Posted by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 4:03pm
Msg #426702

Rude or educating?

So, I wonder... what you guys think. I don't particularly *care* about what you think as to how I handled it because I would always do what I did, but I wonder if it it's what you might do if it were you. I hope that makes sense. The question being, if you witnessed a notary in the middle of doing something wrong, would you speak up and correct them? Even if it embarrassed them?

This is, of course, a CA specific situation, but I think it may generally apply to everyone.

I was in a UPS store this morning for a USAA deposit. I had to sit and wait because the young lady, a notary, was with a client notarizing 6 different signatures.

I really tried to bite my tongue, be polite and just let her do her thing, but I had to speak up!

First she did the ditto mark and diagonal thing in her journal, which, in CA is a big no-no. Then she just handed him a stack of 6 loose forms for him to attach later where he needed them in the pile of documents.

When I saw her draw the diagonals, I lost it... I'll admit it. I interrupted her, apologized for doing so, and let her know that she's not supposed to do that. I told her that I didn't want to see her get in to trouble with the SOS if her journal were audited.

She said, 'Really? My boss told me to do it that way.' She had no clue that the diagonals and dittos were not allowed nor did she know about the stapling loos certificates. I went out to my car and handed her my copies of the newsletter from January that mentioned the stapling. She said, "Oh, I get that by email." I said, "They don't email this."

She said, "Sure they do, I get it every month from the [XYZ]. They never mentioned anything like that."

I pointed to her that the newsletter I gave her was from the SOS. She was really confused. She honestly believed that the [XYZ] was the governing authority. I gave her a copy of the meeting notes from the SOS that noted that diagonals and dittos were not okay, either, including the printout from the XYZ when they published about over 2 years ago. And, I reminded her that she needed to go to the SOS's website for information first.

Then I gave her my card and said she could always call me if she had questions. I was trying to be helpful and not get her in to trouble. For some reason, she clearly had no idea what she was doing and listened to everything her boss told her.

Her boss called me about an hour later and chewed me out, said that I was "Dead wrong, that the [XYZ] tells them how to handle their business and they know what they're doing because the do over 50 notarizations a day, [blah blah blah]," and she included their rep from the [XYZ] told them that diagonals were okay. Apparently, that organization has area reps that have regular contact with these stores (I'm sure just to upsell their materials and services). She said that stapling was inconvenient and that their customers just get upset about it anyway. Really? Who cares what the State says when your customer is upset about removing a staple, that makes sense.

I told her that the handbook is clear about this (one act per line, each line/act must contain specific information) and the paperwork I gave her employee were copies of newsletter and meeting minutes direct from the Secretary of State and a printout from the [XYZ] website and if she had questions or concerns about what I'd told her employee she was welcome to call the SOS's office and complain about me.

It didn't really bother me...I was just trying to help this young lady understand, and I would do it again, most likely. I can't help it...... I'm a know-it-all buttinksy sometimes, it's a problem.... but really... my concern was that she was doing something that could get her fined by the state if her journal were to be audited - and if she is handling that kind of volume, the chances of her journals being reviewed go way up. I pointed out to her in the January Newsletter where it states that journal keeping issues for CA notaries is a major issue.

So, my question is... if you saw a notary, in the middle of the act, doing something you know they shouldn't, would you speak up right then and there? Personally, I don't have a problem with it, so long as I can back up what I'm saying and I'm not butting in with stupid opinion. That's why I carry copies of that stuff in my briefcase.

Reply by Jessica Ward on 7/13/12 4:12pm
Msg #426705

I think you did the industry a service.

Good job backing it up with legit authorities on your state laws too!

Reply by Molly/Ca on 7/13/12 4:22pm
Msg #426706

I would have done the same!! and one day she will call you Marian and say THANK YOU!!!

