Posted by mwm143 on 10/29/12 9:29am
Msg #441011

Companies that "require" contract signing AFTER the closing

I was asked to do a last minute closing on Friday. I had set up a profile in 2009 with them and this was my 3rd! So I average one a year. Closing was completed and I get an email this morning from their accounting manager that they can't pay me until I submit the following: signed contractor agreement, copy of E&O, copy of DL, current background check, copy of notary commission and a W9. I submitted a W9 and told them that's all they are getting.

It's just another example how this business has gottens so unprofessional...the general public would cringe if they really knew who could possibly have access to their personal information.

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/29/12 9:38am
Msg #441013

After the fact contracts, etc.... Nah. They don't even NEED a W9 until/unless they pay you over $600 in any calendar year, tho' I'd still send that. If it wasn't important before they sent you out--it's just not important.

Reply by LarryM on 10/29/12 10:24am
Msg #441024

Well, as always, it depends. There are certain things that, by default, we have to provide to be in this business. A current profile with a TC is not too much to ask. Your profile with them was three years old. As such, your credibility as a reliable sub-contractor is suspect. In the intervening years you could have committed a felony, had your DL expire and become unable to obtain E&O insurance. Your background check could have been compromised and your commission revoked.

It's entirely reasonable for them to request current qualifications, and I cannot understand your unwillingness to comply. It's part of being in the business.

Reply by mwm143 on 10/29/12 10:35am
Msg #441027

Larry...they asked AFTER the closing

Reasonable but not neccessary to ask BEFORE you're hired. Not so much after the fact.

Reply by HisHughness on 10/29/12 11:38am
Msg #441038

I am just enough of a contentious SOB ...

... that when <anybody> tells me after the fact that they won't pay me for work performed unless I sign a contract, I'm going to tell them to use their contract for toilet paper. That's a legitimate request for future assignments, but to try to make payment for past work contingent upon the execution of a contract is a form of bullying, and I don't take well to being bullied.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/29/12 3:03pm
Msg #441084

I totally agree, Hugh!

It also depends on how they present it. I did one recently for a new client (fairly well rated, if I recall). The request for that info was presented in the context of adding me to their data base for future signings - not as a threat against payment for work already completed. Whole different ball game. I don't take well to that kind of extortion, either. It's a complete turnoff to wanting to do any future work with that company.

If payment is contingent on anything other than the successful completion of the signing - the work they've hired me to do - then it needs to be disclosed up front. If that's not done, then they have no right to demand it before payment. Calling it bullying is a nice way to put it, imo. Couldn't it also be called extortion?

Reply by LarryM on 10/29/12 4:05pm
Msg #441107

Re: I am just enough of a contentious SOB ...

Now wait a minute. @mwm143 stated that he/she had worked for them in the past, and that their data on him/her was not up-to-date. Is it unreasonable for them to want that updated?

I totally agree that if you accept a signing from a TC you have never worked for before, and they pull that, I'd object, too.

However, in this specific case, a company for whom one has already worked has every right to ask for updated information, IMO. I still don't feel it was an unreasonable request.

But that's just me.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 10/29/12 4:33pm
Msg #441125

Re: I am just enough of a contentious SOB ...

"Now wait a minute. @mwm143 stated that he/she had worked for them in the past, and that their data on him/her was not up-to-date. Is it unreasonable for them to want that updated?"

It's not unreasonable to ask for an update BEFORE assigning more work - it IS unreasonable to withhold payment until this information is provided AFTER an assignment has already been completed. If they had concerns about a "stale" BGC, why did they make the assignment in the first place?

And demanding that a contract be signed after the work is already completed before they will release payment is beyond ridiculous. One of the members here from CA took an SS to court a couple of years ago over this very issue - payment was being withheld because he refused to sign a contract after the fact. The court found in his favor.

Reply by ToniK on 10/29/12 10:40am
Msg #441030

I picked a few new clients during EOM. They sent the contract package along with the closing docs. Due to being so busy EOM. I dont have time to review, sign and send back contracts during EOM. They will get it after EOM when I have more time.

I spent the last 3 days last week getting home around midnight. I was beat then had to start the next day over at 9am....yea those agreements will be put on the back burner.

Reply by MW/VA on 10/29/12 2:17pm
Msg #441072

One of our fellow notaries brought a lawsuit against a co.

for requiring a contract to be signed after the signing & before they would pay him. This is not good biz to pull that. They need to get that up front & not play hostige with payment to have you comply. If it wasn't mentioned at the time to the signing, it's not valid, IMO.

Reply by Beverly Kinlaw on 10/29/12 3:31pm
Msg #441093

Re: One of our fellow notaries brought a lawsuit against a co.

Tis a shame that we cannot hold "docs" hostage til they pay us.
I have encountered 2 companies that called me in a rush - then after I sent off docs they informed me that in order to get paid would have to complete W2, contract, EO ins and more.
I did it later on but it really was ignoring to say the least.