Posted by HisHughness on 12/28/12 6:59am
Msg #447947

The ratings system

I have grown a bit skeptical of the ratings system for NotRot.

What I am encountering is companies that pay anemic fees, yet because they pay on time, they earn 4 and 5-star ratings from those signing agents who insist upon accepting low-ball fees, and who think that a company rates 5 stars because it pays an $80 edoc fee in 30 days. That seems to me to be a fundamental flaw in the system.

Conversely, it seems to me that rating by fee would be simple and invariably accurate: $125 and above = 5 stars, $100 to $124 = 4 stars, etc. That would also have the additional advantage of putting the heat on lowball companies.

We all know that Harry is busy, often with adding bells and whistles to NotRot that we didn't even know we needed till he offered them. However, if enough of us ask, he might be willing to add a fee rating system to his list of things to do.

Whaddya think?

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/28/12 7:19am
Msg #447948

I think many areas need improvement...

However, as to answer your question and address your first statement, "What I am encountering is companies that pay anemic fees, yet because they pay on time, they earn 4 and 5-star ratings from those signing agents who insist upon accepting low-ball fees, and who think that a company rates 5 stars because it pays an $80 edoc fee in 30 days." - IMHO the problem here isn't with NotRot or Harry and Company - it's with the uninformed notary.

As for SC, my wish list is:

1. Can't have a notary listing if you're acting as a signing company - and if the members alert admin to it and provide proof, the notary profile is deleted (one company discussed recently really sticks out in my mind - even after being asked publicly to delete their notary profile they didn't)
2. Company does not have ability to rate in SC so it can't rate itself - which happens all the time (again, one prominent company comes to mind).
3. Purge the companies that are out of business.
4. Do not allow multiple listings for one company - I see listings in there for Jane Doe - XYZ Company, Mark Smith - XYZ Company, Homer Simpson - XYZ Company.
5. Fix the zip code search criteria.

And on and on. But all that aside, SC is a tool I don't think any of us can do without.

Speaking of - time to review and market..

All JMNSHO and .02 FWIW

Reply by Lee/AR on 12/28/12 7:56am
Msg #447950

Agree with both above. The star rating is in the eyes of the beholder and so is skewed by their criteria. Reading the comments is more helpful than just looking at stars. However, paying XX or XXX, while very important, isn't the only criteria that I take into consideration. (If they don't meet my fee, I never get to looking at their rating--it's a no-go from the get-go.)

I'd also like to see the improvements that Linda mentioned. Adding...would also like to see a company's rating no matter where they (supposedly) do business. Would also like to see the mileage search expanded beyond 50 miles because that limit cuts out half of where I actually do go...but realize that's area/notary-saturation specific and could be a real pain for notaries who are in densely populated areas.

Reply by Tess on 12/28/12 8:13am
Msg #447951

It would be most helpful if there were three drop down star

ratings for each company.

1. Fees paid
2. Payment history
3. General professionalism.

We could then make a decision based on what area we are more concerned with.

Reply by jba/fl on 12/28/12 11:46am
Msg #447965

Re: It would be most helpful if there were three drop down star

I agree with this one - the first two suggestions are good, tho still flawed. I like the idea of rating the specifics for each area of the company.

I still do the Orange search though - these comments tell me so much more.

Lee also has made great points....

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 12/28/12 9:59pm
Msg #448027

Msg 445691 (along same lines as Tess), but

I DO think that notaries who are not aware of what is standard, sub-standard, acceptable/non-acceptable, etc. won't help the rating system at this point. Most of us find it completely Unacceptable to work for slow-paying companies (60 days+) and completely Unthinkable to work for under $xxx for edocs . . .
but then, you say, I'm adjusting my biz plan to charge late fees for over 30 day invoices Or I'm upping my fee to $xxx.50 Or I'm doing only one background check, period . . . and there will still be those who say "That will never work. I don't see how you'll stay in business."

And, well there we are (I'll just stick to comments).

Reply by BrendaTx on 12/28/12 12:32pm
Msg #447968

No. I don't think you want we good fee companies

to be advertised...they will learn that they have a tribe of low fee notaries.