Reply by MW/VA on 7/13/12 4:26pm
Msg #426708

"She honestly believed that the [XYZ] was the governing

authority". That's what really scares me. They have been able to convince people that they are. I was involved with them (cert/bgc) when I was getting started. A friend had told me that was the place to go. No offense to them, of course, and I had to discover over the first couple of years that they are profit mongers, and I've chosen not to support that organization any more.
It's so interesting in today's world that when you try to help someone out you usually get the "it's none of your business" response.
You did what you felt you had to do. As I've learned, "no good deed goes unpunished". LOL ;-)

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 4:39pm
Msg #426714

Re: "She honestly believed that the [XYZ] was the governing

Yeah... I have a membership with that them that, thankfully, expires in November. It was purchased for me and I just let it be... but I won't be renewing.

I think they reason they think that way is because they are herded in to these classes where they do everything right there in one day, including the fingerprinting, photo and exam. They buy all their supplies right there than all they have to do is wait for their commission. For most of them, that's all they get for 4 years, and the only exposure they get is a hard sell. I'm not saying that they are telling people that they are the governing authority... but somehow, a lot of people *think* that's the case.

I've always felt that the one day class/exam setup is a very bad idea and turns out poor notaries. They only pay attention long enough to pass the exam (at 70%) and then they're done. I'm still considering an effort to require a period of at least 2-4 weeks before the completion of training and the exam. I know a lot of people hate that idea, but it will force people to study and eliminate a lot of the training companies who are just in it to make a quick buck by guaranteeing a pass. Well, sure, a lot of them will pass when the information if fresh in their heads, but they aren't using the part of their brains where it goes into long-term memory.... and then 3-6 months go by before the commission shows up and then they go, "Now what?"

Reply by Barb25 on 7/13/12 4:31pm
Msg #426712

Do we know what happened to the unimportant customer? n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 4:42pm
Msg #426715

Re: Do we know what happened to the unimportant customer?

Ahh, yes... he actually said to her, "If it's state rules, do it the right way, I have time."

Honestly, he didn't seem upset about it at all. In fact, he was apologizing to her for bring a big pile of paperwork to her.

Reply by MichiganAl on 7/13/12 4:44pm
Msg #426716

Marion, I saw a thread last month on another site about acceptable I.D.s and the so called "less but not more" rule. On one side of the discussion there were reasonable people saying "what's in your notary statute?". "What does your state handbook say?" On the other side were supposedly experienced people saying "it doesn't have to be in my handbook, the NNA says to do it this way." Oh...my....goodness. Makes me crazy. I ranted about this on my blog a few weeks ago and said the exact same thing you just did:

"The NNA is NOT some sort of notary governing body. They don't make the rules and they don't enforce the rules. They are a FOR PROFIT organization. They are a marketing machine. They speak in generalities with little regard to the rules of each individual state statute. And they are wrong. A lot. Just because they're the loudest voice in the crowd doesn't mean they're right. And just because you've always done it that way or that's how you were taught doesn't make it right either."

I keep a copy of my state notary statutes and county recording requirements with me at all times for this exact reason. If someone questions something or I see them doing something stupid, I won't hesitate for one second to point it out and back it up.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 4:57pm
Msg #426719

Yeah... I keep an whole folder of copies of the handbook, newsletters, publications, etc, just in case things ever come up so I can point people to a source.

I even carry copies of the Governor's veto message when he vetoed a bill that would force CA notaries to accept the Matricular card from Mexico. I regularly encounter people (including lawyers) who said that a law was passed to accept them as ID... and I have to set them straight. The Bill passed but the Governor did not sign it in to law. As much as we rail on the XYZ, they actually helped with that one.

