Posted by 101livescan on 1/20/13 5:08pm
Msg #451309

Quit Claim Deed Required by Chase for Out of State

Quincy, Massachusetts 2nd home property refinance...Mr. shows up, I ask where Mrs. is, she has a quit claim deed to sign, not on the loan or vested. We make arrangement for me to go by on Saturday to have her sign.

Before he left my office, he said, can't I just sign it for her? I said, no, she must appear and sign.

I get to the house yesterday, she looks it over and says, I'm not signing this! I need to be on the deed if something happens to you.

I of course did not leave until she signed and I notarized. She was not happy. I'll bet cups and saucers were flying around that house after I left.

Reply by Roger_OH on 1/20/13 6:17pm
Msg #451313

Curious as to why you had her sign...

if she was clearly unhappy and had stated she WOULDN'T sign it? Did the husband coerce her?

In this situation, I'd have reported her reluctance to the hiring party and let them handle it, then ensuring that she was signing freely.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/20/13 6:27pm
Msg #451314

Re: Curious as to why you had her sign...

Dialog went as follows:

Why do I have to sign.

It is a prior to funding condition.

Husband says, go ahead and sign. We'll work it out later.

She signed. I know there would be further dialog after I left. They've owned this property all their married years. Strange.

Reply by Barb25 on 1/21/13 3:25pm
Msg #451411

Re: Curious as to why you had her sign...

And Cheryl said:

Dialog went as follows:

Why do I have to sign.

It is a prior to funding condition.

Husband says, go ahead and sign. We'll work it out later.

She signed. I know there would be further dialog after I left. They've owned this property all their married years. Strange.

So it looks to me she worked it out with her husband or beat the crap out of him after she left. She is the notary. She signed. What was she supposed to do. Tell him: "You don't have to listen to him." How did this post take on such a life of its own? And so much Law....

Reply by Jennifer Jackson on 1/21/13 7:36am
Msg #451360

Re: Curious as to why you had her sign...

I agree with Roger...I feel that it is not our duta as a notary or SA to "make" a borrower sign. If someone tells me they do not want to sign something, I give them the option to call their LO, utilize their 3 day right to cancel, or I cancel the signing. We are not there to mediate situations like this. I had the same thing happen, and after the wife signed (husband spoke spanish and told her to I assume) she packed up their kids and left. I don't want to be in the middle of that.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/20/13 6:32pm
Msg #451315

Maybe this is a "you had to be there" moment...

Cheryl, you said "I of course did not leave until she signed and I notarized."

She was also adamant she did not want to sign, did NOT want to be off title - he says sign and we'll work it out later?? Not to mention this wasn't discussed with her in advance (by her husband, not meaning you) - so she's taken totally off guard and is against it.

I would not have continued - I'd have "packed my toys and gone home". Unless she made some very strong statements to convince me that she was on board with this.

Like I said, maybe you had to be there..

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/20/13 7:25pm
Msg #451318

My thoughts too, Linda

If the marriage goes south, wife will tell her attorney she signed QCD under duress - that the husband and notary teamed up to badger her into signing. Not true, but that's what she'll say. This will come back to bite a notary. Loan signing or GNW, if someone expresses they're not fully on board to sign, even in the slightest, I'm out of there.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/20/13 7:36pm
Msg #451320

Re: Maybe this is a "you had to be there" moment...

Definitely would have had to be there. Something about Mrs. credit not good enough to be on the loan and he acquired property as an unmarried man, sole and separate. MASS different than CA.

We can't all be experts in this field, and I don't think that I am qualified nor would advocate what the borrower should do, he made the decision and his wife complied.

I'm pretty sure there will be a grant deed conveying property to her as community property after the loan records. It was a tense moment. I've already alerted the loan officer.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/20/13 7:43pm
Msg #451323

Re: Maybe this is a "you had to be there" moment...