The low fee takers will even offer to take them cheaper.

I say leave it as is.

Reply by jba/fl on 12/28/12 1:33pm
Msg #447978

5 star, Brenda! True, oh, so true. n/m

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 12/30/12 5:10am
Msg #448144

Agree, Brenda - also, fees are subjective

There are so many clients that will negotiate fees, pay per location or need (rush, etc), pay one person differently than they pay another, etc. Including fees as a factor in the star-rating would likely bring on some of those nasty unintended consequences, such as locking a client into a particular fee zone.

What a client agrees to pay is between the client and the vendor. I'm only interested in whether or not that agreed-upon fee is actually paid.

Nobody needs to look up a potential client's 'fee rating' - they'll gladly TELL you what they'll agree to when they call. The only thing they will NOT volunteer is whether or not they'll actually hand over those dollars.

Reply by 101livescan on 12/28/12 2:11pm
Msg #447984

I just don't think there is a magic pill for this rating system. I think that regionally, fees are different, and hence saturated areas have lower fees.

I would like to see a change for prohibiting SSs from getting on this board and rating themselves, and for posting like they are notaries, bullying, abusing and creating a toxic environment for this forum. It's simply inappropriate and deceptive.

Reply by MW/VA on 12/28/12 2:48pm
Msg #447991

IMO, there's always room for improvement, but the

system is only as good as we make it. I have never relied on the star ratings, and only view comments on the experience of other notaries. We are the one's who do the ratings, and experiences vary, just as notary expertise does.

Reply by Art_PA on 12/28/12 3:29pm
Msg #447998

My $.02: Rating by fees is virtually impossible and a really bad idea.

First, fees paid are not uniform. A company may pay notaries different fees for any number of reasons.

Second, as soon as you let your competition know that a company pays well, it will be contacted immediately by your competitors and by signing services. The notary who works for $75 will be very happy and anxious to take $95 from the company you rated as ***** which pays you $150, and may do a really good job for the $95.

No problem warning others about a bad company, but every time someone posts about how great "Six Pack Title" is, it is solicited by the lowball notaries. A few of us lost a really good local company that way 6 months ago.

Reply by HisHughness on 12/28/12 3:59pm
Msg #448004

So, I gather a fee rating system ranks right up there ...

... with the Edsel in the Pantheon of Good Ideas.

Reply by Art_PA on 12/28/12 7:21pm
Msg #448016

Re: So, I gather a fee rating system ranks right up there ...

"Oldsmobile sucking a lemon" How the Edsel was described when it was introduced, back then. Today it ranks up there with Solyndra. Perhaps you can put Joe Biden in charge of rating companies as his next project.

Have a great New Year

Reply by HisHughness on 12/28/12 7:30pm
Msg #448017

Re: So, I gather a fee rating system ranks right up there ...

Or maybe find you a good ethics teacher who can explain why one should follow the rules and not post political material in the Discuss Work forum.

Reply by jba/fl on 12/28/12 8:28pm
Msg #448019

Getting the Happy on for the New Year already? LOL n/m

Reply by HSH/WA on 12/28/12 5:02pm
Msg #448009

Re: I had the opposite though, that companies ought not to

get low ratings for "low ball" offers (any company tries to lower it's costs - even notaries) but ought to get stars based on how fast they paid. Most of us reject low ball offers, and are happy to get paid quickly, so we give high marks for fast pay.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 12/28/12 9:55pm
Msg #448026

I completely disagree.

I'm sure that's true, but I think that's part of the problem - and I think that's the point the seasoned notaries who posted in this thread are trying to make. I believe that approach makes the ratings less useful.

IMO, payment within 30 days should be expected, not something that deserves a high rating. If they pay faster, I just consider that a bonus, but not something that determines the quality of a company. If they DON'T pay timely, they should lose stars, but I don't believe paying faster than 30 days is enough to deserve a high rating. Keep in mind that the listings in SC are also used by many to decide whether or not they want to apply to a company to get into their database, not just as a guide to decide whether or not to accept an offer for an assignment.

