Posted by Shoshana/AZ on 1/7/13 5:51pm
Msg #449372

POAs

It's been a long time since I closed a loan with a POA. I forgot what to do if the cert is a jurat. Can someone please refresh my memory?

Reply by John Tennant on 1/7/13 5:58pm
Msg #449373

I swear the individual that is in front of me.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/7/13 6:00pm
Msg #449374

Re: POAs...in Florida

an AIF cannot take an oath on behalf of the principal or swear to statements known by the principal. With POA signings all certs are acks.

Should check with your SOS on that

Reply by Buddy Young on 1/7/13 6:00pm
Msg #449375

Shoshana,
Example: Jane Doe is acting as attorney-in-fact for John Smith. She would sign in this fashion:
John Smith by Jame Doe, attorney-in-fact. Or
Jane Doe, Attorney-in-fact for John Smith, principal

Hope this helps

Buddy

Reply by Les_CO on 1/7/13 6:24pm
Msg #449377

You have the signer sign it……You can swear them in if it makes you feel good…They just sigh (depending on the State) that they are acting with the full authority as the POA, or IIF (or agent in PA) You witness their signature. Let others figure it out. It’s like a name affidavit with a POA, useless…. but ‘required.’ If NOT done it could be it could be kicked out by some idiot somewhere…so just do it, and forgitaboutaboutit. This ain’t legal advice, and JMO

Reply by MW/VA on 1/7/13 6:31pm
Msg #449378

I put the name in the notarial cert. this way: Jane Doe, indivually as as AIF for John Doe.
States that have issues with "capacity" wouldn't allow that.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 1/7/13 6:57pm
Msg #449379

Agree with Linda

Unless your state law allows it, you cannot take an oath for someone else. What they would be saying is, "I, as the attorney-in-fact for John Doe, swear that he believes this to be true" - an essentially meaningless statement, because the document calls for John Doe to make that declaration.

If the package for a POA signing includes jurats, I would question that with the hiring entity. They should be acks, not jurats.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/7/13 8:14pm
Msg #449384

Re: Agree with Linda

"They should be acks, not jurats."

In principle, that makes sense to me, but in practice, I don't think it's our decision to make, if confronted with a doc that has a jurat certificate. I ran into that a short while back and discussed it with the client. We decided that it was up to him whether or not he felt able to state under oath the various AKAs his wife used. I don't see that as a determination I can make. And, as someone else said, it was HIS name only that went into the jurat certificate. (This is one place where the CA jurat cert does give an advantage, since it's very clear who is, and who is not, taking the oath.) And, of course, this means that the person doing the actual signing (the one personally appearing) is taking the oath for themselves, not for the other person who is absent.

The one document we left unsigned was the signature affidavit, since one person obviously can't duplicate someone else's signature. I see no point in having someone sign THAT one as someone else's AIF, and my client agreed.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 1/7/13 11:50pm
Msg #449392

Re: Agree with Linda

"In principle, that makes sense to me, but in practice, I don't think it's our decision to make, if confronted with a doc that has a jurat certificate. I ran into that a short while back and discussed it with the client. We decided that it was up to him whether or not he felt able to state under oath the various AKAs his wife used."

As a matter of law, I don't think it's possible for person A to swear to what person B believes to be true. You and your client may have discussed it and decided it was OK, but whether that would stand up in court if the document was challenged is another question altogether.

As notaries we notarize, not analyze - so if the client says, "yeah, do it", you do it. If the client insists that I take an oath from someone who claims to know what someone else is thinking, I'm not breaking any law that I know of by doing so. It just doesn't make any sense.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/8/13 11:17am
Msg #449418

Re: Agree with Linda

This is why POA's must be approved by the lender's legal counsel, then underwriting, to be an approved signing by AIF for the client. These affidavits hence become ineffective for this reason. They become unusable in a package for signing as AIF on POA.