<<<.......he made the decision and his wife complied.>>>

When it comes to a **notarization**, he can't make that decision for her. If she's not choosing to sign of her own free will - which is a requirement to a lawful CA notarization - then I'd be out of there. Others can do what they want.....I'D BE OUT OF THERE. He can get her to sign whatever other non-notarized docs he wants, but for a **notarization** he cannot. JMHO

Again, others can do what they want.

Reply by janCA on 1/21/13 9:10am
Msg #451364

Re: Maybe this is a "you had to be there" moment...

Why are so many people on this board so quick to judge Cheryl, on this matter. She has been a notary for 30 some odd years. You don't think she knows what she is doing and that she doesn't know the laws of her own state? You weren't there, so stop already.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/21/13 9:26am
Msg #451365

"So stop already" Why??

Cheryl is no more above things than the rest of us are. She posted on a public forum, and her post generated comments, commentary and opinions. No one said she doesn't know her notary laws

Reply by janCA on 1/21/13 9:32am
Msg #451367

Re: "So stop already" Why??

Her post generated "judgements" which everyone here loves to do, Linda. She was sharing an experience with the forum and as usual, people love to jump in and tell the OP what they think she did wrong. It gets tiring, to say the least.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/21/13 9:38am
Msg #451368

Perhaps it was the wording of how the situation

unfolded? Which, by the way, took on 3 different scenarios throughout the course of this thread...

Sorry Jan - but we all are entitled to our opinions and entitled to voice them respectfully. As are you, and your's is "enough already". <<shrug>> So be it.

Reply by janCA on 1/21/13 11:13am
Msg #451381

And we know what "they" say about opinions! n/m

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 10:27am
Msg #451377

Re: "So stop already" Why??

<<<She was sharing an experience with the forum and as usual, people love to jump in and tell the OP what they think she did wrong.>>>

Jan, how is it that you think newbies/veterans learn here if not for the various agreements, challenges and rebuttals to "an experience" that an OP shares? NR will get boring and dry up fast when statements are only agreed with and no statements are questioned or challenged. New notaries and new posters are constantly told to hold off asking questions but to read/research the threads for suggestions/answers. Lively discussions, debate, and varied perspectives provides that learning. JMHO.

Reply by janCA on 1/21/13 11:20am
Msg #451382

Re: "So stop already" Why??

We should always have a "network" member's back and an opinion doesn't "always" have to be expressed on this forum. Some just have that need within them.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 11:57am
Msg #451383

Re: "So stop already" Why??

<<<We should always have a "network" member's back and an opinion doesn't "always" have to be expressed on this forum. Some just have that need within them.>>>

Having someone's back doesn't always mean keeping silent or agreeing with them. Personally, I wouldn't want someone in my circle that couldn't/wouldn't challenge me and tell me the truth. Jan, the time we stop growing/improving is when we stop breathing.

On recent threads started by SERVICIO, within all of that long discussion were two posts I thought were brilliant - one from a poster I like and the other from a poster I do not like. I gain many pearls of wisdom from messages, in spite of messengeRs. As much as I glean from the forum, I also like sharing about the people, places, things, or situations I've encountered, if I believe it to be of value to another notary. As I said earlier, challenges, (dis)agreements, debate, rebuttal is how we learn from each other. We help each other avoid costly mistakes by sharing our experiences - and asking questions about why a notary handled a situation in *that* particular fashion.

Jan, it's too bad that you're under the impression that I don't have Cheryl's backs. Sorry, but if the network member robs the bank, I will NOT drive the get-away car. JMHO

Reply by 101livescan on 1/21/13 7:26pm
Msg #451450

Re: "So stop already" Why??

Not sure why this hostility and negativity was necessary. One of the attributes of our network is that members are, for the most part, collaborative, supportive and promote each other, making significant contributions toward our common goals. I see that slipping a little in this thread. It certainly sends a strong message.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 10:24pm
Msg #451478

Re: "So stop already" Why??