[BTW, for any CA notaries interested in that one... you can view it here: ftp://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/09-10/bill/asm/ab_0401-0450/ab_442_vt_20091011.html ]

Reply by MLSA/CA on 7/13/12 4:59pm
Msg #426721

Marian, it was education and education is important. I am currently waiting for my renewal of my commission because I let it lapse. Anyway, my sister had to get a document notarized because she was relinquishing ownership of her car. I told her go to the UPS Store & have it notarized. One signature, one page, not difficult right? Well that same day she came over to my house and the UPS Store notary actually called her and told her there was a problem with her notarization and that she would have to come back. She wasn't sure what the problem was so of course, big sister had to get on the phone and handle it. I asked the guy what the problem was and he told me she needed to come down to give him a thumbprint in his book. When I pointed out that it was not real property and it didn't need a thumbprint, he said its the state law. I asked him where it said that and he said in the Notary Handbook. I of course argued and he said he would not record her document if she didn't come back for the thumbprint..... of course now Im a little confused because she filled out all the info and signed the book.... what was he going to record?? Anyway, I told him we'd be happy to come by with the Notary Handbook and show him he was wrong. We hung up and 15 minutes later he calls back again and tells her that she doesn't need to come in that his manager said it was alright without the thumbprint. Go Figure!!

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 5:01pm
Msg #426723

And this in a state with strict education, exam and

background check requirements! I feel really bad for notaries in other states who have little regulation or guidance.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 5:33pm
Msg #426727

Re: And this in a state with strict education, exam and

BTW, the newsletter in January (page 4) says, "Investigators report that, either as the result of a complaint or as a result of an audit, a large majority of journals are not completed correctly."

LARGE MAJORITY.

Reply by HisHughness on 7/13/12 5:28pm
Msg #426725

I think you butted into something you shouldn't have

The journal issue is her problem, not the signer's. It would not impact the validity of the notarization. If you were going to point that out, you should have done so out of the presence of the signer.

As to the stapling, that would impact what the signer left the shop with. I think I would have walked out with him, and pointed out to him the problem, then let him deal with it.

Then I would find another UPS store to do my mailing that day, and for the future. You're not going to be welcome there anymore.

The alternative to the above was to wait till the signer was well out of earshot, then point out the problems to the notary. The disadvantage to that is that the signer leaves with incorrect notarizations. The advantage is that you probably won't be barred from the shop as persona non grata.

Reply by Barb25 on 7/13/12 5:55pm
Msg #426732

OMG Hugh

Who would have thought you had so much tact and diplomacy. I think you are right on.

I am wondering whether this "customer" was consider at all. If the notarization was valid, everything should have been handled after "she" was finished. If not that should have been handled on the side so the UPS person could have corrected it. The rest later.

Always bad form to call someone in front of others. No matter how good your intentions. And I do believe the intentions were above 100%

But back to you, Hugh. You are right there on this one.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 7/13/12 6:34pm
Msg #426748

Re: OMG Hugh

I completely see what you mean.

In this case, it was actually stopping her in the act of doing something she shouldn't have. She needed to get the customer's signature on 6 lines (6 times) but had drawn a diagonal across the six entries to get a single signature. That's a big no-no in CA.

If I had let the customer leave first, her journal entry would have been incorrect, which, in CA is a big deal... can get you fined pretty heavily. The notarizations themselves were probably just fine, but her records weren't... which are just as serious.

Reply by Barb25 on 7/13/12 7:55pm
Msg #426761

Marian

You did what you thought best. What I said was just another perspective. Sometimes I think when we see wrong doing emotion overcomes us. That is not all bad by the way. But if I understood you correctly you wanted to know how we would have handled it not so much what we thougt about how you handled it. You obviously have a passion for what is right.

Reply by HisHughness on 7/13/12 6:38pm
Msg #426749

Re: OMG Hugh

***Who would have thought you had so much tact and diplomacy.***

I'll thank you, Barb, to keep such comments to yourself. I have a reputation to maintain.

Reply by PegiT_MN on 7/13/12 6:56pm
Msg #426753

I hate the UPS Store.....

......I think they're all a bunch of idiots......and your story just affirms my beliefs. I probably would have never stepped foot into that store in the first place......take your packages to the drop box.....then you don't have to risk the possibility of running into people that don't have a clue what they are doing and you have to spend your time correcting them knowing full well she is just gonna do it her way the next time anyway cuz that is what her boss and the [XYZ] told her to do. You're just some kooky stranger off the street that probably doesn't know what the heck you're talking about anyway.

