Posted by Pam/NM on 1/9/12 6:47am
Msg #408497

Article calling "Convenience Closings" into question

Just read this from Source of Title's blog:
http://www.sourceoftitle.com/blog_node.aspx?uniq=920
I can't say I agree with her and I resent being compared to a macaw...I think I'm at least as intelligent as an orangutan....

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/9/12 8:13am
Msg #408499

I disagree with some of what she posted

and I was going to respond until I read the last paragraph

"Call on the services of The Preferred Title Group, Inc. in Maryland for a professional settlement experience. If you are not located in Maryland, call on the services of an Professional Independent Title Agent in your area. "

Seems her whole purpose was not to put down most closers but to promote her title company.

I've read her blogs - for the most part they're very informative - but I think here she needs to realize that there ARE notaries in this business who CAN and DO answer the consumer's questions - and info IS available at the table. She seemed to miss the mark on that IMO

Reply by Carolyn Breckenridge on 1/9/12 8:26am
Msg #408500

Re: I disagree with some of what she posted

I agree, it was nothing more than self-promotion.

Reply by C. Rivera Chicago Notary Services on 1/9/12 9:43am
Msg #408507

well at least it was a bird comparison and not an ape!? LOL n/m

Reply by BobbiCT on 1/9/12 10:05am
Msg #408509

The point is "closer" or "signing agent"...

This is a free country. Americans have the right to make stupid mistakes. And we do it every day! To me, the point is:
Consumers have a RIGHT to choose an attorney, title agent or other "closer" to represent their personal interests, which they must PAY for themselves. The lender-provided "agent" does not represent the consumer/borrower's best interest; the steady work is coming from the lender, title company or signing service - not the one-time individual in front of them.

Consumers have a RIGHT to a DIY closing with no advice or explanation, getting exactly what they pay for: nothing. NO advice from the person collecting signatures and only advice from a loan officer on commission or salary or another interested party; i.e., it is in the advisor's financial best interest to see that the loan closes and is recorded.

I liked her article with the exception that it appears to me she believes everyone should pay for personal representation anytime they sign loan documents. Anyone on a lender's approved list who advises the lender's customer NOT to do business with that lender or sign those loan documents won't be on that list for long LOL I don't believe the title insurance company attorney or employee's job is to represent the borrower's best interests; the title company, too, has a vested financial interest in seeing that the loan is closed and funded and that title is sufficient for LOAN purposes. I believe in the "free to choose" theory.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 1/9/12 12:46pm
Msg #408526

Re: The point is "closer" or "signing agent"...

I think her article is incorrect/arguable on several points, but then it speaks for itself. Anybody who would admit running to a bird when it called "Mom" and then expect the reader to accept her position on convenience closings all in the same article cannot be taken too seriously. Not to mention the advertisement on the left about cut-rate title services in India.

Sure, if she's pimping title as the only closing method, try having the borrowers sign with overseas title work in the picture.

BTW, Pam and Carrie, we have been compared to primates, as well. I think if we did an orange button search we'd find that a while back a SS owner said even a monkey could do a closing...yikes! And now we're being compared to a macaw ... gawd knows what they call us behind our backs!

Reply by Louisiana33 on 1/9/12 12:58pm
Msg #408528

She is trying to supplement her own income

while putting down others. Clearly her only purpose is advertising.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/9/12 2:31pm
Msg #408550

Good response below her article

I think he made some very good points, too, especially about how many errors we see coming from title/escrow. Like Ms. Perry, he didn't pull any punches, and he zinged her right back with his last line:

"I think if I had a bird like Ms Perry, I could go into the title business."

Reply by jnew on 1/9/12 8:40pm
Msg #408574

Need for competence at every level.

I am both an NSA and a licensed title agent, so I have the perspective of seeing this from both sides. What was not mentioned is that there is a move by title underwriters to have their in-house closers refrain from making assurances on behalf of the lender. Most of the title company closers I have worked with in the past do not have a title examination or title underwriting background and are really not charged with providing answers to problems to substantive title issues or lender issues beyond closing matters. I agree with the responder that NSA are more fastidious in applying notary law correctly and I believe that many title people don't understand the notary laws of their own state or choose not to practice them. I had an issue concerning lender credits on the HUD on a refi I completed today. I had the answer readily available but I honored the settlement agents request not to discuss the document with the borrower. It took more time to complete the closing, but following instructions is what this job is all about, so I let them work it out. It always works better if those responsible for completing the task do it in a responsible matter. It only breaks down when the information chain breaks due to someone being less than competent.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/10/12 4:47pm
Msg #408651

So true - and great post!

Clearly, mistakes can happen anywhere at any level, so it doesn't make sense to point fingers in any one direction. We've read mountains of stories here about notary incompetence or just small mistakes. Also, many of us could retell as many stories of situations where we've found mistakes made by others and were able to get them to someone's attention in time to get them corrected and perhaps save the closing.

So I heartily agree that there's a "need for more competence at every level". But I don't agree with putting all the blame on NSAs, as was done in the Source of Title article. (Guess I should post this over there...)