No hostility or negativity on my part. Being a network member does not mean we are above other notaries. We are of like values and philosophy but not necessarily of like procedures or methods. Any network of professionals will have differences of opinions, at times. The ability to disagree tactfully, diplomatically, respectfully truly makes us a network. Anything less makes the group nothing more than a clique.

Yes, to expect people in group to agree, not because they are of like minds on an issue but simply because they belong to a group certainly sends a strong message - a strong and DISTURBING message.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 10:05am
Msg #451374

Re: Maybe this is a "you had to be there" moment...

<<<You weren't there, so stop already.>>>

Comments are based on the info shared. It's up to the OP to provide enough info so the reader has a clear understanding of their scenario. If not, and their post lacks and details then posters can only reply based on what is offered. Several posters did ask for clarification. A notary's years of experience IS considered in a response. If they're new, the replies typically *suggest* a better method of operation. If the notary has much experience, (30 some odd years) the replies may lean more toward a judgment because said notary is expected to know better.

The audience here consists of notaries of all experience levels - some know the OP's time in the business and some don't so it's very important that notaries are careful in how they present a scenario. A statement such as "I didn't (or wasn't) leaving until so-and-so signed and I notarized" when in the same post it was reported that a clueless-about-the QCD wife said "I'm not signing this!, speaks volumes - and not in a good way. For those of us who DO know the OP's experience level, to me, that was an incendiary statement.

Constructive criticism, suggestions of better SOPs, or judgment (of words, not the notary) will come to those who post - based on whatever info (or lack thereof) is provided.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 1/20/13 7:42pm
Msg #451322

Agree with you, Linda

I'm scratching my head about the "I of course did not leave until she signed and I notarized" remark. Maybe there's more to this than what was in the OP.

It's possible that the husband's plan was to just quit claim her back onto the deed after the loan funded, but they obviously never even discussed it because the wife seems to have been taken by surprise.

I too would have just packed up and left, telling them to call me when they had reached a decision about what to do. I don't care what the hiring party wants; we're not supposed to be notarizing documents signed under duress, and that pretty much sounds like the situation described. Hanging around until Party A convinces Party B to do something Party B doesn't want to do is not in the job description either.

Unless there's other information the OP didn't provide, this is DEFINITELY not on the list of Notary Public Best Practices...

Reply by 101livescan on 1/20/13 7:50pm
Msg #451325

Re: Agree with you, Linda

The loan had been in process for 6 months...rate lock expiring Tuesday, they both made the decision they should sign the QC if they wanted this loan rate of 3.5 for 15 years...there are exceptions, guys. I'm pretty sure it will work out satisfactorily. Both well educated and own many properties together. I think this one got away from them.

LO doing a wellness check on borrowers this weekend to make sure they are all right.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/20/13 8:52pm
Msg #451330

Be careful livescan, that's trodding on dangerous territory.

Not a good idea to post that on a forum either. Unless, of course, as others have mentioned I am missing something, however, not from any of the replies you made. If I am wrong...my apologies, but my gosh; you never arm wrestle someone to sign a doc and especially a "QC" deed. I am sure we must not be understanding your post(s).

Reply by 101livescan on 1/20/13 9:05pm
Msg #451331

Re: Be careful livescan, that's trodding on dangerous territory.

I'll let you know how this comes down...LO will contact me in the am. I still have the documents.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 1/20/13 9:32pm
Msg #451333

Re: Agree with you, Linda

"Both well educated and own many properties together. I think this one got away from them."

In the OP, this was just a second home in MA - now it's merely one of many properties they own together, and he forgot to tell her he was going to QC her off title on one of them? These are sophisticated real estate investors with multiple properties, and he neglected to tell her what he was doing? Yeah, that happens all the time...

"LO doing a wellness check on borrowers this weekend to make sure they are all right."

I don't even know what this means - does the LO now think that there may have been some issues with mental capacity? If so, does that negate the loan? And how is he doing over the weekend, when this information is generally not available?

Quite frankly, this whole story simply doesn't seem possible the way you've presented it - is there other stuff you left out that would help make more sense?

