Posted by Bob_Chicago on 2/13/13 11:17am
Msg #455618

Exhibit "A" Legal revisited.

While I respect the dedication of those NPs who will not notarize a mtg/td, without
the legal being "attached", I believe that it is not necessary.
First of all, I would be very surprised is any NP has ever been disciplined by NP authority for notarized a mortgage/td, without a legal on the grounds that it is an "incomplete document"
Secondly we do not have the training nor access to information to determine if the legal , if attached , is , in fact , the correct legal. That is the responsibility of the TC, That is why they get the big bucks. They are insuring that the mortgage executed by the bwr creates a valid lien on the property.
If an incorrect legal is attached, it is the problem of the lender and the TC, not the NP nor the borrower.
Many lenders require that the TC provides a "location note" to the mortgage insurance policay issued for the mortgage. That is a endorsement to the title policy insuring the the lien is against the propery commonly known as "123 Main Street, Anytown , USA.
The recodiing authority indexes instruments affecting title by the Parcel number, which should be included in the body of the instrument. This is , in most, if not all, States, a requirement for recording.
The recorder will record any doc which has the required info, so long as it is properly executed and notarized, has the requisite info, and the appropriate fee is paid. They Recoder does not know , nor care, if the signatories named in the instrument are the owners of the propery., nor what the "legal" attached says. It gets recrded , and shows in the "chain of title" for the property as shown in the "index #"
If there is a problem as to the propety described or the authority of the signers to lien the property., then the affected parties can sort it out themselves. by agreement or through the courts.
The above is applicable to refis, which constitute the bulk of our work. If someone is acquiring a propery, then they should hire a lawyer, to make sure that they are getting good title to the propery that they are intending to buy.

Reply by CarolF/NC on 2/13/13 11:41am
Msg #455625

In NC we are not responsible for the content or correctness

of the document. I interpret this to fall in that category. If the BO doesn't want to sign because of it, then they don't, but I don't feel that I cannot notarize. JMO

Reply by Beverly Kinlaw on 2/13/13 11:57am
Msg #455628

Re: In NC we are not responsible for the content or correctness

Agreed Had that situatin last night where bo wanted to see legal description because he had several acres but was not financing all of them---not in the 168 page BofA pkg.
I told him he needed to call his LO and the reminded him of the 3 day right to cancel.
He was okay with it.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 2/13/13 1:45pm
Msg #455638

Re: In NC we are not responsible for the content or correctness

" because he had several acres but was not financing all of them"

Bingo - and this is precisely why I will not take it upon myself to go to the court website and obtain a property description for a loan package - too many variables

I've lost count of how many loans I've signed without the Exhibit A on them - they have a property reference on page 2 of the mortgage, complete with Assessor's Parcel Number, the more lengthy legal description being on Exhibit A. As long as the parcel reference is there I feel the document is complete.

JMO

Reply by Linda Juenger on 2/13/13 1:51pm
Msg #455640

Re: In NC we are not responsible for the content or correctness

I agree with Bob and Linda on this. It is not OUR responsiblity. If one is in the pkg that's great, I show it to the borrowers. If not, I do show them the address of the property on the Mortgage and they verify that the address is correct. Some borrowers have actually taken out their tax bills to match the # on the mortgage. I've signed hundreds upon hundreds of loans without the legal description in the pkg.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 2/13/13 2:35pm
Msg #455659

Wholly agree Bob & Linda(2) - not a liability I want.

No problem helping clear things up by getting with title about it, but no way would I act on it on my own.

Reply by Ronnie_WA on 2/13/13 2:17pm
Msg #455651

Model Notary Act of 2010:

§ 5-9 Improper Documents.
(a) A notary shall not notarize a signature:
(1) on a blank or incomplete document;

If the document says, "incorporated herein by reference" and it is not incorporated herein, then the document is incomplete. If I have the knowledge to observe that it is incomplete, then I have a responsibility. If I don't have the knowledge to observe it is incomplete, then I shouldn't be in the business of representing myself as a well educated signing agent. A notary that has no knowledge of loan documents will, of course, be granted the greater leniency in the event of a lawsuit or a civil complaint. I do understand that this board is filled with great public servants who do not hold themselves out to be educated in a field in which they are not. That's why I restricted my posting to WA agents who are indeed subject to the laws of WA and are specifically prohibited from attaching anything to that DOT or representing that something other than a valid legal description attachment suffices. I am totally ignorant of how things work in other states, so I can't really respond to those of you great folks out there

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 2/13/13 2:41pm
Msg #455660

Easy fix

Simply call the title agent and ask them to send it if it's not in your pkg.

Understand that the mortgage/DOT is a part of the lender's pkg, not title's. It is not prepared for recording by the Settlement Agent until AFTER the pkg gets back to them. This is why the title agent will often include the Schedule A or the complete title commitment in the title docs. Lender pkg and title docs don't get 'married' until you send the signed pkg back.

If you want it or need it, they have it - just ask.

Reply by Ronnie_WA on 2/13/13 2:45pm
Msg #455661

Re: Easy fix

That was the content of the original post. The title cos push back because it isn't a request they generally receive. I always get it. I was just hoping for a united front from our WA State notaries as it would make life smoother. If all WA notaries requested it, they would go back to the practice of earlier years where the legal was attached, without exception. Wishful thinking for a united front!