Posted by sigtogo/OR on 10/31/13 12:02pm
Msg #490687

NNA explains! let the feeding frenzy commence

http://www.nationalnotary.org/bulletin/bulletin_articles/new_mortgage_signing_standards_questions_answered.html?utm_medium=email&utm_source=BULETN&utm_campaign=A51406&utm_content=link1

Just to be clear-not saying I support them. Don't shoot the messenger

Reply by Kathy Fletcher on 10/31/13 12:23pm
Msg #490688

Keep in mind not every state requires a background check and for our signers protection, a yearly check of national criminal records seems appropriate to me. I would feel better knowing a stranger being sent to my own home and carrying my private information have a recent background check.

I too agree that we shouldn't shoot the messenger - living in the Southwest didn't they stop that a long time ago?

Reply by notary4az2 on 10/31/13 12:24pm
Msg #490689

Thanks for posting this NNA bulletin. Hopefully, it will explain all the recent Federal changes, not that I agree with them all. If more and more is required from us as certified signing agents then why are our fees being reduced with SS and Title Companies?

When I worked in the newspaper industry - more work = more pay.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 10/31/13 12:30pm
Msg #490690

I'd rather see the federal citations for these changes

as opposed to an NNA bulletin

Reply by BobbiCT on 10/31/13 1:00pm
Msg #490694

LOL :) less standards if you are an Employee ...

I recently attended a national webinar (not for notaries or signing agents) that recommended companies should run background checks on their EMPLOYEES handling NPPI information every THREE years.

Guess the requirements for employees are less stringent then 3rd or 4th party vendors who receive less information and have less access to consumers NPPI.

Reply by MAC/WA on 10/31/13 11:38pm
Msg #490799

Re: I'd rather see the federal citations for these changes

In the NNA Special Report on the NNA website, there is a link to the actual CFPB Bulletin 2012-03, to lenders or you can google the bulletin. There are also citiations in the Bulletin to the specific section of the Dodd-Frank provisions regarding consumer protection.

I spent today reading it.

Reply by Notarysigner on 10/31/13 12:57pm
Msg #490692

No worries YET for notaries who haven't do so yet,

I saw a post detailing some "problems" they're having (just like our Gov't) with their website. It seems there is a glitch involving the "opt-in, opt-out" option that's dumping applicant out of the system all together.

This just cracks me up!!!!!!!!!1

Reply by Notarysigner on 10/31/13 12:58pm
Msg #490693

meant to say "done so yet" n/m

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/31/13 1:02pm
Msg #490695

Reminiscent about Raising Standards (Be careful what you

Wish for!)

Msg 441001 (in part)
NSAs eventually will need to address these issues and more in the new regulatory environment. There will be a huge focus on professionalism. In addition to the compliance and risk management mandates, lenders are taking a hard look at their customer service (really, after this month end madness, I find it hard to believe it's actually been implemented). However, banks are beginning to seek ways to improve the customer experience at the closing table as well.

Lenders realize that as they increasingly centralize their loan origination operations, the NSA may be the primary face of the bank with the borrower. That improved experience could start with something as simple as wearing business attire to closings and having professional sounding voicemail greetings. Lenders and closing services also recognize the need to improve communication with NSAs.

Consequently, face-to-face meetings with local loan officers may become a more common
occurrence. First impressions count. The impression NSAs make at the closing table will set the tone for how borrowers and the general public perceive the mortgage industry.
___________________________
Ms. Cheryl, You need to STOP being right all the time!
(also see msg 467366)

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/31/13 1:07pm
Msg #490696

Should have titled: Raising Standards (and Raisin' Sand!) n/m

Reply by desktopfull on 10/31/13 8:55pm
Msg #490780

banks are beginning to seek ways to improve the customer exp

Here's one suggestion: LO's and lender's should quit lying to the borrower. One example, don't tell them that they will have an RTC in a package for an investment property to get out of reviewing the docs with the borrower prior to signing. Knowing they've done this, they make certain that they aren't available for questions during the signing. I've had this scenario twice this week. Guess what the borrower didn't sign until the next day because they wanted the package reviewed with them by their LO at the bank. Meanwhile, I'm the one getting yelled at and all I can do to apologize to the borrower for the misunderstanding and talk them into calling their LO the next day instead of them dropping the loan altogether.

Before complaining about our professionalism, maybe they should look in the mirror first!

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 10/31/13 1:29pm
Msg #490700

What a slick piece that was, have to credit the crafting ...

"Why are the Standards necessary and how did they come about?
The Standards came about largely due to the passage in 2010 of the federal Dodd-Frank Act and its creation of a new federal agency — the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) — with sweeping powers to regulate various types of financial companies."

The "Standards" are NOT of/from the DFA or the CFPB, they were put together by the "Signing Professionals Workgroup" (a group that's already been mapped out here). "Largely due to ..." could be easily misunderstood to mean these Standards are something other than what they are.

Reply by NVLSlady/VA on 10/31/13 1:43pm
Msg #490704

Re: What a slick piece that was, have to credit the crafting ...

You highly knowledgeable, professional NSAs here could have just as easily been a part of the SPW (and crafted a Professional Standard like no other!); although your motivations may not have centered around DFA, they'd have been all the impactful just the same.