Posted by Malbrough_LA on 11/18/13 9:59am Msg #493134
This code wasn't worth the time invested IMO by them or me.
I've read through this thing...read it again....and read it again. It's a wonderful example of bloviation. More than that? Not so much. I'm not really concerned about the legs it stands on because while it's trying to convince you it has legs in the first place, it's too busy cutting those figments out from beneath itself.
It does raise a very interesting question which I believe strikes at the heart of the matter that has been brought up again and again. (Incoming dead horse which I'm fond of beating. You've been warned). It seems half are quite fond of the term 'signing agent' while the other half could give a rat's posterior about it. Yet, if you read this whole hot mess in it's entirety and pay attention to the details, it's so contradictory regarding precisely what your specialization is and should be. Just as an example, here's an excerpt from the heading Standards of Practice:
"6.3. Scrutiny of Documents The Certified Signing Specialist will not inspect or examine the closing documents beyond what is needed to determine the requirements and conditions for the assignment and to complete any journal entries for notarizations on the documents.." [The ellipsis at the end is actually there; I did not add it. What is meant to be omitted, I haven't a clue]
I can only logically assume as a "Certified Signing Specialist" I am providing "Signing Services". Yet, the definition of 'Signing Services' goes against this assumption:
"D.14. Signing Services “Signing services” means performance by a Certified Signing Specialist of any of the following: coordination of the appointment at which closing documents are signed; receipt, duplication, transportation to the parties for signatures, and delivery to a shipping carrier, of closing documents; care, custody, and control of closing documents while in the possession of a Specialist; presentation of closing documents to the parties for signatures; notarization of closing documents; and supervision of the signing of documents by the parties."
Unless we're using a very very minimal definition of 'presentation' in the aforementioned definition of the term, I understand my job, as outlined and now codified, is to "...not inspect or examine the closing documents beyond what is needed to determine the requirements and conditions for the assignment and to complete any journal entries for notarizations on the documents.." In short: here's this piece of paper, sign it, I'll notarize it, here's this piece of paper, ad nauseum...
Is that what this term 'signing agent' means? If you go too far in one direction, you may be offering legal advice. Too far in the other direction and you're signing your name to a document you know nothing about (I agree this is more of an issue in my state than elsewhere. Though we aren't just responsible for witnessing signatures here). Delineate however you like regarding what you do and what your title is. I am of the opinion that such a line in the sand serves only to perform the function that lines in the sand ever perform. They separate individuals into two disparate camps. If the lines were erased or removed, suddenly there's less restriction and freedom of movement both in the philosophical and literal senses of that word.
At any rate, the whole code reads this way. A contradicts B; X strongly implies Y which is counter-intuitive to Z, Q, and directly opposite A which somehow now affirms B. Hot Mess.... Whoever drafted it can learn from David Hume's humility regarding his own opus: 'A Treatise of Human Nature: Being an Attempt to Introduce the Experimental Method of Reasoning into Moral Subjects'. Of it, Hume said, "It fell still-born from the press."
|