Posted by CopperheadVA on 8/16/13 12:01pm
Msg #480699

Why administering VERBAL ack and oath is important

Got a call this AM for general notary work. This guy had a Separation Agreement and POA for wife to sign that grants POA to him. We agree on fee and I go to his house. I ID both husband and wife, log their ID in my journal, and have them sign. Then I administer the acknowledgment and oath that I always use:

“Do you acknowledge that you are signing these documents of your own free will, and do you swear or affirm that your responses on the affidavits will be true and correct to the best of your knowledge?”

Husband answers yes – wife does not answer. I look at her and wait. She is looking down and seems very sad and very hesitant. I administered the oath again and waited for answer. No answer – same look of sadness, despair, and hesitancy. I told her that she does not have to sign the documents and she should not sign them unless she wants to willingly sign them. I ask her if she’s read them and she said no. She said that she doesn’t know what the documents will do [for her situation]. Her husband wants separation and she said she doesn’t know what she will do or where she will go or what will happen to her. At that point I looked at her husband and told him that I cannot notarize her signature, as she is not signing of her own free will.

He said OK no problem. I asked him if he still wanted me to notarize his signature on the Separation Agreement – he said no, that he will go a different route and just file for divorce.

I collected my travel fee and left. Such a sad situation. But SO GLAD I administered that verbal acknowledgment.

Reply by CopperheadVA on 8/16/13 12:05pm
Msg #480701

Just a note for clarification

They signed my journal, but they did not sign the documents.

Reply by Karla/OR on 8/16/13 12:14pm
Msg #480703

What a sad situation. Had you not done the verbal ack or oath, and proceeded with the signing, it probably would have been an even uglier situation for her.

After giving the verbal ack or oath to my clients, they often will say they have never had to do that before!!! That always shocks me!!!

GOLDGIRL, thanks for re-confirming why it is so important!

Reply by pat/WA on 8/16/13 1:41pm
Msg #480717

I like your oath better than the one I have been using from the Washington Notary Primer.
With your permission I plan to use the one that you use, it is more complete

Reply by CopperheadVA on 8/16/13 8:48pm
Msg #480753

Yes feel free to use it n/m

Reply by MW/VA on 8/16/13 2:45pm
Msg #480722

Good work, Linda. Yes, those are difficult situations. She

should be consulting an attorney before signing that, because it becomes part of the final decree of divorce here in VA. It could impact her for the rest of her life.
You did a great service by realizing she wasn't signing willingly. ;-)

Reply by walthtz on 8/16/13 3:22pm
Msg #480724

I think I would add , "SO HELP YOU GOD" to the statement.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 8/16/13 3:46pm
Msg #480726

I wouldn't add "so help you God". It isn't necessary, and it isn't required. A person who does not believe in God can take an oath, or can affirm to something being true.
I have had signers who are Christian (one was a minister) who preferred to affirm rather than swear, and didn't want religion brought into the signing of their statements.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 8/16/13 4:08pm
Msg #480729

I agree, Sylvia. Leave God out of it

You never know who you're talking to ... in my neck of the woods where there are many Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs and Buddhists, I wouldn't even go near "so help you God" wording. Having them do an affirmation can be tricky enough sometimes. Then, as you said, some Christians might not be onboard, either, with that wording ... not to mention atheists.

This is a loan signing ... not a religious event. Most courts ... at least around here... not longer use that wording either.

Reply by John/CT on 8/16/13 10:00pm
Msg #480769

That's the reason why I ask, "Do you swear or solemnly affirm and declare your signature(s) ...." Works every time.

Reply by MW/VA on 8/16/13 8:50pm
Msg #480755

Unfortunately, most have removed "God" from the oath, due

to political correctness. It's also meaningless to have someone swear to God if they don't believe in Him.

Reply by HisHughness on 8/18/13 12:14am
Msg #480857

Definition of "oath" from Black's Law Dictionary

"Any form of attestation by which a person signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully and truthfully...An affirmation of truth of a statement which renders one willfully asserting untrue statements punishable for perjury."

An oath is a solemn affirmation, given more weight by both the swearer and the audience by its very solemnity; belief in a Supreme Being is not required to make such an affirmation. Sometimes people, in the arrogance of their particular belief, assign to an affirmation without a religious reference less significance, regarding it as something like an Oath Lite. It is a result of confusing faith with ethics. The two are quite separable, as atheists and agnostics like myself all over the world can attest.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 8/16/13 9:14pm
Msg #480761

I add, "under the penalties of perjury."

Administered 3 separate oaths yesterday (gnw) at employees' workplace.


btw, I never knew I was supposed to do the ack (free will) part - as sometimes that language is inserted in the notarial statement! Thank you for sharing.

