Posted by FGX/NJ on 10/31/13 3:27pm
Msg #490728

Signing Professional Workgroup

Have sent them e/m today requesting that they should require their members deal directly with Commissioned Notaries only. No unregulated middlemen allowed.
Here is contact info.
http://signingprofessionalsworkgroup.org/contact-us/

Reply by MW/VA on 10/31/13 3:36pm
Msg #490730

You do realize that this is all NNA stuff, don't you?? n/m

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 10/31/13 3:47pm
Msg #490733

yes, but they have a mighty voice n/m

Reply by Susan Fischer on 10/31/13 6:21pm
Msg #490761

What they have is a lot of $$$$$ to pay lobbists. n/m

Reply by MW/VA on 10/31/13 7:05pm
Msg #490765

Which is why I don't want to give them any of my $$$$. n/m

Reply by Susan Fischer on 10/31/13 8:33pm
Msg #490776

Exactly. Pay-to-Work scheme cum monolpoly. Next? Law. n/m

Reply by SheilaSJCA on 10/31/13 3:47pm
Msg #490732

Thanks for sharing. I have sent them an email too, expressing my concerns about the unregulated arm of this whole process; the signing service
This must be addressed and should be subject to the same regulations that anyone else (like us). What is the point of having us jump through all these hoops, when any Tom, Dick or Harry with a signing service, is exempt from any sort of , screening, regulation, licensing, or vetting?

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/31/13 5:08pm
Msg #490744

That makes a lot of sense. However, to get a better idea of this group's real perspective about signing services (and their likely true motivations), check out the membership page on their website:

http://signingprofessionalsworkgroup.org/become-a-member/

So they're offering signing services the opportunity to become an "associate member" for a mere $1000 a year. To me, this group has the appearance of a lobbying organization, pursuing the interests of companies that hire notaries directly or indirectly. I see no mention of anything that would appear to serve the interests of the actual "Certified Signing Specialists" they hope to produce, regardless of their stated goal to "protect" us,

Reply by Lee/AR on 10/31/13 5:14pm
Msg #490745

Boy, you really have to hand it to 'em for 'creating a need and then fulfilling it'. Wonder how SS feel about finally being on the receiving end of their many $$$$-generating schemes.

Reply by BobtheElder on 10/31/13 3:50pm
Msg #490734

Although I've taken their course in the past (what a joke) I really think the NNA is just a big scam... reminds me of a long time ago watching the Realtor's associations do the same thing...

Reply by MikeC/TX on 10/31/13 7:55pm
Msg #490768

"reminds me of a long time ago watching the Realtor's associations do the same thing..."

Having been a Realtor, I can say that there was at least some value in membership, especially when it came to state-mandated CE courses. Of course, the biggest value for me was that it gave me access to the local MLS system, which was priceless...

That's more than I can say about the NNA

Reply by HisHughness on 10/31/13 10:11pm
Msg #490786

***watching the Realtor's associations***

There is no such thing as "the Realtor's associations..."

There are many things that a cub journalist learns in his first year on the job.

First and foremost, you never refer to a "tow-headed youngster." Do so, and the odds are 100 percent that some ignoramus -- or more likely some jokester of a printer who thought because his union wage was twice as high as yours that he was smarter than you -- would change it to "two-headed youngster."

You never refer to Coke with a lower-case "c." Do so and you will get a nasty scolding letter from the Coca-Cola Co. letting you know that "Coke" is a proper noun and a registered trademark, and proper nouns require capitalization. This is an especially sensitive matter in Atlanta, the hometown of Coke.

Lastly, call a real estate agent a Realtor -- or worse yet, a "realtor" with a lower-case "r" -- and you will most likely receive a similar letter from the Association of Realtors informing you that Realtor is a registered trademark, and that whereas Realtors may be real estate agents, not all lowly real estate agents are Realtors, not by a long shot.

Yeah, you're right. Things are a bit slow in Austin, TX, too. Have to find some way to occupy my time when PeeBee the Platinum Blonde is beautifying herself. Make no mistake, now, she's still as beautiful as she was 20 years ago. It just takes her longer.

Reply by MikeC/TX on 10/31/13 10:45pm
Msg #490788

Hope you are high and dry

Just saw some videos of the flooding in parts of Austin. So much for drought conditions...

Reply by MAC/WA on 10/31/13 7:08pm
Msg #490766

From HousingWire: "The Signing Professionals Workgroup, which consists of a special committee of major lenders and title companies, released its best-practice standards for notaries handling loan signings. "

Reply by MAC/WA on 10/31/13 7:33pm
Msg #490767

Here are the members

Members



Bank of America

Citibank NA

Fidelity National Financial

First American

U.S. Bank

Wells Fargo

LSI Title Company


Mortgage Connect

Old Republic National Title Insurance Company

ServiceLink

Title Source

ValuAmerica

Westcor Land Title Insurance Company

Reply by desktopfull on 10/31/13 8:20pm
Msg #490771

Is membership free to those requiring xyz only BGC

and certification? I knew it wasn't just a coincidence that the major TC's & SS's started demanding xyz credentials by 11/01/2013. And now we know that it is for the roll out of the xyz's newest money grabbing membership plans: The Signing Professional Workgroup & Certified Signing Specialists. Membership will be induced by their new partner's (TC's & SS's) refusing work to those that don't comply and purchase one of the xyz's new products.

