Posted by JJNotary/CA on 11/20/13 1:59pm
Msg #493438

FNF Release

Hello all, I have been a NSA for 6months now, and am still finding my way through some of these forums a bit - but could anyone give me feed back to this FNF release/ background cert. I'm being asked to sign or direct me to a thread that has already discussed it? I tried a search of the forum but didn't come up with what I am looking for. It's the release that is giving me pause, I have no trouble with the cert.

This seems like a vague, rest of my career, sort of release that is covering details I'm not 100% sure about give that sort of release of.... however if they will no longer be using me.... As I said, trying to figure out what the feedback on this is. Any advice is helpful. Thank you all!

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 11/20/13 2:03pm
Msg #493439

Orange search button - keyword "release" or "fnf release"

there HAS to be results as this has been discussed extensively over the last couple weeks. In fact, if you scroll down I think you'll find a discussion today about it.

Reply by Darlin_AL on 11/20/13 2:17pm
Msg #493440

search in text of posts, not topics n/m

Reply by JJNotary/CA on 11/21/13 1:03am
Msg #493506

That may have been the problem - thank you

It seemed unlikely that the topic had not come up before!

Reply by Lee/AR on 11/20/13 4:04pm
Msg #493451

There are actually 2 releases...revised version not much improved over the original. As FNF is one of the 'members' of the NNA/SPW group and was involved in the whole CSS concept, part of which is an NNA BGC.... I don't understand why they want more (WAY MORE) than the original Certificate.
Don't they trust the NNA/SPW to get it right? LOL...rhetorical question. That release is so over the top that they have to be thinking we're all idiots. Teach them otherwise.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 11/20/13 5:39pm
Msg #493460

This is an issue worth flooding an exec's inbox with letters

I don't have time to research it right now, but maybe one of you do... The issue of this release seems to be the most flagrant thing to have come about as a result of the CFPB bulletins and the one where we seem to be getting the most supportive feedback from outsiders (attorneys, govt officials, etc.) who agree that it is an extreme over-reach.

I think it would be very helpful for someone to post here some names and addresses (snail and/or email) for top level FNF executives. I sent an email to Liz Rhea @ FNF about this a few weeks ago, but if I got a reply, it was a dismissal. (I think she said it had already been reviewed by their legal department. That was before the revision.) Time to go over her head, I think.

I believe it would also be helpful for the researchers amongst us to offer some bullet points of documentation regarding how this release is an infraction of our rights. If we make some intelligent noise on this, I think we can have an impact. As I've said elsewhere, though, let's try to stay away from emotion, name calling and hyperbole. The more factual and reasoned our correspondence can be, the more they're likely to listen. For example, are there specific governmental statutes that are being ignored or broken? Is this action contrary to the letter or intent of some of the CFPB bulletins?

Bottom line, I believe that we should not be expected to forfeit our own expectations of protection of our NPPI just because we do this type of work. There are ways of providing security for borrowers without sacrificing our own. I would be more than happy to sign a release that protects everyone - including us. Just eliminating the borrowers from those who can request copies of whatever info about us that comes into their possession is not enough.

Anyone else have some specifics to add? (I gotta run...)

Reply by Claudine Osborne on 11/20/13 7:27pm
Msg #493478

Re: This is an issue worth flooding an exec

No specifics to add..Just my own 2 cents..Im not signing this..in any version revised or not!! The can have the certificate no problem..But I am not giving them permission to share the background report to whom ever would request it..If the certificate is issued to me that means I passed..that is sufficient!

Reply by jba/fl on 11/20/13 7:28pm
Msg #493479

agree...that is enough. n/m

Reply by Lee/AR on 11/20/13 9:36pm
Msg #493493

Agree! Re: This is an issue worth flooding an exec

I did write to Jennifer Walker @ FNF, after which I received the revision eliminating the Bs from the list of parties to whom my BGC could be provided. But it still could go out to every FNF subsidiary and who knows how many employees would have access to it. AND, the real kicker, is that we are expected to release FNF et al from any liability or claim whatsoever from releasing my information to who know how many whoevers. This is just wrong on so many levels.

Reply by Les_CO on 11/21/13 9:10am
Msg #493518

Re: Agree! Re: This is an issue worth flooding an exec

I would never sign this release! Let them close all their loans in a Title Company office with Title Company employees, or hire lawyers to do it (what lawyer would sign such a release?) These people have just gone too far….I’m not about to lose my house and all my assets, because some twit at a title company gives my personal info to her just-out-of jail boyfriend; for a $75 fee?…they can shove it.

Reply by JJNotary/CA on 11/21/13 9:48am
Msg #493524

Agreed - thinking of responding w/ note that I am forwarding

to my legal rep. It's ironic - I mean, we're NOTARIES - we look at details for a living, something of this magnitude is not going to slip by us.

I do think, after reading through some of the thoughts here, that I am going to forward the Cert (which I think is a responsible request) with an email stating I am having the legality looked at of the release, and then forward the release to my lawyer to review. It just feels fishy, no timelines, no constraints, and while in theory it is only info we provide - there is a line about 'or let be released' (not exactly that, but similar). And THAT is certainly fishy!