Posted by Mike Goodey on 3/14/13 12:15am
Msg #461096

Notarizing docs

I was at a signing tonight, actually my own...been waiting for 5 months for the paperwork to be completed by the US Bank rep...finally get the o.k. to close the loan...what a nightmare...notary comes out...tells us to sign here, here, here, initial here, sign there...no, not there...never tells me what docs are what...sign and initial DOT...sign his book...eventually get to the Name Affidavit...had total of 3 notarizations...only signed book once. This guy said he's been a notary for 10 years...Am I the only one who has borrower sign my book for each and every notarization? I just thought that odd...maybe it's just me who is odd! Anyway, my wife chuckled when US Bank had a form wanting to know about their service...5 months? Are you kidding me? Our credit is excellent...only hold up should have been that the property is in a trust.....but noooo...they wanted every piece of paper they could think of...then their rep fails to forward all the paperwork to the underwriters! Of course then the paystubs have expired, the appraisal expired etc. Once my 10 year loan is paid off, any accounts with US Bank go bye bye.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/14/13 12:29am
Msg #461097

In answer to your question: "Am I the only one who has borrower sign my book for each and every notarization?" Probably not, but I'm certainly not one of them. Never have, probably never will. One signature, one t-print per entire document signing.

Reply by Kat2857/CA on 3/14/13 12:31am
Msg #461098

I envy you...........10 years no more US Bank

Refi my house last April. Loan went to US Bank. I will admit I take advantage of the grace period. Payment is due on the 1st, get a call on the 3rd asking where my payment is. I tell them have a 15 day grace period and why are you calling me she said that the stock holders want their money............really! 2nd month get a call from them on the 4th day of the month. Same questions, then I said this is harassment.............No more calls.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 3:39am
Msg #461101

"Am I the only one who has borrower sign my book for each and every notarization?"

No, you are most definitely NOT the only one.

It's a matter of contention around here and there are two very different opposing interpretations of the requirements.

Personally? Every notarial act gets its' own line entry in *my* journal. I believe that's the law, and I've read multiple items from the Secretary of State that support that position.

There, are, however, others who only get a single signature and print and write all of the documents notarized in a single entry. There is wiggle room in the written code that appears to support this method. I've yet to see any written documentation that supports this interpretation, though... unlike with the one line per act interpretation I noted above. I've looked or it, and even asked other notaries to show me any if they have it. I've seen nothing yet.

I did recently write a letter to them, asking them what their expectations were regarding this... procedurally speaking. You can't ask the Sec of State to interpret the law for you. But, you can ask them what they expect you to do as far as procedure goes. That approach has always worked really well for me.

The last time I wrote a letter to them, it took several months to get a written reply on Sec of State letterhead. I'm hoping I'll receive on this time, as well.

Reply by janCA on 3/14/13 9:15am
Msg #461108

Aside from the whole line item issue, which I do agree with Marian, it sounds like you had a point and sign notary, Mike. I hope those borrowers also made a comment about his service on US Bank's survey sheet.

Reply by janCA on 3/14/13 9:29am
Msg #461110

Just reread my post. I hope you, as the borrower, commented about the SA's performance on the survey sheet.

Reply by Notarysigner on 3/14/13 9:54am
Msg #461116

Like you and Marian, I now complete my Journal i notarization = i line. Another reason why I won't alter my fee, I'm doing it correctly. I also do all the notarization in the presence of the person(s) and not later. Takes longer but that's what you're suppose to get IMO.

In defense of that SA I honestly believe if you knew how to do it correctly, you owe it to your client to do so. They probably didn't know.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/14/13 11:51am
Msg #461135

Yikes, James

Looks like you can teach an old dog new tricks! (LOL)
BTW: I, too, now complete all notarizaions in presence of signer since (can't remember where I read it?), the SOS plainly said to do so. I thought it would be messy and mistake-prone since I normally can't do two things at once, but the secret (for me) is to make sure everything's CA compliant before leaving the house and that all printed loose certs are done. Then it's pretty much a slam dunk and doesn't take any longer than a couple of seconds.

I also have switched to a new journal that makes it really easy to get name, sgnature and t-print of borrower on one side, and then I list 1. 2. 3. etc. what docs were notarized and then start again with the next guy(s). But still, only one signature and t-print for the whole shabang. It's obvious the notarizations go with the signer. I think it's barbaric to expect a signer to sign and t-print each and every notarization. Five-six is standard, but it's not uncommon to have up to 8 or 9 per singer. Yikes!

