Posted by Oz/Fl on 11/13/13 8:59pm
Msg #492612

FASS

This company now wants you to be NNA certified and pass their background check in order to complete signings for them. I have been doing this for 25 years and have never been held hostage to such demands. I have completed two background checks this year for Lexis Nexis and Sterling which companies like LSI, Servicelink, etc. require. They would not take this and want not only the background check from NNA, but the certification from them. The charge for both is close to $150-$200. I already spent money on the other two background checks that cover everything. I feel this is not right considering the number of signing I complete for them. I told them to just put me has inactive since I will not spend anymore more on another "CHECK" until my current expires. How do you feel about this?

Reply by jba/fl on 11/13/13 9:08pm
Msg #492620

This has been discussed here so much over the past 2 wks.

Consensus: No way! Tired of the NNA.

Reply by Esther Korn on 11/13/13 9:08pm
Msg #492621

Very frustrated and angry. I'm with you 100%.

Reply by HSH/WA on 11/13/13 10:18pm
Msg #492628

Re: Tough call. Over the years Fass has

been my biggest source of closings. Business is so slow, I'd hate to loose their closings even though what they send me doesn't add up to a whole lot right now. You'd make up the cost in two signings or less. But, having bought two BGCs this year, neither of which they will accept, makes buying a 3rd one maddening. Assuming you are still getting some business from Fass, I'd buy it because of the quick pay back (two closings or less), but I can certainly understand your frustration. Many responses to your post will be knee jerk negative reactions to XYZ but may not be the best business decision. Good luck on your choice.

Reply by Pat/IL on 11/13/13 11:55pm
Msg #492634

Background Checks

I think what's needed in this industry is a set of standards, and an open door for a variety of providers to compete. Standards should fit the level of access to the consumer's personal information and person. An escrow officer will have access to funds and, perhaps, personal information that would be of interest to an identity thief. A NSA is likely to have access to the consumer's home. It would seem that different criteria for background checks are in order.

Whoever performs the background check, as long as they, themselves, are vetted, should not matter. Competition serves to keep prices down in the NSA field, and it will serve the same purpose among vendors providing the checks. It's the same in any kind of market that I can think of, unless laws are created to stifle price competition.

This multiple background check could well be a problem outside of the NSA corner of the greater title industry. Some industrious soul might take it to the American Land Title Association, and persist with the issue, until the ALTA seriously addresses a reasonable approach to background checks in its Best Practices advice to its members.

Reply by Exclusive Mobile Notary on 11/14/13 12:26am
Msg #492637

I quit working for FASS and their off-shore, NNA affiliated call center a year ago and couldn't be happier.

Reply by Paula Yakey on 11/14/13 7:15am
Msg #492643

In real estate and mortgage lending "steering" is a no-no. If caught "steering" it is punishable by penalties and fines. My question how is this not "steering"?

Reply by Paula Yakey on 11/14/13 7:20am
Msg #492644

PS: And to avoid "steering" penalties you have to offer 3 choices and not recommend just 1.

Reply by sigtogo/OR on 11/14/13 12:48pm
Msg #492720

anti Steering is to protect borrower not the notary

In other words , while they may be "steering" notaries, we are not covered by the laws that protect borrower.

Reply by Paula Yakey on 11/14/13 10:38pm
Msg #492838

Re: anti Steering is to protect borrower not the notary

The rules were written for consumers. We are in that category as a consumer. It is just mostly used for real estate and insurance.