Reply by HisHughness on 1/20/13 9:33pm
Msg #451334

I fail to see the reason for all the furor

There don't appear to be ANY elements of coercion here. The wife expressed an initial reluctance to sign. The husband told her to go ahead and sign, they'd work things out later. The wife is an adult. There is no indication she is not in control of all her faculties. There certainly is nothing in the OP to indicate the husband threatened, sulked, coerced, or did anything to interfere with his wife's free will. From all appearances, the wife considered her alternatives, and elected to sign. That's what grownups in full control of their abilities do when confronted with situations in which they have reservations.

It seems to me that an inordinate number of notries are overly willing to substitute their judgment for the wife's.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/20/13 10:15pm
Msg #451343

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

"There certainly is nothing in the OP to indicate the husband threatened, sulked, coerced, or did anything to interfere with his wife's free will. From all appearances, the wife considered her alternatives, and elected to sign."

Right you are, Hugh, not the husband. Read it again and this time with understanding....it was the OP who said "she" wasn't going to leave until the wife signed the doc! That's what I am assuming everyone (except you) determined from her post, not just one but several. As an Attorney, I guess ex?, you, more than anyone else should understand why a number of notaries responded. Not to be judgmental, however, to give caution to something that it appears that livescan/ca wasn't considering. Hopefully I hope livescan/ca understood that most ("notries"-sorry Hugh couldn't pass that one up; lol)?? made that fact clear.

Reply by HisHughness on 1/20/13 10:24pm
Msg #451344

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

***("notries"-sorry Hugh couldn't pass that one up; lol)??***

The "notries" was deliberate. It refers to notaries who look for reasons to say "no" to a signing.

I am a retired attorney, not an ex attorney.

I read the same original post you did. I did not construe that the notary coerced the wife. What I got was that the quit claim deed was essential to the entire transaction, and she was not leaving until the issue of its execution was settled, one way or the other. She may have expressed that inartfully, but that's what I took away from her post. I'm hard-pressed to envision a notary coercing someone into signing. What was she going to do, threaten to stamp her across the forehead?

Reply by linda/ca on 1/20/13 10:43pm
Msg #451347

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

"The "notries" was deliberate. It refers to notaries who look for reasons to say "no" to a signing."

Hugh, please don't tell me that you are saying that we should try to force someone to sign a document they flat out said they are not going to sign. Is that what your are implying by your comment: "notaries who look for a reason to say "no" to a signing?

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 10:47am
Msg #451378

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

Linda, didn't you get your commission to waste money, time, gasoline, cause excess wear-and-tear on your office equipment and vehicles SOLELY so you could go to appts and find ways NOT to notarize or say NO to a signing?

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/20/13 10:33pm
Msg #451345

There is no furor

<<<The wife expressed an initial reluctance to sign....>>>

Initial reluctance? According to the OP, the wife SAID, I repeat....SAID "I'm not signing this!". That's not "reluctance"....it's a flat out refusal.

<<<The wife is an adult.>>>

And this adult wife flat out refused to sign.

<<<That's what grownups in full control of their abilities do when confronted with situations in which they have reservations.>>>

Yes, they refuse to sign something they don't want to sign. Thank you for making everyone else's point.

<<<From all appearances, the wife considered her alternatives, and elected to sign.>>>

Yeah...and that's why the OP made the comment that she thought dishes would be flying across the room after she left. Uh huh, that REALLY shows the couple were in complete agreement regarding the QCD.

<<<It seems to me that an inordinate number of notries are overly willing to substitute their judgment for the wife's.>>>

It seems to me that an inordinate number of notries are smart enough to not ignore glaring red flags.

Reply by Joan Bergstrom on 1/20/13 10:43pm
Msg #451346

I agree with Hugh

This is "Nanny notary police" at it's worst.

The wife/or husband had a problem signing a document
Duh.

It happens; they work it out and you get the document signed or you don't get it signed and you leave.