Anyway, you to now say "I'm doing it correctly," make that: correctly, in your opinion, big guy. You sound like a converted holy roller now. I already have 9 PMs (sigh; and I'm sure I'll get a few more) from notaries who disagree with you and your fellow believers. This always happens on posts of this sort. They never want to post in public for whatever reason (tired of all the drama/violence/intimidation?) but apparently I'm one of the few who simply post what I do (when asked). Notice I don't say everythng I do is "correct," implying that everybody else is incorrect (maybe we're both "correct,"); it's just the other side of the story.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 12:08pm
Msg #461139

Re: Yikes, James

GG... I don't think it's fair to berate James. The fact is that the Sec of Sate has written opinions that support the one-line method. I still challenge and wish to see something that supports the way you like to do things. I'm sincerely genuine about that. Nobody has provided anything of the sort to this date that I can find.

If people are too afraid to talk about it publicly, that's a shame. Maybe they should try to get a written opinion from the Sec of State supporting their interpretation. I would WELCOME seeing it.

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 3/14/13 12:33pm
Msg #461143

GOLDGIRL-I thought on this site we shared the way WE handle,

not pushing the way we conduct a signing on anyone else.
Anyone on this site is entitled to conduct signings any way they chose and we should accept it.
It did not seem as though James was pushing/demanding that we follow his "Best Practices", but merely conveying how he conducts a signing.
I say...let it be....

Stephanie

Reply by Notarysigner on 3/14/13 1:43pm
Msg #461152

Re: GOLDGIRL-FOR ALL TO KNOW....I love GG she is

considered one of my best Notary friends, we go all the way back to when she disagreed with me about it being OK to Notarize illegal aliens. I love her, she inspires me to do the right thing and if everyone on this forum would appreciate someone who disagrees with them to get to the bottom of any issue,..we would all be in better shape....Now sistah, here comes your p/m hehe

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 2:01pm
Msg #461156

Re: GOLDGIRL-FOR ALL TO KNOW....I love GG she is

I think there's a big difference between disagreeing with interpretation or professional methods and liking somebody personally. Despite some nasty comments sent my way by some people... I really don't dislike any of the notaries here. Though, I won't lie... there are one or two that I would NEVER, EVER refer anyone to... but none of them are regular posters here.

Besides, GG has amazing taste in stamps.

Reply by Notarysigner on 3/14/13 2:15pm
Msg #461161

Oh yea....Marian has taught me more about

finding out the truth via research and how to do it then anyone else. Then of course there's the gospels, in Texas, Fl. I don't dislike anyone here either Marian of course if the devil needed a document notarized, there are a few I could recommend. hehe

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/14/13 2:16pm
Msg #461162

Good one, JD!

"if the devil needed a document notarized, there are a few I could recommend. hehe"

Too funny!

Reply by Mike Goodey on 3/14/13 2:52pm
Msg #461178

The borrowers were my wife and I and I lit into them for their lack of service...I did get a $68.00 tolerance credit for poor service...Are you for real?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/14/13 11:19am
Msg #461125

For the record, the "law" in CA doesn't address the one-line-per-entry issue at all. However, that is a common interpretation of the law that many agree with - and many don't. I'd prefer to see us all focus on making sure that all the required info is included, rather than how it's done, and not try to impose one interpretation on everyone.

Reply by Louis Pescarmona on 3/14/13 11:27am
Msg #461129

Thank you, JanetK, well said.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/14/13 2:52pm
Msg #461177

JanetK's always well said.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 11:49am
Msg #461133

I've always said that I fully understand and respect the opinion of those who feel that the one--line issue is not an interpretation they agree with. I can absolutely see how the wording of the law may for multiple different ways of recording information.

Here's the thing though... the Secretary of State often issues their expectations regarding procedure. They are the ones who have investigators audit notary records. They are the ones who, last year, said that the "vast majority" of journal entries are not being completed properly. To me, that says they *DO* have expectations on how they want things done... whether it is specifically written in the law or not.

For example, nowhere in CA law does it say we have to staple loose certificates --- and yet, the Secretary of State has made it VERY clear that's how they want us to handle loose certificates.

That's my point here. I've seen several written opinions from their office that support the one-line per act method... and NONE that support any other approach. I sure would love to see one if it exists. I don't exactly like the monotony of multiple entries either... but I see the overall good reasoning for it in the event of all of the "what-ifs" that can and do happen. The fact is, if I'm audited, I'm absolutely comfortable showing them my one-line per entry records... whereas if I did multiple documents on a single line... I'd be seriously nervous, because... deep down... I don't think that method follows the intention of the law. Better that I be over prepared than not.

