Posted by Marian_in_CA on 1/19/12 3:16am
Msg #409432

Major BIG information for California notaries...

According to the information in the latest annual newsletter... we MUST staple (not tape or paperclip) loose notarial certificates to the document.

Page 2: "The certificate of acknowledgment must be endorsed on or stapled to the instrument. Taping or paper-clipping the certificate of acknowledgment to the document is not permitted."

and Page 4: "The jurat must be endorsed on or stapled to the instrument. Taping or paper-clipping the jurat to the document is not permitted."

This is going to really upset a lot of title/escrow companies. Heheh... in way though, it makes me laugh. At least now I can pull this out and tell them, "Sorry, state law requires a staple. Take it up with the Secretary of State."

Not that many of us did it anyway... but only notaries employed by a bank can do protests now. And... any document that legally requires a thumbprint cannot utilize a subscribing witness. (Note that's subscribing witness, not credible witness).




There are also several other things that are really spelled out. It makes me shake my head knowing that a lot of this needs to be published... things like:

1. Your notarial certificates must be in English. That includes pre-written certificates on documents in a foreign language.
2. The certificate, your seal and signature must all be on the same page.
3. You should only place your seal on the certificate and not on every page of the document. Nor should the impression span across several pages.
4. The only IDs you can accept are the ones listed in the handbook.
5. When they ask you to disclose all convictions when you renew your commission, you really have to disclose them.
6. Dating, signing and affixing your official seal without a certificate does not constitute a notarial act.


Seriously... there must be some really dumb notaries out there.

And the really scary bit?

"Investigators report that, either as the result of a complaint regarding notarial misconduct or as a result of an audit, a large majority of journals are not completed correctly."

LARGE MAJORITY?? Holy cow.

IN a way, though... that goes to show you that the current education requirements pretty much fail if most notaries aren't doing it right. But then, I know from personal experience that there are a LOT of dumb instructors out there, too, who give bad information.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/19/12 3:25am
Msg #409433

whoops... I totally missed rengel's post below about this. Sorry 'bout that!

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 1/19/12 12:12pm
Msg #409453

What's an audit?

I posted yesterday, too, Marian, about how those whiny TCs will just have to suck it up re stapling! Finally!
But, I, too, was struck by the part that a "large majority" of notary journals are not "completed correctly." Yikes! The only mitigating factor here could be that the journals are from notaries who have complaints about them bad enuff to warrant a misconduct investigation.... so you might not expect them to keep their journals up to snuff. But what's with the "audit"? Never heard of an audit. I wonder if they go the county clerk and look at journals turned in by resigning notaries and call that an "audit"?

"Investigators report that, either as the result of a complaint regarding notarial misconduct or as a result of an audit, a large majority of journals are not completed correctly."

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/19/12 4:44am
Msg #409434

This listing of do's and don'ts sounds like someone from the SOS reads this and other forums - everything you've listed here has been asked somewhere by someone.

And yes - sorry it takes a state mandate to govern common sense.

Reply by Belinda/CA on 1/19/12 11:41am
Msg #409446

Where does this

annual newsletter come from? Directly from SOS?
How do you sign up to receive the newsletter? I have never received one.
Do you have link for this on their website?
Thanks

Reply by Belinda/CA on 1/19/12 11:44am
Msg #409447

Here is the link.

http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/notary/forms/notary-newsletter-2012.pdf

Stapling the certificates to the document is not new. It has always been a rule. It is just that very few people follow all the rules.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 1/19/12 12:47pm
Msg #409454

"Stapling" has never been a "rule" (up until now) ....

as far as I know (?). "Attaching" has always been the rule, which TCs (who seem to have an inbred aversion to stapling) have interpreted as meaning paper clips, which, as we all know, easily fall off, thus causing TCs to "lose" our certificates and then complain that we didn't complete them and thus need to go back to the borrowers and send back new ones - all on our dime, of course.

So, this is great news that the SOS finally has this in writing!

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/19/12 3:18pm
Msg #409467

Nope, stapling has NOT always been the rule...

The rule was that it be "attached" and it has never been clarified, until now, what method of attachment be used. Many people assumed that meant stapling (which makes sense) and many instructors may have taught it... but there has never been any specific method dictated by the state.

