CA law " Phrase Unless its use

is prohibited by the laws of your state, I do not have a problem using it.
All it says is that as far as the NP knows, the person signig the doc properly established their identitly.
That is what we do every day. So long as tht is true, the NP has not perjured themself.
Seriously doubt if California would seek to extrdite in any event.
Agree that it is silly, but I do not think that it is worth to effort to strike, and cerainly not worth it to argue about it with a SS/TC rep

Reply by Les_CO on 4/14/12 10:40am
Msg #417914

Re: "under penalty of perjury of CA law " / Ditto! n/m

Reply by JinCA on 4/13/12 2:12pm
Msg #417825

I will never ever do a Provident Loan again.

I don't like playing signing police, and having scared/pissed off borrowers because of Provident's anal-retentiveness.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 4/13/12 5:10pm
Msg #417860

I used to do tons of Provident loans. I found the packages to be pretty straight forward and of a reasonable size. Then I got one with a borrower from a foreign country who wrote his numbers a little differently than what we're taught here. He also had sloppy handwriting. I can't count how many pages I had him do over, but nonetheless, I got a call that one of the dates "wasn't clear", so I had to go back (a good distance) to get one page resigned. (I would have refused except that it was for a good client.) What really ticked me off was that they refused to fax me a copy of the page that "wasn't clear". I had to take their word for it.

Their expectations are ridiculous! However, there's no way I would have put my stamp on a wrong acknowledgment certificate. We would have had a big fight about that and I would have probably lost a client, but it wouldn't be the first time...

Reply by Carol Graff on 4/13/12 5:17pm
Msg #417861

Yes, this was also for a good client and fortunately, it was only 1.5 miles away (I went 3 times in 2 days). I have been told by seasoned notaries that we can use "out of state" certs for out of state properties. I know this was questionable, but I had had it with it all--not a good excuse, I know. But a good lesson. The borrower was so upset with Provident even before all of this happened (and with good reason). He must have called me at least 7 times the last few days.

Reply by LKT/CA on 4/13/12 7:50pm
Msg #417880

If Provident is so picky, they should have given written instructions to use the acknowledgment certs in the package since the property is in a different state than the signing. I hope there were no jurats in there because we HAVE to use CA jurats regardless of where the doc is being filed and I'd be interested in knowing what their argument is for the jurats.

<<<I have been told by seasoned notaries that we can use "out of state" certs for out of state properties. >>>

That's correct, BUT.....so long as the other state's notarial cert wording does not require CA notaries to claim capacity and I believe FL notaries CAN claim capacity (i.e. Mary Smith AKA Mary Jones, or Mary Smith who took title as Mary Jones, or Mary Smith formerly known as Mary Jones - something along those lines.).....

If those Florida certs had anything like the above in them, then a CA notary cannot complete those certs as they were. ONLY the person in front of the notary - THAT name ALONE goes in the cert, if a CA notary is completing a Florida cert.

The thing is, we can use other state's certs for docs filed in other states, BUT {another but, LOL} we're only to do so if the other's state's certs are compliant for that state. How are we to know that? We don't and are not required to know, and like you, I typically use the CA compliant certs as I KNOW what CA certs are supposed to say. I don't know about the other 49 states and I'm not required to find out, due to the fact that when I'm in the field completing a signing or general notary work, I have no way of checking.

You notarized properly - Provident just has "issues" for which I'd not do their signings either. Because if I notarize properly according to CA law - which I'm only obligated to follow my own state's laws - and they gave ***NO written instructions to use the Florida certs*** (providing those certs do not require me to claim the signer's capacity), they'd have to pay me another fee to return to the client.

If it's not in writing, it's not part of the order and if it's not part of the original order, then they will be charged a fee accordingly. JMHO

Reply by Carol Graff on 4/13/12 7:55pm
Msg #417882

thanks for your input, Lisa. No, they were all ACKS, no jurats which I know we can never use anything but CA compliant.

Reply by LKT/CA on 4/13/12 10:24pm
Msg #417888

Thinking back....I remember only one time in my notary career that I had a written request to NOT use a CA acknowledgment and use the cert already included for other state. It was general notary work and the doc (non real estate) was being filed in Nevada.