We always want to get documents signed but if the wife in this case said no; then Cheryl would have left.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/20/13 10:49pm
Msg #451348

Re: I agree with Hugh

"We always want to get documents signed but if the wife in this case said no; then Cheryl would have left."

I give up! Did you read the OP comments at all, Joan? Or are you Guys just calling around trying to get someone to come post something to defend your buddy like folks used to do on NOT ROT many moons ago! C'mon!

Reply by HisHughness on 1/20/13 11:51pm
Msg #451350

Re: I agree with Hugh

Linda, you're being a jerk -- not to put too fine a point on it.

Joan is a professional. I'm a professional; in light of your comment, I daresay more of one than you. I expressed a professional opinion; so did Joan. So, for that matter, did you and everyone else who contributed to this thread, until such time as you chose to make it an alley fight. Did those of you who expressed opinions contrary to mine call around "trying to get someone to come post something to defend your buddy"?

Reply by linda/ca on 1/21/13 12:45am
Msg #451351

Re: I agree with Hugh

"I'm a professional"

That's an oxymoron, Hugh! Who on this site believe that you are a professional anything....your reputation precedes you....are you kidding? Just because someone happen to post something you disagree with and don't let you off the hook does not mean they are being a jerk. It means they don't let the biggest jerk on this site try to bully them and Jerk "them" around!

Let's see who the real professional and "mature" person is between me and you. Clue: the one who moves on. For clarification....that means if you make another post on this matter you are not the professional only "you" think you are. Deal? :-)

Reply by HisHughness on 1/21/13 1:49am
Msg #451355

Re: I agree with Hugh

Of all the people to whom I might be willing to surrender my right to post in this forum, Linda, you would not make the cut.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 1/21/13 1:01am
Msg #451353

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

"The wife expressed an initial reluctance to sign"

An initial reluctance to sign??? Is that what you call it when one party to the transaction has no idea what is going on and doesn't want to go forward?

"There is no indication she is not in control of all her faculties"

No, not until a follow up post said that the LO was going to look into that....

"There certainly is nothing in the OP to indicate the husband threatened, sulked, coerced, or did anything to interfere with his wife's free will"

Other than the part that said he told her to just sign it and they would work it out later???

Jeez, Hugh -what the heck were you reading? Because whatever THAT was, it had nothing to do with this incident. Wife didn't want to sign, husband insisted she should, notary waited around until the document was finally signed - there's no duress there?

"It seems to me that an inordinate number of notries are overly willing to substitute their judgment for the wife's"

Come on, Hugh, this is a classic case of someone trying to bully someone else to sign a document they didn't want to sign. "We'll work it out later" - really? Would YOU sign away your rights if someone said "trust me"?

Reply by HisHughness on 1/21/13 2:03am
Msg #451356

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

***An initial reluctance to sign??? Is that what you call it when one party to the transaction has no idea what is going on and doesn't want to go forward?***

Yes. Especially when she subsequently elects to do so.

***"No, not until a follow up post said that the LO was going to look into that....***

Where in that do you find evidence that the wife was not in complete control of her faculties?

***Other than the part that said he told her to just sign it and they would work it out later??***

Did I miss a threat? Is there some indication of the use of physical force? Is there anything other than one spouse telling another spouse that they will discuss a disagreement/misunderstanding/failure to communicate later? Even at my advanced age, and with the decline in my mental acuity, I seem to recall that that was generally the approach that worked best in my marriages.

***"We'll work it out later" - really? Would YOU sign away your rights if someone said "trust me"?***

Indeed I would, if it was my spouse and if I did indeed trust her. Which seems to be the case here, based on the information we have at hand, and my original conclusion stands: Several notaries are quite quick to substitute their judgment for the signer.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/21/13 8:18am
Msg #451362

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

Actually, I'm excited to see so many experts in their field here. The couple are very comprehensive people. No one was holding a gun to any one's head. They both saw the big picture. All they have to do on closing, which is tomorrow, is to record a grant deed putting wife back on title. Some quirky way of how things go in Massachusetts. They had never refi'd this property since their marriage years ago.