Now is there any question as to why members of NotRot have a deep seated loathing of xyz?

Reply by MikeC/TX on 10/31/13 11:14pm
Msg #490796

Re: Is membership free to those requiring xyz only BGC

Sen. Sherman must be rolling in his grave...

This whole thing looks like a violation of the Antitrust law, not much different from when the Justice Department contacted notaries about collusion on prices a couple of years ago. You can't get a bunch of companies together like this in order to corner the market on a product or service - it's illegal. The NNA has backed off their demand that they will be the sole provider of background checks, but that doesn't go far enough; membership in this group should not be a factor in deciding whether or not to use a notary.

Someone compared this to Realtors, but that's a false comparison. A real estate agent is free to work with or without membership in the NAR; what they cannot do is call themselves a Realtor unless they are a member. Their access to the local MLS system may be restricted in some areas, but even then they can still do the job. That's the model the NNA should be following

Reply by MikeC/TX on 10/31/13 8:11pm
Msg #490769

"Have sent them e/m today requesting that they should require their members deal directly with Commissioned Notaries only. No unregulated middlemen allowed."

That would be nice, as would be world peace - neither is gonna happen in our lifetime...

I just can't past their "standard" that says a "signing professional" cannot refuse to notarize a document even if doing so conflicts with local law. What bright light came up with that idea? This is from a company located in a state where it is illegal to even ASK a notary to do that. That alone should show how clueless these people are.

Reply by desktopfull on 10/31/13 8:22pm
Msg #490772

But they're looking out for the notary don't you know! NOT! n/m

Reply by MAC/WA on 10/31/13 11:31pm
Msg #490798

Im an NNA member, but not for long....

Like auto or home insurance or any other product I buy, I plan to shop around as soon as the new vendors that provide the annual training or certification come on-line. You can be sure that although the NNA will provide the additional trgn/cert. to nonmembers, they will charge a higher fee to them than they would to members. I plan also to raise my fees.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 10/31/13 11:52pm
Msg #490802

Just for the record, Mike, I don't think that's what that particular standard actually says. Here's the full text:

"The Certified Signing Specialist will not refuse to perform a notarial act solely because a signer refuses to comply with a practice that is not a legal requirement for notarization in the Specialist’s state or jurisdiction."

I don't think it's very well written, but my interpretation is that if we ask a signer to do something that is NOT required by state law, and they refuse, that we should not use that as an excuse to refuse to notarize for them. On this one particular item, I don't have a problem with it. In fact, in a state that doesn't require a journal or a thumbprint, for example (as the standards do), it sounds like it's letting the notary off the hook from their "standards" if the signer doesn't want to provide either one or both.

Just FWIW.

Reply by CJ on 11/1/13 9:43am
Msg #490822

Not all SS are evil.

Even though it is nice to deal directly with title and get that big check, I like many of my SS. Title goes home at night, and some SS are REALLY available to solve questions even at midnight. I remember an email from Title that I did not see until very late at night that said, "The borrower won't have a DL, so I told him that you would accept his birth certificate." I emailed the SS and in the morning he said, "Don't email me at midnight with a question like that, I want you to CALL me!" Some title people don't know the law and say "just go ahead and sign them anyway", where as the SS says, "DON'T do it! Put the borrower on the phone and I'll tell them it's illegal" (that's when the borrower won't believe me). I had one SS tell me to pack up and leave, and I would get full pay and they called the LO and told them not to use his notaries to sell their loan. Sometimes I fax to title and they don't get the fax. The SS says, "Send it to me and I'll make sure title gets it." I have one SS that always seems to have title's cell phone, and they are able to get title to call the borrower at the table, even at 10:00 at night.

I don't like it when I get a job from a title agency, and they offer a SS sized fee instead of a full fee.

I also wish title would LOOK at the borrower's IDs before I get there, so the signing doesn't start out with an ID issue. That should be cleared up before I get there.

Reply by Darlin_AL on 11/1/13 10:56am
Msg #490844

Thanks for the link--I've been sending my emails to

them & xyz this morning w/the gripe that, as a member of xyz, I haven't received the email notices some of you have rec'd from them, among other gripes. And emailing xyz and the "workgroup" which mentions "Fees" as a topic. It sounds like they are the ones setting-up an illegal trust scenario. We must be able to discuss our fees & fee-situations--but now are "they" trying to limit our fees? OK, $300 per signing is max.....for me, I'd go w/that dream.

Reply by ikando on 11/1/13 1:54pm
Msg #490891

Re: Not all SS are evil.

CJ, I really love your comment that the people that hire us should have already seen a copy of the DL or identification documents before we get there. If they did, there would be fewer issues, imo. So many times the signers say that they've already provided forms that we're having them complete and sign, so why not a copy of their ID?