Anyway.....you're a much better person than I am. I probably would have told her she was doing it wrong, announced to the entire store that they are making money by me dropping off my envlopes with them but yet they won't give me a fresh supply of envelopes and pouches cuz I don't have a UPS account, and then tell them all they should go to Fed Ex where they will get much better service.

Reply by sueharke on 7/13/12 7:44pm
Msg #426758

Re: I hate the UPS Store..... n/m

Reply by sueharke on 7/13/12 7:48pm
Msg #426759

Re: I hate the UPS Store.....

Luckily, the UPS store near me does a better job. Maybe this store trains the people better.

Reply by MW/VA on 7/13/12 7:38pm
Msg #426756

LOL, Hugh. It must be the veggies! ;-) n/m

Reply by Barb25 on 7/13/12 7:39pm
Msg #426757

last word hugh, okay n/m

Reply by Jessica Ward on 7/13/12 10:39pm
Msg #426787

Agreeing--the correction shouldn't be done w/signer. n/m

Reply by LKT/CA on 7/13/12 9:55pm
Msg #426779

<<<Her boss called me about an hour later and chewed me out, said that I was "Dead wrong, that the [XYZ] tells them how to handle their business and they know what they're doing because the do over 50 notarizations a day, [blah blah blah]," and she included their rep from the [XYZ] told them that diagonals were okay.>>>

Some people don't like correction - and in fact become hostile when you try and upset their apple cart. It's an upset to their ego to be told they've been notarizing incorrectly from the get go. Instead of the manager calling you to get more information and at least find the source of your information, she goes ballistic. Her pride was bruised.

A couple of weeks ago, I notarized a grant deed for a friend who's handling her late mom's estate. The ack wording had "in and for said state", which I lined through and initialed. My friend called me to say the escrow company rejected it saying I cannot cross out any wording. I got their number and called and informed them that their ack wording was non-compliant and must be exact pursuant to Civil Code 1189. The escrow officer then said everyone in her office was a notary and they get their ack tablets from the XYZ and they'll just "get someone else to notarize it". I informed her that the XYZ did not govern notary law but the SOS did. I also told her that the XYZ gives misguided and wrong advice - to which she laughed. I told her that she won't be laughing when I file a complaint against her escrow company for her notary staff completing certs with non-compliant verbiage.

I gave her the SOS website and told her she could verify the ack wording there. I also encouraged her to print out a handbook and review it with her staff. I also brought up the SOS website on my phone to show my friend the correct verbiage of the certificate. About three hours later, I get a phone call from my friend saying the escrow officer told her to just have me complete and attach a loose compliant ack.

Maybe we should complain to the SOS that the XYZ is misleading notaries and giving bad advice. As far as correcting this notary, I probably would have done what you did.

Reply by NJDiva on 7/13/12 10:40pm
Msg #426788

Far be it for me to be anything but rude AND educating...

I thrive on it...tee hee

Just kidding...but I absolutely agree, I would have done the same thing. I tend to also like to "help". But you know the saying...

The road to H*ll is paved with good intentions.

Reply by Notary1/CO on 7/13/12 10:57pm
Msg #426789

If the notary is defined as a public officer, you may have obstructed a public officer while engaged in the discharge of his/her duty. See California Penal Code Section 148(a)(1), http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/148.html

You may also be invading the privacy of the signer. What right do you have to inspect the notary journal?

Although your notary knowledge may be superior to the store notary, I would not interfere with a transaction in progress, unless you are attempting to stop a crime.

You could introduce yourself to the notary after the transaction. Provide your tutoring, if welcome, and provide the state laws or publications as your evidence. You could refer the notary to a state approved notary training course.

If the notary learns that he/she has made a mistake, the notary should take steps to correct the mistake. If the signer is already gone, the notary might use the name and address or phone number in the journal to contact the signer to correct the mistake, or contact the E&O insurance company.