It's like how last weekend I went and bought a new(ish) car. I had my loan approval already in place, but the dealer wanted me to bring some documentation in just in case. Well, I took FOLDERS of stuff with me... banks statements, tax records, everything they might want to see. When we were finishing up, the saleslady said, "Let's take copies of the last 3 months of bank statements, just in case. I don't think we'll need them, though." Fortunately, I had them with me. Turns out that the bank DID want them because of my self-employment income.

I'd rather have more and be over prepared than not have what I need when I need it. I take that same approach with notary work... don't invite potential trouble.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 3/15/13 1:06am
Msg #461306

"they *DO* have expectations on how they want things done.."

Yes, of course they do. Their expectations are that we follow the law and include ALL the info that is required.

"whether it is specifically written in the law or not."

This I think is a stretch - and over-thinking the issue. There are so many, many things they could mean by not "properly" completing the notary journal. For example, writing "loan docs" instead of listing the name or character of each doc with signatures notarized, or not including the type of notarial act, or not getting a signature or a thumbprint where required... Just go down the list of all the items that our law states must be there, and I'm sure we could find lots of journals where this info isn't being collected at all.

You yourself have posted about several examples you've come across of flagrant incompetence where notaries are not including all the required info - or worse. I think that's a very valid concern by the SOS. However, I'd rather not have them be concerned with HOW a notary completes the required elements. I'd much rather see them spending their manpower going after those who don't have a clue or don't care, than writing written opinions on every single nuance of what we do. (BTW, the oath we take is to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and of the State of California, not to the SOS.)

"I'd rather have more and be over prepared than not have what I need when I need it."

That's great, if that's how you choose to operate. I think most of us respect that about you. But that doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't choose to "over prepare" or who feels they are adequately meeting the state's legal requirements without rising to the level of your exacting standards, is necessarily wrong. Everyone has a different comfort level or process that they feel works best for them.

To follow on your example, when I bought my car last year, I showed up with nothing but my checkbook, DL and proof of insurance. After we agreed on a deal, I filled out some forms, they pulled my credit report - and I walked out with a new car. (And my only income is also from self-employment.) To me, it wasn't worth the time and effort to collect all that other stuff. (Truth be told, it never occurred to me.) Two different approaches, same result. I can't say that your way is wrong because it was right for you. Conversely, my way may not fit your comfort level, but it was right for me. We were each able to choose how we wanted to go about accomplishing the end result, as long as we met the necessary requirements, and we each achieved our respective goals.

California already has the most restrictive requirements for notaries in the country - which I AM generally pleased about - but I don't see the need to keep pushing the envelope on things like this. I'd rather see time and effort directed at things that I consider to be higher value issues, and imo, that applies to keeping a journal in some ways the same as it does to prepping to buy a car (although I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with that analogy... ). The CA SOS office is overburdened enough. Let's give them a break.

Reply by ananotary on 3/14/13 1:14pm
Msg #461146

OMG, not this AGAIN. Janet- Well said!!! n/m

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 3/14/13 1:28pm
Msg #461150

This will always be an issue!!! n/m

Reply by Notarysigner on 3/14/13 1:53pm
Msg #461153

Re: This will always be an issue!!!

Not really Stephanie, it just shows how our notary training doesn't reflex the issue of interpretation of the law (hand book) which differs drastically from the SOS newsletters.

The forum is for discussion of ideas, the courts are for interpreting the laws. I am not a lawyer, don't want to be. If it's anything I've learned over the past five years is that everyone has an agenda here but the bottom line is, we're Notaries commissioned to service the public.

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 2:09pm
Msg #461157

Re: This will always be an issue!!!

James makes a great point. There just seems to be so many questions because I don't think the mandatory training is adequate...nor does it necessarily provide any correlation to updated information put out on our newsletters. Shoot... do you know how many notaries I meet who have NO CLUE that they even put out an annual newsletter... much less any of the other resources available online.

I actually keep copies of the newsletter in my briefcase now to give to those people.

I think the big issue is that the Secretary of State's office obviously has behavioral expectations of their notaries. I've known several notaries who've been audited for various reasons and the investigators nailed them (or counseled them) on "proper" procedure. And, as I mentioned before, last year's newsletter had a giant clue about this when they said that the "vast majority" of journal entries aren't being done properly. Yet, it's like pulling teeth to get them to admit to specifics as to what "properly" means to them. That, I think, is the problem.

