Posted by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 12:48pm
Msg #472078

SSI Vetted

For those Notaries out there who became vetted by SSI, have you seen any increase in
business? I have been vetted since October 2012 and most Title companies don't know
what it is.

I was required to do this by Security One in order to continue to do Reverse Signings for
them. I didn't mind the $99 a year, since they pay me $200 a signing and often take less
time than my forward mortgages. Just curious as to your experience with being vetted.

I just wrote an e-mail to SSI asking these same questions. Let's see if I get a response.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/3/13 12:49pm
Msg #472079

$99.00 per YEAR? For What?? n/m

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 12:55pm
Msg #472080

Linda :) Ongoing background check n/m

Reply by Jack/AL on 6/3/13 12:55pm
Msg #472081

What is SSI? $99 for what? Perhaps you've been had. n/m

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 12:58pm
Msg #472083

Re: What is SSI? $99 for what? Perhaps you've been had.

SSI is Secure Settlements Inc, you can google them. Wasn't had. It was required by
Security One Lenders.

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 1:14pm
Msg #472084

Response from CEO/President SSI

Dear Ms. Malone,



That should change soon. The reason you have not seen any traction in CA is because some local escrow and settlement associations spread the false rumor that the CA Department of Corporations ruled that vetting was illegal, which it did not do. Our program was developed together with regulators and banks and screened by attorneys. Our board includes a former MBA president, former ALTA resident, past director of FHFA, and former banking and insurance commissioners.



Today the noise has dropped off considerably. The vetting requirement for banks is now mandated not just by CFPB, but also by HUD, FNMA, FHLMC, FDIC, OCC and NCUA. We are now beginning to sign up new lenders in California so that your information will be available to them and your status as an independently vetted agent will show value nationwide.



Thanks for your interest and participation in our program.



Andrew Liput | President & CEO

Secure Settlements Inc.

100 Lanidex Plaza, Suite 1201 | Parsippany, NJ 07054

Main: 877-75-TRUST Cell: 973-975-8434

E-Fax: (973) 463-4299 | www.securesettlements.com

[e-mail address]

Follow us on LinkedIn



Look for the SSI Verified Agent Seal



SSI Registered Agent Official Seal

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 6/3/13 1:26pm
Msg #472085

Might want to see this

http://www.clta.org/for-members/newsExpress/express1213/express_1213-26_090412.html

And look for any follow-up. I, for one, would not take the word of the CEO of the company pushing this service.

If it were true that it were required? - only those notaries who went through this service would be working right now. And that's not the case.

JMO

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 1:40pm
Msg #472086

Thanks Linda

Good info. So far, the only one that required me to be vetted by SSI is Security One Lending.
I could not do THEIR loans unless I am.

Reply by dgd/CA on 6/4/13 7:51am
Msg #472144

Re: Response from CEO/President SSI (false rumor)???

While I understand you had to make a business decision, here is the written opinion from our Department of Corporations:

www.corp.ca.gov/Commissioner/Bulletins/pdf/0001-12.pdf

It's very clear...

Reply by dgd/CA on 6/4/13 7:56am
Msg #472145

Copy and Paste... sorry about that... n/m

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 6/3/13 1:58pm
Msg #472088

What information do they "verify' and "vet" that is any different than any of the other background screenings we submit to, especially in California. I can see this service being necessary on those states that don't perform background checks on their notaries... but in the states that do? Seems like a waste...

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 6/3/13 2:02pm
Msg #472089

Hmmm... I found this on their FAQ page. Seems they get WAY too nosy.

"Attorneys and settlement agents must pass a list of credentialing criteria that covers everything from E&O coverage, proven industry experience, valid licensing and bonding where required, clean credit, criminal and litigation backgrounds, trust account safety, and other proprietary criteria."

Reply by Susan Fischer on 6/3/13 6:41pm
Msg #472111

(Looks like a paragraph out of their std job app.) Just

noticed "...and settlement agents". Which, we aren't. Two different animals. SAs distribute the $$$, hence, the trust acc't safety, for instance.