They used to always mail the newsletters out annually. However, this is the first one they've published at all for a few years.

Reply by rengel/CA on 1/19/12 12:05pm
Msg #409451

They don't send it out

I found it while looking on the SOS site to see if the 2012 handbook is out yet. It isn't.

My .02

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/19/12 3:18pm
Msg #409468

They used to... the last one they sent out was in 2009 n/m

Reply by VT_Syrup on 1/19/12 1:53pm
Msg #409456

In one respect the CA SOS office is like the Vermont SOS office. They like to make up "rules" and put them up on their website without providing a citation to the law or properly adopted rules that justify their claims. Virtually all government agencies I've ever heard of can't just make up a rule off-the-cuff; they have to publish draft rules and allow the public to comment before they become official. Once the rules are adopted, they are compiled and made available in a place like the California Code of Regulations, which is available at

http://weblinks.westlaw.com/toc/default.aspx?Abbr=CA-ADC&Action=ExpandTree&AP=I28B5B960D49411DEBC02831C6D6C108E&ItemKey=I28B5B960D49411DEBC02831C6D6C108E&RP=%2Ftoc%2Fdefault.wl&Service=TOC&RS=WEBL12.01&VR=2.0&SPa=CCR-1000&pbc=DA010192&fragment#I28B5B960D49411DEBC02831C6D6C108E

I wouldn't put much more stock in a newsletter than I would in the contradictory information that members of this board get when they telephone the CA SOS.

I mentioned the Vermont SOS is as bad; one example is the statement in their FAQ that we shouldn't certify copies of vital records. Sure, it's a good idea to not do that, but what law or rule says we can't?

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 1/19/12 5:35pm
Msg #409475

One might argue ...

While you're right that what your SOS states in the handbook isn't precisely backed-up by the statute language (handbook details that a certified copy is of an ORIGINAL document, actual law simply says "a copy of a document") - one might argue that the SOS is charged with interpreting and implementing the state statutes ... which gives the handbook plenty of power.

Since a vital record ORIGINAL is held by the Dept of State charged with holding it - and the paper document we mere mortals possess is already a Certified Copy of that original, all a notary COULD (shouldn't) do is certify a copy of a certified copy of an original.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 1/19/12 7:22pm
Msg #409488

Re: One might argue ...

One problem with the FAQ is it doesn't say whether the prohibition in certifying copies of vital records applies to vital records from all over the world, or just from Vermont. I don't know what the title on a Vermont vital record says, but the title of some certificates from some states just says "birth certificate" or "death certificate" with no mention of being a copy.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 1/19/12 5:42pm
Msg #409476

As for the staple requirement ...

IMO, it's a nonsensical requirement that serves absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Even the recording offices are going to have fun with that - pulling staples out of everything they have to record, to send it through the scanner. EVERYTHING gets scanned nowadays - everything will have the staples pulled out in order to do it.

What's really frightening is that perhaps now notaries will simply staple, INSTEAD of cross-referencing their cert with the doc it is 'attached' to.

I've never seen a statute that would negate the legality of a document simply because it was a bit tattered or 'folded, spindled or mutilated'. Removing the staple is the immediate consequence of stapling. Dumb. IMO, of course.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/19/12 6:34pm
Msg #409479

Re: As for the staple requirement ...

Yes, let's examine that issue a little bit more. The actual language says "...must be endorsed on or stapled to..." I'm not 100% sure what they mean by "endorsed on", but that doesn't mean that those words should just be ignored, nor do I believe it means that a staple is ALWAYS required. I DO think it means that tape or a paperclip is inadequate, because they said as much.

My guess (at this stage) is that the "endorsed on" language refers to a practice that many of us already follow, which is making sure there is information on the certificate page that uniquely identifies it somehow as belonging only to the document in question. At this point, I don't know that for certain and I think it bears further examination, but I also think that assuming that a staple is required in every situation is a bit premature.

I'd be interested in other opinions about the "endorsed on" verbiage. Any other "old-timers" out there care to comment?

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/19/12 7:14pm
Msg #409485

Re: As for the staple requirement ...

