Posted by Mung/CA on 3/8/12 5:05pm
Msg #414356

Question bout Sr on docs but not on ID

I know I know "more than but not less than". Has anybody used an ID w/out the Sr indication. the docs have Sr. I spoke to a rep at the State's office and she said that the Sr was implied so it was ok to use it. She said if it wasn't Sr the ID would show Jr. It makes sense but I'm still a little skeptical. Anybody?? I'm Ca btw.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 3/8/12 5:38pm
Msg #414364

"More than but not less than" is bunk. You will never find a law or court decision that says that.

Reply by Lee/AR on 3/8/12 5:47pm
Msg #414368

The thing is...nobody is born/named a Sr. That only happens when a Jr. is born/named.
So no Sr. has any written proof that he's a Sr.

Reply by MW/VA on 3/8/12 6:12pm
Msg #414373

That seems to make sense anywhere except CA. LOL :-)

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/8/12 6:16pm
Msg #414375

No... it makes sense here, too... there are just a lot of instructors out here that make things more complicated than it needs to be and they put out a lot of nonsense that have no actual basis in notarial law or that come from the handbook. That's why I cannot attend live training classes anymore... I get really frustrated at some of the dumbest things I hear coming from instructors mouths. Now, they're not all dumb... but I've personally witnessed some really horrible advice being given in these classes.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/8/12 6:14pm
Msg #414374

Here's how I handle it... the name on MY certificate is the name on the ID so long as the signatures match. I never, ever, ever put the name from the document on my certificate... it's always the ID of the person in front of me and the ID. Why? Because I have no possible way of knowing that the person named in the document actually *is* the person in front of me. In essence, the name on the document pretty much irrelevant. This ticks off a few companies who are anal retentive about matching names from the document to the certificate, but that's not my problem. I'm IDing the guy in front of me... not a name on a paper.

In California, our notarial certificates cover us on this because the person themselves are taking on the responsibility for signing in their capacity. We cannot determine nor certify one's capacity to sign a document. If they claim the right to sign any given document... then that's what they do.. and that's why our notarial certs should always match the ID of the person in front of you.

That way, you're saying, "Look, John Doe Smith appeared before me and claimed to have the right to sign this document. His signature matches the ID he gave me...and therefore I can tell you that John Doe Smith is, indeed John Doe Smith."

We can't be held responsible if John Doe Smith doesn't actually have the legal right to sign any particular document. That's way outside our job description. The legality of a signature or enforcement of a document is up to the courts, not us.

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/8/12 6:41pm
Msg #414378

I respectfully disagree with your opinion on this one

I do, however, understand how you drew your conclusion. Page 18 of the California notary manual does indeed state: "a notary public's function only relates to the signature and not the contents of the document". However, the manual is not law. When there is an inconsistency between the handbook and the statutes, the statutes always trump the handbook. Section 1185(a), California Civil Code, says: "The acknowledgment of an instrument shall not be taken unless the officer taking it has satisfactory evidence that the person making the acknowledgment is the individual who is DESCRIBED IN and who executed the instrument" (emphasis supplied). Florida's law requires the same thing.

You can't take a person's acknowledgment unless they prove that they are the person DESCRIBED IN the document. So yes, the notary does have to exercise his/her diligence in ensuring that the person who is named in the document is the person appearing before them. This doesn't require an expert lawyer.

JMHO.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/8/12 7:21pm
Msg #414387

Re: I respectfully disagree with your opinion on this one

Right... we've gone over this before. This language is only found for acknowledgements, not jurats. It also doesn't cover situations where the signer is an attorney-in-fact or a trustee, for example. Let's say a wife has power of attorney for a husband. She has the legal authority to sign a document, right? We cannot tell her no.... if she claims to have the right to sign something and has proper ID, we can't turn her away, nor can we insist she show us documents that prove it.

I've talked to several attorneys and the SOS about this. The wording you quote is ONLY for acknowledgements and is contradicts a lot of other things we're told. For example, we're prohibited, in CA, from determining or certifying capacity or a signer. So, if a woman comes to me and says she is AIF for her husband, I have to take her at her word because I am not allowed to determine otherwise.


That's why the notarial certificate needs to match the ID, and take detailed notes about the person's claimed capacity.