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 3/14/13 4:55pm
Msg #461229

...this is why I say it will always be an issue...we

interpret the law differently.

Reply by 101livescan on 3/14/13 9:36am
Msg #461111

US Bank is losing market share. Can't deliver a competitive product. There are so many better lenders out there. The time lag is not the only issue. Lack of quality assurance, customer care, etc. I have a friend who was a LO there and left for a multitude of nondelivery issues.

Reply by Robin/CA on 3/14/13 9:44am
Msg #461112

I also have the borrower sign my book for each and every notarization. I really wish we could get a clear answer from the SOS.

Reply by 101livescan on 3/14/13 9:53am
Msg #461115

Mike, who was your loan officer? was this a refi of your current/former loan? You should give him feedback, not just fill out the questionnaire. I signed a client the other day in a local escrow office. The LO emailed the EO and asked how the signing went. The EO copied me on the email reply, it went extremely well, as usual. Cheryl knows her way around loan docs, no matter who the lender is.

That's the kind of review you want to hear, not the point and sign kind. Although I do meet with borrowers who only care about rate and term, they know up front what the costs are before I sit down with them, and if there are $$ due or cash out. I like the sophisticated borrowers who get it.

That's the cutting edge we veterans have over the less experienced people coming on line now, who are clueless, really, about how to perform and to make the borrower feel comfortable with their loan documents and the entire signing process. My .02 cents

Reply by MW/VA on 3/14/13 10:16am
Msg #461121

Yes, it's interesting when we're on the other side of

the process. Try to remember that there's been a lot of misunderstanding in this profession about "explaining the documents" and I've heard of notaries that interpret that literally & don't "review" the docs with the borrowers. Not me, I do a complete closing with them.
Also, I refi'd about six mos. ago with WF. I was prepared to have to document everything. I joke that they wanted everything except a DNA sample. Lender criteria has changed, and I often comment that we're all paying for the "no document" loans that went down during that period of lending insanity. Now the lender will make sure they have everything covered. I'm sure you're glad it's behind you. ;-)

Reply by Stephanie Santiago on 3/14/13 11:40am
Msg #461131

During a signing, I read the title of the document to them,

if they have a question, I point to the area where they can find their answer. I am not a "closer", I am a "Notary Signing Agent".
If they have questions, I will guide them to a document that may answer their question.
If necessary, they will call their Loan Officer.
While I am familiar with all loan documents, I read the name of the document, ask the signers to review before they sign.
This seems to work out well and the signings are very successful.

Stephanie

Reply by Marian_in_CA on 3/14/13 12:03pm
Msg #461138

Re: During a signing, I read the title of the document to them,

I agree with Stephanie. I am NOT a loan closer. I'm not there to "close" anything. When I do these, I explain to the borrowers that I am not their loan officer or a representative of Title, Escrow or the lander. I'm a neutral third party hired to provide a convenient service in their home/office. I'm there to witness their signatures and expedite the paperwork, that what they are doing is PART of the entire closing process, not the whole thing. They are fully aware that if they have questions specific to their loan, they need to contact their loan officer, attorney or other appropriate party.

I do note the title or purpose of each document and, in some cases (each appointment is different) will point out some important information -- like the first payment information, etc. I keep it very general. I'm definitely not a point and sign notary, but I don't get in to specifics, either.

Reply by GOLDGIRL/CA on 3/14/13 2:39pm
Msg #461170

Whadda ya know?

I am in complete agreement with Marian's last post! And also the one where she noted we had great taste in (round, purple) stamps!

Her post also reminds me of a conversation I had with a Realtor when I was thinking of becoming a loan signer and was fishing for any helpful marketing info from him. I recall he thought I was nuts (now I know why!), but one thing he distinctly said: It was the notary's job "to bring home the loan." He went on to explain that most of his signings were done at TCs or if not, an EO would go meet the borrower, just to make sure the darn loan got signed. And if they actually had to spend good money on a notary, he/she better perform! LOL. I found that kinda frightening at the time, but soon found out it was a pipe dream (on their part). Even today, when I have a rough signing, I always joke to my hubby: "Yeah, I'm not just any dum notary; I brought home the loan." (When in fact, we got the LO on the phone.)

Reply by mskip/AL on 3/14/13 3:47pm
Msg #461213

Re: During a signing, I read the title of the document to them,


Amen, to that Stephanie.