We identify signers, describe docs, refer explanations to LOs, Notarize, etc. We don't do anything with funds but pass them on through the custodial system, if we collect any funds at all.

I would X-out that "requirement" as N/A; I'm neither an attorney nor a settlement agent. I would expect the "vetter" would agree. Just my take.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 6/3/13 8:27pm
Msg #472121

Re: (Looks like a paragraph out of their std job app.) Just

I agree, and noticed the same thing... but I see nothing on the website about notaries and the vetting requirements. It seems to be all bunched together with other positions, which makes me wonder if they simply put everyone through the same process.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 6/3/13 11:35pm
Msg #472133

Just shows to go ya, there's no 'one-size-fits-all' criteria

especially with the two specific subjects: attys and SAs in specific. N/A solves that conflict created by such boiler-plate language, no? If they "require" the impossible, well...I sure couldn't sign it.

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 2:04pm
Msg #472090

Marian

I agree. Just wanted to continue with one of my favorite loan officers and this was
required by Security One Lending for me to continue to do their signings. Please see
SSI's website for further info.

Reply by MW/VA on 6/3/13 2:45pm
Msg #472096

I see what you're up against, but I wouldn't pay it or

submit to it. IMO it's a way for them to profit from your efforts.

Reply by BobtheElder on 6/3/13 4:04pm
Msg #472100

I already do annual background checks and I don't think I'd spend any money on such a thing... if my regular clients want to use me they'll accept what I offer... or they won't be regular clients any more.
There are altogether too many companies besides the NNA pushing this sort of stuff and it's all about them making a buck... just my 2 cents.

Reply by ananotary on 6/3/13 5:50pm
Msg #472106

JAM/CA- I understand why you did it. It's no different than

people who submit to the NNA check for their good clients that are demanding it. $99 for a stream of $200 signings makes complete sense to me. I almost went this route a year or so ago but since it didn't appear that it really was going to be required and none of my clients were requesting it, I didn't go through the process. But you can bet that if my direct clients that give me dozens of direct closings per month suddenly requested it, I would go through the vetting process.

Reply by Darlin_AL on 6/3/13 6:00pm
Msg #472108

You mentioned they do reverse mortgages

and that is something I am getting away from as I can see the ones I have signed are not particularly a very good deal for the owner, and some owners are really low income and low appraisal--it is starting to appear predatory lending in my neck of the woods. Not many fancy schmancy houses where the owners have a sizeable equity to benefit from. BUT, this is my rural area. Your setting may provide a very beneficial deal with the reverse. The companies I have worked for are not SSI and only require standard notary credentials. I haven't seen any more personal info on the borrower than the regular refi; I suspect the hiring party wants you to have an "interest" in the signing===even though that's not supposed to be the case.

Reply by JAM/CA on 6/3/13 7:43pm
Msg #472119

Darlin_AL

I truly believe sometimes people don't read the threads thoroughly or skim over them.
I have never been hired by SSI. The "lender" required this vetting, in order for me to continue to do signings for them. I have nothing to hide.
As far as reverse mortgages or any mortgage, I have no financial or beneficial interest in them. There is a different fee of $249.00??? or something for actual Settlement Agents. My fee of $99 is for
Notary Signing Agents.

If you personally do not do Reverse Mortgage signings because you don't see a financial or beneficial
interest for the consumer, then you are involving yourself. Your choice, of course. I see many benefits.

My question was for others who did go through the vetting process with SSI. I do know there
were others that posted around October last year.

Reply by jba/fl on 6/3/13 11:02pm
Msg #472131

Re: Darlin_AL

"If you personally do not do Reverse Mortgage signings because you don't see a financial or beneficial
interest for the consumer, then you are involving yourself. Your choice, of course. I see many benefits."

I do as well, for many. I also don't see benefits for some, but since I never ask about the whole picture and it really is not my business (I don't sell the product) I agree with you that it is best to stay uninvolved.

I have never been vetted by this company nor been approached about it. I don't think I would bother, but then again, if the company I do a lot of RM's for mentioned a new requirement, I might re-think my stance. I don't know, of course, as I haven't had to think about it. Like Scarlett, I will think about that tomorrow or later.