I'm comfortable in how I handle these rare situations, because I document the heck out of them.

As I've said so many times before... the notary seal doesn't impact the legality of a document, and any crook coming to me claiming to be authorized to sign something they aren't is an idiot, because I'm going to have physical proof of their criminal activity in my journal.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/9/12 6:39am
Msg #414404

The only problem with this is signings.

Title companies and lenders usually don't go along with that...or, at least that has been my experience. The name in the acknowledgment cert must match the name in the document.

Therefore, if a notary is going to do NSA work, using the name on the ID can be a problem.

Marian, if you have not had issues with this for title and lenders, please share. I think it is a great solution to the problem of ID that I did not know was acceptable.

I put the name on the ID in my journal and the name on the document and how it was signed if it varies. I ask the signer if he or she is the person is intended to sign the document and if his or her signature is placed for genuine purposes. If I have no reason to believe that he or she is lying, then I notarize.

Reply by Glenn Strickler on 3/8/12 6:23pm
Msg #414376

There is a good discussion on CA id requirements beginning with msg#411368. The "more than, but not less than" has never been a legal concept. As Lee stated, everyone who is not a Jr can be considered a SR. If you believe that the evidence before you proves your BO to be who be says he is in accordance with law, then you are good to go.

Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 3/8/12 11:08pm
Msg #414397

Here is an illustration of what I teach in my Notary classes

The identification document can contain more information than the signature, but never less.


Document Signature:
Daniel C. Jones, 111

Drivers license has:
Daniel C. Jones
Signed as:
Daniel C. Jones

We must not use this driver's license for documents signed as Daniel C. Jones 111 since the name on the approved identification MUST contain the same or more information as the document signature, but never less.

This driver's license does not include the "111" so we do not really know if this Daniel C. Jones, 111, 11 or even the 1st!

Reply by FlaNotary2 on 3/9/12 6:13am
Msg #414402

Where in the handbook does it say that? There is no legal

basis for the "more but not less" myth.

Reply by BrendaTx on 3/9/12 6:29am
Msg #414403

Your method is not a "law" though.

Hopefully, you teach that also.

Notaries must follow the law and this is not the law.

Reply by MrEd_Ca on 3/9/12 8:34am
Msg #414407

Re: Your method is not a "law" though.

What is "the law" on this ? It is my belief that Joan's example is reasonable.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 3/9/12 8:40am
Msg #414408

Re: Your method is not a "law" though. Unreasonable method

It is unreasonable to deprive a person of the right to sell or refinance real estate because the DMV decided to change the form of a name they will put on a driver's license, or because the person moved from a state that puts less information on a driver's license, after the signer bought the property. (For example Vermont will only put the first and last name on an enhanced driver's license; no middle names and no suffixes will be placed on enhanced licenses).

Reply by VT_Syrup on 3/9/12 8:42am
Msg #414409

fix phrase

I should have written "moved TO a state"

Reply by CopperheadVA on 3/9/12 8:50am
Msg #414410

Re: fix phrase

I have had people here in VA that have told me that they moved here from another country and the DMV told them they had to drop a name. For example, in Spanish-speaking countries two surnames are commonly used. The DMV will make people drop one of them. I believe that's wrong for the DMV to to that, but I have heard it from quite a few different people during the course of my notary career. This is the same DMV that misspells people's names on their ID, but then tells them that they will have to pay $10 for a replacement license to have it corrected. I've heard that one several times too.

Reply by Clem/CA on 3/9/12 7:38pm
Msg #414469

Re: fix phrase

OK I did a Juan Yesidro Vasquez Alhambre once. He could not fit his name on the signing lines, but we got it done with writing very small with a fine point pen and two lines on the sig. I guess he would have to get a two page drivers License in VA. I just called him Senor AL and that was OK with him..

Reply by janCA on 3/9/12 11:01am
Msg #414428

Re: Here is an illustration of what I teach in my Notary classes

If the description matched, if the signature matched and I believed this was Daniel C. Jones III but it wasn't on his driver's license, he can sign the docs with the III, but in my cert, I would leave the III off.

There is nothing in the CA handbook that states the "more, but never less".

Or am I missing something here.