I think from here out when journal is being signed, I will preface with that 1st part as a rule.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 8/17/13 8:03am
Msg #480793

For an acknowledgement, I ask signers if they are signing as their free act and deed, which is the customary wording in my state. I don't ask them if the SWEAR they are signing as their free act and deed, because I haven't found anything in my state laws saying they have to. If the certificate provided by the client is otherwise acceptable, but has language both about acknowledging and swearing, I ask for the acknowledgement and also administer an oath, and so note in my journal.

Reply by Sandra G Holland on 8/17/13 8:48am
Msg #480797

I have been a notary since I was in graduate school, before our grown children were born. There is always something new to learn. It makes the job interesting and pleasurable. "So help me God" has never been in any paperwork from my state or any other that I have had to notarize. In some states, the wording is very specific. In my state, the signer is supposed to agree to the wording. Affirming instead of swearing is not "taking God out of it". The religious person does not want to offend God by swearing. Instead, he/she is saying that his/her word is good. That is putting God in the document, although invisible to others. Either word--swearing or affirming--is a choice in my state. The existence of other religions does not mean that the current wording is "politically correct" but that the notary is being sensitive to another's beliefs while still doing the job. It's like when I was growing up if I talked to a Mennonite neighbor, I put my polished fingernails behind my back. I did not dress like them, but I didn't want to offend them, either. If everyone is civil, courteous, polite and inoffensive, we don't need political correctness to ruin our country.

Reply by jba/fl on 8/17/13 10:04am
Msg #480802

Well said, Sandra. n/m

Reply by MW/VA on 8/17/13 11:59am
Msg #480806

Ditto. Thanks Sandra for that explanation. ;-) n/m

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 8/17/13 2:31pm
Msg #480817

I don't think political correctness ....

.... is necessarily ruining anything in our country. Granted, it can get carried to extremes as can most anything; but in most cases it shows increasing sensitivity to and awareness of certain people who have historically been ridiculed and debased or punished for things beyond their control: their race, gender, age, national origin, color; or things they choose: their religion, marital status, etc.

To scoff at political correctness is in many cases to brush aside the views of historically oppressed people and shows a desire not to change but to cling to the old ways. I agree with Sandra that if we had been civil, courteous, polite and inoffensive we wouldn't need PC!

Reply by jnew on 8/17/13 11:22pm
Msg #480856

Oaths, affirmations and swearing.

Traditionally, an oath is an act where you call upon God to act as a witness to your statement. Many people interpret the commandments to bar them from giving oaths or swearing in general and will not cooperate with the notary. Our state will take an affirmation under penalty of perjury as an option. It is also true that George Washington added "the so help me God" statement to the end of the Presidential oath of office. The oath, as written in the Constitution, does not have any reference to God in it. Of course, that creates the semantic argument that if it does not mention God, it is not an oath, since it does not call on God to act as a witness. My mom taught me not to swear, which word came about from people calling upon God to condemn a person, place or thing to hell. So there lies the connection.

Reply by linda/ca on 8/18/13 1:50am
Msg #480864

Calif. Probate code gives (2) "suggested" wordings for those

who (like me) believe in God and an option for those who prefer not to use his name:

"§ 2094.
Oath to witness; form
(a) An oath, affirmation, or declaration in an action or a proceeding, may be administered
by obtaining an affirmative response to one of the following questions:

(1) “Do you solemnly state that the evidence you shall give in this issue (or matter) shall be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?”

(2) “Do you solemnly state, under penalty of perjury, that the evidence that you shall give
in this issue (or matter) shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?”

Reply by rolomia on 8/18/13 7:27am
Msg #480880

I wonder what His response will be to our PC excuses?

Will he say " No! You may NOT enter Heaven b/c it would NOT be PC." JMHO

Reply by JanetK_CA on 8/18/13 10:52pm
Msg #480957

Re: I don't think political correctness ....

I wholeheartedly agree with GOLDGIRL and Sandra on this issue. The pendulum can swing too far in either direction. While there may be some who have gone overboard with their concern about what's commonly come to be known as being "politically correct", the more common usage of that term lately seems to be as an excuse to dismiss any concern for the sensibilities of others. That then leaves them free to be disrespectful of others with differences (see Goldgirl's list in post above), or who just have different opinions or interpretations of just about anything.

I very much respect the convictions and deeply held beliefs of most people - up until they get to the point of arrogance, where they're so sure that they have "The truth" and the right answers, that common courtesy and consideration for others who are different, or who don't agree, is no longer necessary.