If the notary has no interest in learning or following notary law, and you witnessed a notary violation, you can report the notary to your state notary regulator and let them do the police work.

By offering advice, you also put yourself at risk. What if your advice is not 100% accurate and the notary follows your bad advice?

The Notary Public Code of Professional Responsibility at http://cdn.nationalnotary.org/resources_for_notaries/Notary_Code.pdf states:

Article E: Fraudulent Notarization or Transaction
IV-E-3: Reporting Illegality
The Notary shall report to appropriate law enforcement or disciplinary authorities any illegality requested, required, proposed or performed that involves a notarial act by the Notary or by any other Notary.

Article B: Dispensing Knowledge
X-B-1: Providing Expertise to Others
The Notary shall freely provide notarial expertise to less experienced Notaries and step forward to offer needed corrective advice on the proper performance of notarial acts.

Article C: Maintaining Standards
X-C-1: Reporting Misconduct
The Notary shall report to the commissioning authority violations of the statutes, regulations and directives governing the conduct of Notaries.

Sadly, watch this YouTube video from San Diego, "How to Do a Notary" featuring "notary training" at a UPS Store at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul_m3MAL8kg&feature=related

Reply by HisHughness on 7/13/12 11:48pm
Msg #426791

Relying upon a Code of Professional Ethics ...

... promulgated by the National Notary Association is much like letting the Italian Army draw up the war plans for an invasion.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 7/14/12 12:55am
Msg #426801

Re: Relying upon a Code of Professional Ethics ...

LOL! Agreed! There may be some value in some of their guidelines, but they are nothing more than that - guidelines. Some of them might even be in conflict with laws in certain states.

Reply by sueharke on 7/14/12 2:25am
Msg #426807

After looking at the UPS training video, I can see that one day notaries will be even harder to find than we are today when the UPS store stops offering the service (due to a lawsuit). I think this is one of the more interesting topics in the forum that I have enjoyed reading and commenting about.

Reply by sigtogo/OR on 7/14/12 12:37am
Msg #426794

Interesting comments. I have to say I would not have said anything while the customer was there but would have said something afterward...if I were a California notary that is.
In Oregon we are allowed to do the diagonal and yet my local UPS store has them sign each line even if its 10 copies of the same document. maybe the California and Oregon NNA reps should trade places : )
My latest irritant was to find my credit union still writes the driver license number- a no no in Oregon since 2008 or 9 and they leave their journals out on their desks when they are away from their desk and don't lock them up at night! hello? aside from potential nosey staff what about the cleaning people?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 7/14/12 12:49am
Msg #426796

OK. Where to begin...

First of all, I think I would have handled this very differently. I probably would not have said anything about the way she kept her journal, even though I do mine differently than she does. As for handing over the loose certs for the signer to attach themselves, I think I would have waited until the notary was finished with her customer and then would have talked with her. (Some things I can't ignore, either.) Offering her a copy of the SOS newsletter and letting her know that the SOS is the REAL authority, I think was a very good idea. It really bothers me, too, when I run into people who think XYZ is the god of the notary world!

However, I think that some of the things that you state here as being "clear" in our handbook are really just your interpretations of what the handbook says. For example, the issue of diagonal lines and ditto marks, while I don't like them, are not even mentioned - at all. There is also no mention whatsoever that I could find of the "one act per line"; not in the handbook or in the newsletter. It just states what information must be included and I believe there are potentially different ways of interpreting how to best include that info.

There are other things stated there that might lead a person to believe that that is what is intended and you might even get corroboration from a person in the SOS office that it is so, but then again, you might also get a different answer. So I think it's a bit presumptuous to tell another notary that this or that is "a big no-no" in California unless it's specifically stated as such in the code. It's not that cut and dried, imo. And while I greatly respect your research on various notarial issues, there are other smart, very competent CA notaries who have been doing this for a lot longer than you have who see these issues differently. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think it might be a good idea to temper some of your comments by noting that these are your opinions rather than absolute fact.