Issues that I would like to see people take into consideration when rating companies include the following:

* How well do they pay? I care much more about how *much* they will pay than how quickly the check comes. With enough work consistently filling my pipeline, I don't care how long it takes to receive the check as long as it's net 30 or soon thereafter. If you're being paid enough, once you get a good list of clients, you don't have to live so close to the edge that a fast payment makes that much difference. That should be a goal, at least, imo.

* How are they to work with? Do they conduct themselves professionally? Is someone reachable after hours or on weekends if there are issues (like problems with docs, etc.) Can they be trusted to do what they say?

* Do they treat the notary with respect or are they babysitters, constantly checking on you for every step, threatening to doc your pay, presenting very long lists of detailed instructions.

* Are they well organized? There are so many things I could add here...

* Are they willing to work with you under exceptional circumstances? (E.g. package is unexpectedly much larger than normal, the borrowers are late or a no show, or no acceptable ID, etc.)

* Do they treat you fairly if someone tries to throw you under the bus? (E.g. an inexperienced LO who blames the notary for his/her own incompetence.)

* If you're asked to do something contrary to your state's notary laws by a borrower, LO, lender or title/escrow person (e.g. backdate, notarize your own signature, etc.) do they have your back?

* Do they actually do something to earn their cut of the fee, other than just asking if you can do one sometime today in ABC City, then giving you a name and phone number?

I'd be interested in hearing about any other criteria that others think should be taken into consideration when deciding on a rating. Some things are sort of intangible, but I believe that lots of issues other than speed of pay should be factored in before rating.

One thing I DO agree with is that that's the thing that seems to be most mentioned in the comments section, unfortunately.

Reply by Budman on 12/28/12 10:02pm
Msg #448029

Re: In a nutshell

Companies should be rated on their overall service. A company should get 5 stars that pays well, pays in a timely maner, is easy and professional to work with. In other words a company deserves 5 stars if they excell in all areas, not just one.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 12/28/12 10:29pm
Msg #448032

Re: I completely disagree. And I agree

with Janet's comments.

And this is a prime example: <<If you're asked to do something contrary to your state's notary laws by a borrower, LO, lender or title/escrow person (e.g. backdate, notarize your own signature, etc.) do they have your back?>>

This month I was called upon twice to explain my separate Note attachment; both times went very well, but still notaries are on VASTLY different pages with what is/is not a valid notarial act within the Commonwealth of VA (and one I feel is a fundamental notary issue).
VA notaries CAN . . .

1. Take acknowledgments
2. Administer oaths and affirmations
3. Certify affidavits or depositions
4. Certify “true copies” of documents
5. Verification of fact

The 5th one "involves a notary directly accessing public or vital records to confirm or validate a signer’s identity credentials or to confirm facts about an individual’s identity or authorization."
[VA SOC Handbook -p. 10]

Essentially ignorance WILL water down the rating system because people coming in don't even know what's expected of themselves - let alone from a hiring party.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 12/29/12 8:41am
Msg #448044

"Verification of Fact"

Isn't that only applicable to VA's electronic notarization and new online notarization laws? Haven't looked in your handbook but I seem to recall that's the way to verify identity to do online notarizations - it's not for use as identification in standard "Paper" notarizations.

Asking - just curious.

Reply by HisHughness on 12/29/12 1:46am
Msg #448039

These comments are fantastic

So how about checklist, provided on the SC site, of the criteria mentioned? The star ratings and comments would remain as they are now; posters would simply use the checklist before assigning a star rating. The SA goes through the checklist, and if the company gets five checks, it gets five stars, etc. That would overcome the objection to specifically identifying companies that pay well; the pay level would not be separated out.

Tht would have the added advantage of eliminating the necessity for any major reconstruction of the section; just add the checklist at the top of the comments section where the poster can refer to it.

Reply by sigtogo/OR on 12/29/12 11:18pm
Msg #448135

Prohibit SS from rating themselves-they skew ratings

other have said this and I agree. clean up this one piece and the system would be much improved.