None the less, I myself have a very strong moral compass, and would never coerce, or allow another to coerce someone into signing anything. I just know what it takes to get a loan closed to preserve an excellent rate lock and that's what we accomplished.

You all picked this carcass clean, and that is what this board is all about. A level playing field where we can all exhibit our skill levels, thought processes, and communication skills. Maybe mine aren't the best all the time, but clearly you've helped me understand how someone might misinterpret the borrowers and the notaries intentions. And, we may find out today, that the lender made a mistake. How thought provoking is that.

I've had a few weeks of not working so hard and been spending time on my receivable records...I found that in 2012 I had the most productive of all years since 2001, signing 1301 loans compared to 928 in 2011. More important than that, I did not get stiffed once this year, working only for the best, by design and resources available to me on this board. This year I am renewing my commission for the 11th time.

Thank you all for your critical thinking. I hope you have an awesome day. It will be a great beach day in Santa Barbara, mid 70s.

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/21/13 9:05am
Msg #451363

Carcass not quite clean yet....

In life, I have a terrible problem with saying "No." to anything I do not initially expect or understand and then taking a moment to figure it all out. I might change my mind, I might not.

When I bought my first house, I said, "No." and went outside of the title company to think away from the pressure.

Fortunately, the closing was not stopped because I needed time to weigh out the situation. I never was unhappy because I decided to sign. Nobody made me. I wanted the house, so I had to agree to the terms, even though I initially said, "No...oh heck no..."

In almost every real estate closing where there is a hard-negotiating buyer and seller or lender/borrower, there are "no moments." In a good many signings, there are moments when signers don't eagerly sign. Some are like me, and they say, "No way." before they are ready to pick up the pen and finish the job. Some do this without saying "no."

Reply by CentralNY on 1/21/13 9:52am
Msg #451372

Re: Carcass not quite clean yet....

my worst situation, divorce and they are selling house to out-of-towners. wife was not hostile but like a child, we had to guide her into the conference room and keep reassuring her. she would not sign sale docs unless she could sit on hubby's lap. whatever it takes. the buyers arrive with there truck of stuff. sellers have not packed a thing. buyers put their truck of stuff on front lawn and let sellers use truck to get out. you can't make this stuff up. i think the real estate stuff is one of the most emotional things we do, i guess besides divorce and/or death.

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/21/13 10:00am
Msg #451373

Re: Carcass not quite clean yet....

Exactly my point!

I saw nothing unusual about Cheryl's post.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/21/13 11:07am
Msg #451380

Re: Carcass not quite clean yet....

Yes, Brenda/Tx and Central. Everyone who has been doing this for a while have all gone through situations with emotional people. I experienced the same thing this past Saturday in a situation with a very emotional spouse who started crying. Did we complete the process? You betcha! If I came onto this site and started boasting about how I would not leave until the spouse signed and that cups and saucers probably where thrown when I left. Would I have been cautioned too? Hopefully! As Linda/FL said, maybe we had to be there and since we were not, either don't post that type of information or make your scenario clear. Speaking of clarification, the situation that I was facing with this borrower was similar to yours, however, I was being patient and not refusing to leave until she signed. I did not come onto this board with statements like those that livescan/ca made:

Livescan: "I of course did not leave until she signed and I notarized. She was not happy. I'll bet cups and saucers were flying around that house after I left."

Brenda: "I saw nothing unusual about Chery's post."

The beauty of this site is that we all have the opportunity to express our thoughts and when you write something that seemed that you were boasting about what was clearly a red flag, in my opinion, you better make sure you make your message clear.
As far as what another poster, I believe it was Jam/ca, stated about how long someone has been a notary is irrelevant and seems to suggest unfairness to otherwise newer members of this site. As a matter of fact, I feel that much consideration was given to Cheryl that more than likely would not have been given to someone else. It is not fair for people to suggest that because someone who has been around for a while post something you feel is not proper behavior, you should just turn your head. IMHO

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/21/13 12:01pm
Msg #451385

I have experiences that are apparently different than yours.

