Posted by Buddy Young on 1/10/13 12:34am
Msg #449728

We can't certify capasity in California.

I recieved a pre printed Ack. for a DOT that said John Doe and Jane Doe, husband and wife as joint tenants. Do you cross out the extra verbage and inital or substitute a blank Ack. or just leave it alone as written? Sorry for the dumb question, but just curious how you guys and gals handle that.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 1/10/13 12:37am
Msg #449729

It's entirely up to you, Bud. If the rest of the wriding is correct, you can probably just cross out the "husband and wife as joint tenants" part if you wish. If that gets too messy, you can always attach another one.

Either way, you're right... in CA the ONLY thing that goes on the line is the NAME of the signer(s). No titles or capacities or any other extra stuff. CA is pretty clear about prohibiting that kind of thing.

Reply by Mung/CA on 1/10/13 1:51am
Msg #449734

Cross it out and initial Bud. n/m

Reply by linda/ca on 1/10/13 2:47am
Msg #449739

Leave the John Doe and Jane Doe that's already typed on the docs and only cross out and initial the husband and wife as joint tenants part. That way you are not tampering too much with what they typed and they usually get the message when you only strike out capacity. Never had a problem when I use that method.

Reply by linda/ca on 1/10/13 3:38am
Msg #449741

"Capacity" n/m

Reply by ArtG/KS on 1/10/13 8:46am
Msg #449757

Re: "Capacity"

Here in KS only the names are applicable but the Joint tenancy with right of survivorship must stay and here is why. The register of deeds records that capacity. In KS if there is not a will "intestate" and no joint tenancy designation on the recording, THEN they are automatically tenants in common.

If changed to where it automatically becomes tenants in common, then IF one spouse dies, and if there are children or other title holders, those children or title holders could force division of the property. If however it states that they are Joint tenancy with right of survivorship, then such other title holders or children cannot force division of the property.

You could get sued over this for changing or removing capacity. You are NOT certifying capacity, only notarizing the names. At least that is the way it is in KS. If you change the Acknowledgement on the Mortgage/DOT then you had better have a very high business E&O policy in force and a few weeks to spend in court while the continuance game is played.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 1/10/13 9:05am
Msg #449761

Art, I respectfully disagree with you.

I believe the vesting is within the body of the document - I find it difficult to believe that the language of the notary cert would impact the status of vesting. And I doubt any court would sustain that vesting. Vedsting is what is above the grantor's signature, not within the notary cert.

Let me ask this - example: If there is NO specific language vesting within the document, it being the intent that it be set as tenants in common, and someone inadvertently puts "joint tenants with right of survivorship" in the notary cert, which will stand? And who is liable?

I firmly do not believe the notary certs have any bearing on the status of vesting of title - the notary cert merely serves as proof that the signers appeared before the notary and signed voluntarily and "for the intent hereinabove stated"....

I cross out any language other than names in my certs...here in FL

JMHO

Reply by ArtG/KS on 1/10/13 9:15am
Msg #449766

Re: Art, I respectfully disagree with you.

I thought of that after I posted. Vesting may or may not take precedent. If challenged, the courts will decide. I had mine covered in that vesting and in the notary certificate, but now have that superceded by will and by transfer of deed upon death.

To address your comment, the wording "state specific" in the ACK should follow what is in the vesting. I have seen that to be in conflict in a couple of cases but I dont know how that was disposed of either.

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 1/10/13 12:57pm
Msg #449789

I believe Marian is referring to Notarial Certificate only n/m

Reply by Bob_Chicago on 1/10/13 2:14pm
Msg #449805

Good thing that I am in IL. Had a request on a POA signing

that the ACK needed to say Joe Blow as attorney in fact for Sam Blow. Joe did sign in individual capacity and as AIF. Only noted Joe on the ACK. Was told that Recorder would not accept unless ACK siad that Joe as signing as AIF for Sam. In Ill we can pretty much do our
own thing, so I just did it.

Reply by garland/CA on 1/10/13 2:30pm
Msg #449811

Cross out/intial or add own Acknowledgment

I've always crossed out and initialed if it doesn't make the certificate too messy. Only once it came back, the lender wanted the capacity left on (was for a different state than California). I said I couldn't leave it on the notary certificate. They kept insisting. I finally resolved it by adding my own California All-Purpose Acknowledgment and just writing "see attached Acknowledgment" (and initialing) on their document without crossing anything out. Lender finally accepted it that way and I satisfied my state law too.

Reply by garland/CA on 1/10/13 2:32pm
Msg #449812

meant to write "initial"!, n/m