   | Welcome to the Notary Talk General Discussion Forum. Before posting, please read the  |
| You are replying to this message: | | |
Posted by  JanetK_CA on 7/31/22 4:07pm
That's a very interesting perspective, but even in a state under RULONA, I'd think using that kind of reasoning would have been a serious stretch in this case (not to mention offensive to the signers).
For starters, these signers were hardly incompetent. I doubt many outside of the real estate business would have come to the conclusion you suggest. They're not the ones responsible for completing the document or 'delivering' it. They're told by whomever they were dealing with (presumably the timeshare management company) something along the lines that they will be selling their interest (or however it works...) to someone else, and will be transferring title to the buyers of whatever it is they own, once the company knows who that party will be. Then the company completes the Grant Deed, showing buyers as Grantee, and THEY record it. The sellers just want out of that financial obligation. The managers of the timeshare property have some process for transferring that obligation, but presumably aren't planning on actually taking ownership. (I've run into this situation before, with the same challenge. The company is based in another state with different notary law.)
How all that works is none of my business. Timeshares are a different kettle of fish and I've heard they can be complicated to get out of. (This may be partly why, but IDK...) All I do know is that I'm grateful California notary law DOES have a provision about not notarizing incomplete documents and I'm not putting my signature on a Deed without a Grantee named.
|
|