When you read into the language things that are not explicitly stated and then speak of it as if it's indisputable, I think you potentially mislead others. Here's your own great advice:

"so long as I can back up what I'm saying and I'm not butting in with stupid opinion."

I wouldn't have called it stupid, but I think some of this is opinion, nonetheless. Again, I think it's a good idea to be mindful of the difference between what you're inferring from the text and what is explicitly stated. Sometimes there is more than one way to read something (grammatically and otherwise), even though you may feel absolutely certain.

Reply by sueharke on 7/14/12 2:13am
Msg #426806

Here is the link to the Ca SOS newsletter where it states one line per each act. Since I also do income taxes for the first part of the year, I am glad to know about this newsletter and the changes I may have missed because of tax season for me. A big thank you from me for bringing this to my attention.

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

Reply by linda/ca on 7/14/12 2:42am
Msg #426808

"Here is the link to the Ca SOS newsletter where it states one line per each act."

Where did you see this sueharke? Did you read what was written or just went by the heading?

Janet is 100% correct! As an FYI: Drawing a diagonal line and one line per each act is a falsehood only to get you and other misguided individuals to go through your xyz journal sooner so that you can order journals 10 x faster than necessary.

Please slow down and read! read! read!....... and please be careful of what you post folks!

Reply by sueharke on 7/14/12 11:38am
Msg #426843

I went to the CA SOS website and went to the notary website and "newsletter" link. I opened the link and viewed the newsletter on my monitor. I copied the link to the newsletter. I also printed and read the newsletter. Yes, I did go to the original source to verify the information (thank you original poster for the information).

Also, when I renewed for my commission in 2010, the instructor for the course stated the information of one line per notarization act was the right way to keep a journal. He also explained why and how it affected notaries legally. For anyone who needs a refresher course, I suggest taking one if you doubt the information in this post.

Reply by HisHughness on 7/14/12 11:45am
Msg #426844

Found the comma, did you? How you doing on the colon and semicolon?

Reply by sueharke on 7/14/12 12:51pm
Msg #426852

Still looking for colon and semicolon

Reply by JanetK_CA on 7/14/12 2:49pm
Msg #426859

Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but in the handbook - both in the descriptive beginning segment and the Government Code - and in the Newsletter, the information there ONLY states WHAT information is to be included in our journals. It says absolutely nothing about HOW that information is to be recorded. (Yes, I checked again before my previous post.) As a result, imo that is solely a matter of interpretation, whether it's commonly agreed to or not, and whether it be by an individual notary, by an instructor, by the SOS staff, or by an attorney. (In fact, that's the answer the SOS staff frequently gives us about a variety of issues.)

My comments are not directed at the particular merits (or lack thereof) of any method of recording info in journals. I’m just tired of hearing from a variety of sources on a variety of issues, over and over, that “California law says...” when it says no such thing. It’s just how some (and sometimes many or even most) have interpreted that law, but I think that’s a distinction that shouldn’t be overlooked.

I feel the same way about the "less, not more" issue when checking IDs. It's up to us to interpret because our state law does not give ANY guidelines as to how to use what we see on an approved ID, yet we commonly hear people saying that "under CA law..." etc., etc. So I believe it's OK to say "good general notarial best practices typically include..." or "it's commonly held that..." or "I was taught..." or "as I see it", or this or that organization has said, or whatever. But I don't think it's OK to say that something is clear under California notary law when it isn't even mentioned.

By all means, argue the merits of an approach or interpretation you feel strongly about, but at least acknowledge that it's an opinion and not something clearly spelled out under state law.

Reply by Notary1/CO on 7/14/12 3:48pm
Msg #426862

Notary statute clarification issued by the California Secretary of State, Feb 2010:

http://www.nationalnotary.org/bulletin/bulletin_articles/for_california_notaries_a_signature_on_every_line.html

Also see pages 24,25: http://www.sos.ca.gov/business/notary/forms/notary-education-sample-workbook-2012.pdf

Reply by linda/ca on 7/15/12 12:27am
Msg #426905

I think the problem here is that some are getting hung up on the "separate line thingy" and missing the point of what they (the "SOS") are trying to compel people to do. Looking at the reference you used for the "law maker" "SOS" only and "not" the "XYZ."