I saw nothing unusual about Cheryl's post and I clearly explained why.

Reply by desktopfull on 1/21/13 12:05pm
Msg #451386

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

" I just know what it takes to get a loan closed to preserve an excellent rate lock and that's what we accomplished."

Wow, so much for being that 3rd. uninterested party. I really hope that this doesn't come back to bite you Cheryl.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/21/13 12:25pm
Msg #451388

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

What could have bitten me hard, is the borrower losing his rate lock, getting hit with a 1/4 point more and the LO losing the deal...

I have no regrets or tinges of guilt or wrong doing. And I am the disinterested third party, but handpicked by Chase to get loans closed at the 13th hour, end of story.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/21/13 12:37pm
Msg #451391

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor...Wow

" What could have bitten me hard, is the borrower losing his rate lock, getting hit with a 1/4 point more and the LO losing the deal..."

None of which are your concern, nor should they have any bearing on your notarizing or not notarizing - if this particular borrower loses his rate lock or has to pay another 1/4 point, he has no one to blame but himself since he didn't bother to discuss with his wife that she has to come off title - something she didn't wish to do. As for the LO losing the deal - who cares?? He/she didn't do their job either!!

But I'm sure you know that Cheryl.

Reply by LKT/CA on 1/21/13 12:50pm
Msg #451392

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor...Wow

I agree with you, Linda. Re-reading the OP, it seems that it may be beyond the guy not bothering to discuss the QCD with his wife. He had NO intention of her knowing about the transaction, from the OP: <<<Before he left my office, he said, can't I just sign it for her?>>>

Who asks that unless they really don't want the other person even aware of something??

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/21/13 1:19pm
Msg #451395

Well, playing devil's advocate and both sides of the fence

here..but

Who would ask that is someone who needs to get the deal done at the last minute, is losing his rate lock and isn't sure she's not gonna give him a hard time about it - someone needing to seal the deal

What bothers me more on this..hindsight 20/20 that it is - and this is truly truly NOTHING about or against the OP - MA is an attorney-only state, or severely attorney-restricted, what with REBA v NREIS and all - but where was the attorney during all this conveyance of this property? Since it was a conveyance of interest, shouldn't there have been an attorney somewhere involved somehow? I know...kick me now for opening the second can of worms.. Probably a whole separate discussion, but would go to her being advised as to the ramifications of her conveying away her interest to the property

Reply by desktopfull on 1/21/13 1:26pm
Msg #451399

Excellent point! n/m

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/21/13 2:15pm
Msg #451400

Re: Well, playing devil's advocate and both sides of the fence

Any concern about the Mass. attorney participation requirement is the responsibility of the title company to see that it is properly handled....sort of like the Texas home equity requirements. They insure the title.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/21/13 2:19pm
Msg #451401

Was just something I threw out there..simply because

MA requires "active participation" - not sure if it would extend to out of state signings conveying MA property...and as I said, would have certainly avoided the "I have to be on title" issue.

And yes, we all know how title companies/signing services all follow the rules of the states - they never use notaries in attorney-only states..of course not - and if you truly believe that I've got some of that oceanfront property for ya.

Reply by BrendaTx on 1/21/13 2:45pm
Msg #451404

Re: Was just something I threw out there..simply because

This made me think of Paul. He and I went round and round on this. I was adamant that Texas H. E. loans had to be closed according to the Texas Constitutional requirements. He said he was a Florida notary and it did not matter. I said it did. My lawyer boss explained it was the problem of title. They were liable if it was not closed properly. The title could be flawed. They can pay out of they screw it up.

