| Late afternoon Wednesday I accepted a same-day, late evening singing. Received and printed docs just in time to make another signing in between. I did do a quick cursory look of the docs but (regrettably in hindsight) didn't look at key specifics, one of which was dates preprinted on the Right to Cancel (sometimes this is called the Right to Recission) form. At the table, I learned that the signers were resigning because of their names had been misspelled in the first attempt to close and that caused a redraw of all docs. All well and good, until right at the end of the packet when we reached the RTC, and the dates preprinted by title were still for the original signing: i.e. there effective date of cancel would have been the same day they were signing with me, effectively giving them a period of three hours. At the late hour and the night before the holiday, I of course couldn't call title. Normally I'm advised (and all my NNA-training has told me) that the date on the RTC if present must always be the date you are sitting at the table with the signers. Title included specific instructions, however, that no edits were allowed to any documents, including and specifically noting the RTC form. I ended up explaning my quandry to the signers and telling them why I was uncomfortable with asking them to sign the document dated as expiring the same day, and left the decision to to them, noting that it was possible title might reject the document if we made alterations and that could possibly cause the whole process to be effected. Even after explaining that, they asked that the dates be changed per industry standards to be effective the date of signing. Because today's a holiday, I didn't send these yet. I could potentially call title in the morning and ask, and I'd be willing to go see the signers again to resign the form if they can assure me this is something allowable. Wondering if anyone has any insight or has experienced this. (Note: title wasn't asking me to postdate the correct date included with signatures; this isn't a case of that which I would (and have) outright reject.) |