Taking the information from your "SOS" source of reference given on page 24 and 25:

-----A description of the document containing the notarial
act must be recorded in the journal in addition to the type of act performed. For example,
most signatures on grant deeds are acknowledged. The journal entry for a grant deed will
describe the character of the instrument as a “grant deed” and type of notarial act
performed as an “acknowledgment.” If more than one document contains notarized
signatures, the notary public must record the title or character of each document.

---A notary public should not write an abbreviation or acronym to
describe the type of act. This may avoid confusion or misunderstandings as to the
contents of the journal entry and type of notarial act.

---A separate line must be used for each document. For example, if a notary public completes
an acknowledgment certificate on a deed of trust and an acknowledgment certificate on a
promissory note, the notary public must record on separate lines in the journal that a
“deed of trust” and “promissory note” were the character of the instruments with
notarized signatures, completing each line of the journal, in full. The notary public
cannot simply state that “loan docs” or “closing documents” were acknowledged.

On the last example, it does mention a separate line. Look at the example that follows, however, and you see that, as I stated initially, the line separation is not the issue, what they are trying to achieve is clear cut information of what is being notarized and the type of notarial act used.

They may have added, for further clarification, that all your entries should be made with the thought that "it is not all about you being able to understand" what's entered; enter information as if you are trying to "make it as clear as possible for someone other than yourself" to look at the journal and understand exactly what was recorded in your journal, hence the no acronym or abbreviation rule as they can mean something entirely different to others, even if it is supposedly universal.

That's why so many of us love the journal from this site, as it helps us accomplish all that is mandated by the "SOS," plus some; of course if we log in the information as stipulated by the SOS. The one argument that I can think of is the abbreviated Ack. and Jur. You can always include a key: Jur=Jurat and Ack=Acknowledgement, for example, if they are not spelled out in your particular journal, as the general public are not familiar with those abbreviations.

Reply by Notary1/CO on 7/15/12 1:21pm
Msg #426930

California law states that the date and time of each notarized act must be recorded in the journal. The journal entries must be sequential.

The statute clarification issued by the SOS in 2010 reads: “Government Code Section 8206 requires that the Notary Public’s journal include all the information for each official act. Therefore, each act would include the date, time, type of each official act, character of the instrument, signature, type of identification, fee, and thumbprint (if applicable) on a separate line for each act.”

Page 24 of the SOS reference given states:
Any member of the public may request a photostatic copy of the journal entry representing a specific transaction, and copies of specific journal entries may be requested by the California
Secretary of State, through civil and criminal subpoenas, or by a peace officer investigating a crime.

Consequently, each journal entry should be full and complete. (California Government Code section 8206(a)(2)(A).)


Ditto marks and diagonal signature lines are not in compliance. A full and complete entry is required, so that the notary can make a copy of a specific journal entry upon request or demand. Abbreviations (and illegible handwriting) may lead to confusion if a copy of an entry is needed as evidence.

State laws vary. Make sure your journal and recording procedures comply with your state laws.

Reply by linda/ca on 7/16/12 2:05am
Msg #426992

Notary1/Co........You only reiterated some of the points that I had already made from "your source" that only adds to the argument I had already made.

Your comment that: "State laws vary. Make sure your journal and recording procedures comply with your state laws" is a mute point; that's all we have been posting about is California law so I don't understand why you even wrote State laws vary, it doesn't fit! Perhaps you are just regurgitating something you once read? Trying to add some substance?

Not sure why your comprehension is lacking/or why you just keep repeating the same thing. Maybe "YOU" need to Make sure "YOUR" journal and recording procedures comply with "YOUR" state laws as the reading and comprehension may be lacking, however, I thank you for your attempt!

