Posted by CH2inCA on 11/6/13 10:15am Msg #491546
So what's the issue here? What is OUR goal?
I read this board every day. We are, Notaries, Signing Agents, Independent Contractors, _______, fill in the blank.
NNA and its pals have developed and cleverly marketed to Lenders and TCs a package that will affect all of us whatever hat we have on, it will affect the focus of our individual business, whether it be the Notary side, or the Signing Agent side of our business.
Yet in the past few days, we are literally all over the map. WE HATE THIEVING SIGNING SERVICES, LET'S DO AWAY WITH ALL SIGNING SERVICES!! What about the very good SS? The ones that do offer a good fee and watch out for the Signing Agent?
WE LOATH THE NNA! Ok, I give you that one. :0) we do. BUT, how many unsuspecting newbies are taken in unknowingly just because of the organizations Title? How many new Notaries think they're some sort of 'official' entity?
NO TO THE NEW STANDARDS! Firstly who's standards? by whom? Sort of the, "who died and left NNA king"? OR, do we want some uniformity? Some standards? Ok, but Notaries and Signing agents should have a seat at the table when writing the new standards.
BACKGROUND CHECKS! ok, by who? for who?
I believe the most counter-productive thing that we can do as a group here is bickering amoungst ourselves. The na na you made a spelling mistake, oh look at you we're on to your hidden agenda type stuff. The 'it's not going to do you any good to contact that agency,' type stuff.
I say we try to develop a clear picture of what we want to see happen. So that those that are brave enoungh, or knowledgeable enough have good information and support form fellow, Notaries, Signing Agents, and Independent Contractors.
I'd like to start a thread, a list, the Subject line can be an item of concern; and the body it's suggested resolution. Shall we try?
| Reply by CH2inCA on 11/6/13 10:16am Msg #491548
Concern: NNA
Ok I've no suggestion for this concern.
| Reply by CH2inCA on 11/6/13 10:17am Msg #491549
Concern: Background release form n/m
| Reply by MW/VA on 11/6/13 10:31am Msg #491553
I'm on the same page with you. We need to remember
that the forum is about discussion, and everyone will raise their concerns in their own way.
| Reply by PA_Notary_II on 11/6/13 10:35am Msg #491554
Concern: Proper vetting of SS's by TC's n/m
| Reply by CarolF/NC on 11/6/13 10:41am Msg #491557
The Entire Code of Conduct
I will agree to sign a document titled something like "Compliance Standards" which details how I will protect consumers private and personal information. I'd like to see a group of us develop that Compliance Standards Agreement.
| Reply by Darlin_AL on 11/6/13 12:44pm Msg #491588
response from xyz to my email complaint to them
about xyz member not being polled or included in the "workgroup"
"Hello Judith,
It was not our intent to offend anyone. SPW participants were under a strict Non-Disclosure Agreement until the announcement was made on 10/29/13. The NNA served independent Notaries by providing further insight about what happens at the signing table, data regarding actual E&O claims to set a level of E&O insurance that is reasonable, and helped guide the SPW committee toward a reasonable minimum level of qualifications for Notaries. Bill Anderson, our VP of Legislative Affairs, is an NSA who is serving the SPW as Secretary.
Again, the SPW is open to any other Notary association, signing service, and Notary services company that would like to join and provide input. So, the NNA will not be the only voice of the Notary at the table. Please understand that the SWP is new and that one of the reasons its work will continue is so that it can address the matters you’ve raised. The SPW is in the process of creating a system to get feedback directly from Notaries like you too and we’ll be sure to make that announcement very public as soon as it happens. We’ll also make sure that news is covered on our page (NationalNotary.org/Standards) so I encourage you to visit regularly for updates.
Warm regards,
-Kat"
So, I'm supposed to visit them if I want to know what's being revealed to the public. My membership does not qualify me for a group email. I now really see why so many of my constituents won't have anything to do w/xyz. I am not a member of any national notary organization, any suggestions on which one to join that is a member of the "workgroup" ?
| Reply by desktopfull on 11/6/13 3:38pm Msg #491613
Re: response from xyz to my email complaint to them
I believe the notice of the fee to join the SPW group is $1000.00. Use the orange search button been discussed ad nauseam here for the last couple of weeks.
| Reply by MikeC/TX on 11/6/13 5:00pm Msg #491627
Re: response from xyz to my email complaint to them
"The SPW is in the process of creating a system to get feedback directly from Notaries like you too and we'll be sure to make that announcement very public as soon as it happens."
How long does it take to set up an email address like "[e-mail address]"??
I think in this case "in the process" is doublespeak for "we'll set it up if enough people complain". My guess is that if they really wanted notary feedback, they would have asked for it BEFORE they released their standards - and any feedback they receive will go directly to the circular file.
Also, I wonder what the reason was for the NDA. Were they afraid that someone else would come along and develop a competing set of standards? Or were they afraid that notaries would object to what was going on without their input? As the saying goes, it's always easier to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission...
| Reply by Darlin_AL on 11/8/13 2:01pm Msg #491978
Exactly, Mike/TX n/m
|
|