Reply by desktopfull on 1/21/13 1:22pm
Msg #451396

Re: I fail to see the reason for all the furor

When Chase starts putting the onerous of selling their loans to the borrower, especially ones without RTC's, that will be the last Chase loan I will accept for closing. It isn't my job to convince borrower's that they are or aren't getting a good deal, or inform them of any consequences for not closing the loan that is being presented. I hope for your sake that this is the end of the story for you. I realize that you believe that you were being helpful, but IMHO you went too far out on a limb with this one.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 1/21/13 5:12pm
Msg #451423

Wow! What an eye-opener this thread has been for me!

Going forward, I'm going to try to take a different attitude about responding to posts on this forum, because I've been amazed by the assumptions and conclusions drawn about this event based on the choice of words that were used in this thread. Knowing Cheryl, I found it hard to believe that she would coerce a borrower to sign something against their will and figured there was more to the story than what was posted. I know that when I write about a signing experience, I don't go into complete detail, don't use exact language and tend to abbreviate events. I found out that was what happened here, as well.

I happened to talk to Cheryl since the original post and our conversation included some chat (among other things) about the situation she mentioned in her post. As I suspected, the impression some apparently gleaned from the original post is very different from the actual circumstances, as I now understand them. (I'm not getting into any of that here, other than to say that I probably would have done the same thing she did.)

I think Hugh's comments were right on point. There are lots of potential interpretations to any statement and I'd bet most posters here don't examine in minute detail the language in their posts for potential misinterpretations - especially people new to this forum. I'm going to try my best to try to keep that in mind when responding in the future.

Reply by 101livescan on 1/21/13 6:36pm
Msg #451441

Re: Wow! What an eye-opener this thread has been for me!

Why, thank you, Janet, for putting some meat back on this carcass!

There are always more ways than one to skin a cat.

I also have to keep in mind when I am posting how different we all are and think regionally.

We west coast folks have it engrained in our heads to think out of the box, but within scope of law. I once drove to Frazier Park from Santa Barbara for $1000 to sign a package due to rate lock closing the next day. I made it to their mountain retreat by 11pm, and the borrowers were so cool...no way was I driving through the snow and mountain passes. I was handed a nightshirt and slippers, toothbrush and paste and shown the guest quarters.

I wonder if these kinds of events ever happen to any one else, or am I the "chosen" one. My clients do know that I will go to the ends of the earth to get loans signed and back to escrow, again always within the scope of state and federal laws.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/21/13 9:05pm
Msg #451466

Re: Wow! What an eye-opener this thread has been for me!

"We west coast folks have it engrained in our heads to think out of the box, but within scope of law. I once drove to Frazier Park from Santa Barbara for $1000 to sign a package due to rate lock closing the next day. I made it to their mountain retreat by 11pm, and the borrowers were so cool...no way was I driving through the snow and mountain passes. I was handed a nightshirt and slippers, toothbrush and paste and shown the guest quarters.

"I wonder if these kinds of events ever happen to any one else, or am I the "chosen" one. My clients do know that I will go to the ends of the earth to get loans signed and back to escrow, again always within the scope of state and federal laws."

I just finished up my appointments for the day and decided to check out this thread to check out the added drama. I read 101livescans post above and it really saddened me, I am seriously concerned; not being sarcastic here. Reading 101livescan's posts, especially lately, I always felt that Cheryl showed signs of a psychological state manifested by her constant delusions of grandeur. The post above is probably the best example thus far. It is too bad that some individuals, in my opinion, felt it was okay to back up her poor behavior at the signing because of the fact that she is in the same network, how absurd. LKT/Ca, good for you for being true to yourself, I admired your courage. It is also too sad that (in my opinion) some of you who I admired for your common sense and seemingly sincere approach on this board caved. I know you are too intelligent to not see that her behavior was unethical (at least as she wrote it in her post) and encouraging her only perpetuate the behavior. Case in point the boastful and no doubt imaginary post above.
All my earlier comments today were nothing more than opinions; however, now I am more concerned about what I see as a bigger problem and it saddens me.

This is only my humble opinion.