Reply by 101livescan on 7/14/12 8:59am
Msg #426828

Good points, Janet. There are several issues here. Calling some one out publicly I think is a major no no. I would have waited to be 1:1. PRAISE IN PUBLIC, PUNISH IN PRIVATE. I've had plenty of irrational bosses who just didn't get how berating it was to be lashed to pieces in front of other co-workers.

BE INFORMED. If you're going to be the BUCK STOPS HERE professional, know your stuff. Study that handbook again, Marian. It's not all in black and white as many assume.

Lastly, I've been a notary all of my adult life, and I DO NOT profess to be the NOTARY GURU of California. But I know where to get the answers I may not have at the top of my brain. I have OUTED notaries in my area when I see their lackluster work or unattention to detail, forged signatures, etc., but not publicly, rather 1:1. Toe to toe without an audience.

I'll bet that UPS store manager can't wait for you to pay a visit again. It's such a small world. You never know who you're going to meet again on this earth. Leave a lasting strong, positive impression, one of service and mentoring. Sounds like you might have been a little bulldoggish.

Reply by 101livescan on 7/14/12 9:02am
Msg #426829

Good points, Janet. There are several issues here. Calling some one out publicly I think is a major no no. I would have waited to be 1:1. PRAISE IN PUBLIC, PUNISH IN PRIVATE. I've had plenty of irrational bosses who just didn't get how berating it was to be lashed to pieces in front of other co-workers.

BE INFORMED. If you're going to be the BUCK STOPS HERE professional, know your stuff. Study that handbook again, Marian. It's not all in black and white as many assume.

Lastly, I've been a notary all of my adult life, and I DO NOT profess to be the NOTARY GURU of California. But I know where to get the answers I may not have at the top of my brain. I have OUTED notaries in my area when I see their lackluster work or unattention to detail, forged signatures, etc., but not publicly, rather 1:1. Toe to toe without an audience.

I'll bet that UPS store manager can't wait for you to pay a visit again. It's such a small world. You never know who you're going to meet again on this earth. Leave a lasting strong, positive impression, one of service and mentoring. Sounds like you might have been a little bulldoggish? If we're going to be an authority on disciplines, I think you've got to be gentle and sensitive to others lack of knowledge.

Reply by kathy/ca on 7/14/12 11:00am
Msg #426841

I totally agree with Janet and 101 in my opinion you crossed

the line....much of what you say is your interpretation. I could say more, but I wont!

Reply by sueharke on 7/14/12 2:05am
Msg #426805

Educating. Look at the FedEx notary that did not ID the signer properly and caused FedEx to lose a major lawsuit and no longer have notaries at any of their offices. It then follows that not following the rules in CA or other states, may cause UPS to no longer offer notary services.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/14/12 9:36am
Msg #426834

It was not a teachable moment. I would have handled it differently. I really can't say how, because I was not there to size up the situation.

When we sow seeds, it is best to put them into fertile soil. No matter how many times one plants a seed in a bowl of salt, it won't grow. There are just some situations over which we have no control and to attempt to assert that control (or, "lesson" as you will) it can yield the opposite effect. In particularly if humiliation is involved.

I am one who learns from humiliation when I have done wrong; however, most of the world does not.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/14/12 11:33am
Msg #426842

To follow up...Marian is an excellent notary.

She will never find herself having done something that is questionable.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 7/14/12 10:07am
Msg #426838

I think what *I* would have done in this situation

is kept silent, observed, and later make a point to go in and meet with the manager about it...not to report the employee but to let him/her know what was observed, how it's wrong and how all of them can be in a boatload of trouble if it's not corrected (in FL, employers are responsible for the actions of their employees). If manager isn't receptive to the information/advice, especially with my holding solid proof in my hands, then I'd politely end the meeting but let them know they left me no choice but to report their activity to the SOS and to corporate headquarters and let the chips (and fines) fall where they may.

JMO