I believe the "endorsed on" statement refers to the notarial cert already being a part of the document, such that if compliant, it is completed. If the notarial cert is non-compliant or missing, then the Notary adds a compliant loose notarial cert and staples it to the doc (or uses an ack/jurat stamp if there's room).

For example, the application for a vital record form has the notary certificate (and usually compliant) at the bottom half. Grant/quitclaim/interspousal deeds have the notarial cert on the bottom half. Or, if the document is several pages, somewhere withing the doc it already includes the notarial cert (hopefully it's compliant). There's no need for a loose cert when the doc already includes a compliant notarial cert.

For those docs that need a loose cert, then we are to complete and staple it to the doc. As far as stapling goes - speaking of GNW - I usually ask the customer which they prefer. Those wanting only a paper clip planned to make copies for their records. Those wanting it stapled planned to immediately mail the docs. As far as loan signings, I've always stapled the loose certs to their doc. Never had a problem or any feedback from the TC regarding it. JMHO

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/20/12 12:36am
Msg #409510

Re: As for the staple requirement ...

That could be, but I just looked up "endorsed", and I'm now thinking that it's more likely that that refers to adding the verbiage with a stamp, like many of us do with jurats.

Here's one definition I found online:

"en·dorse [en-dawrs] Show IPA verb, -dorsed, -dors·ing, noun
verb (used with object) Also, indorse ( for defs. 1–6 ) .

1. to approve, support, or sustain: to endorse a political candidate.
2. to designate oneself as payee of (a check) by signing, usually on the reverse side of the instrument.
3. to sign one's name on (a commercial document or other instrument).
4. to make over (a stated amount) to another as payee by one's endorsement.
5. to write (something) on the back of a document, paper, etc.: to endorse instructions; to endorse one's signature. "

I've always stapled loose certs for GNW, but have settled for careful identification with loan docs which, like Renee said, will undoubtedly get into a scanner.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 1/19/12 7:13pm
Msg #409484

Re: As for the staple requirement ...

I don't think we will ever see a statute that negates the legality of a document because it a bit tattered or 'folded, spindled or mutilated', or even that shows signs of having been stapled, unstapled, and restapled. But a document signer could always claim in court that the document the other side put into evidence is not the same document that was signed because some of the pages have been removed and replaced with pages more favorable to the side that introduced the document. It would be up to the jury to decide if pages had been swapped or not.

Considering how often documents are unstapled for copying or scanning, I agree that stapling is nearly useless. If there is ever a dispute, one side will say "that's what I signed, look at the extra staple holes" and the other side will say "that always happens, get real." Some methods that would add real security would be for the notary to use an embosser on every page or to use paper with a distinctive watermark. I'm sure some SOS offices would complain about embossing every page, and the reasons might or might not have anything to do with any real laws or properly adopted rules.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 1/19/12 7:16pm
Msg #409486

Missed a word, meant "that's NOT what I signed." n/m

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/19/12 7:32pm
Msg #409489

Re: As for the staple requirement ...

<<<Some methods that would add real security would be for the notary to use an embosser on every page or to use paper with a distinctive watermark. >>>

I just recently notarized two Trust docs for a customer that - per the written instructions he received - required that the docs be embossed in addition to the inked stamp. We met at Starbucks but then had to reschedule because the acknowledgments were non-compliant and I couldn't add a loose cert because - per his written instructions - all pages of the Trust had to be printed on 10 lb. paper. So I gave him a loose cert with compliant wording so he could correct the notarial certs and reprint them on this 10 lb. paper (which was a little thicker than construction paper). We met the next day and the signatures were notarized and the docs were embossed.
Apparently, he and the wife called for days looking for a Notary who possessed an embosser. I was the only one they could find. Glad I made the investment.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 1/19/12 7:51pm
Msg #409490

Kudos to California's SOS for making an effort to keep

notaries updated on new interpretations of law.

I'm also glad to see a state taking an active role to restrict protests. These things are being used so fraudulently. I got a request this week. The people that are into these are downright scary and I would be happy if they did away with protests all together.

I also agree that a loose certificate should be attached by staple. Common sense.