Regulatory Abuse or Foreclosure Sloppiness?

We heard an interesting one the other day and it goes like this: Supposedly, auditors were giving one bank servicer a hard time because foreclosure notaries that worked for the bank did not physically see their co-worker sign the documents. Instead, the documents were signed and then when he was finished the notary came in and verified them. Is this regulatory harassment or a simple case of a servicer not following the letter of the law down to the fine detail? Should the notary have to witness “live” the signing of foreclosure documents or is that a bit too pedantic?

Servicing

REO

Comments (7)

THIS TYPE OF "covering our eyes"; activities may well be how the 'robo signing' mess began. Notaries, like appraisers, should look carefully at the documents that they verify and or certify as well as the persons signing them. Purchasing a home and the documents surrounding mortgages , titles, transfers of property are important to the families who are involved in these transactions not only now but years later as well. YES, The notary should witness the 'live' signing of foreclosure documents!

Posted by chuck wilson | Monday, January 09 2012 at 1:38PM ET

A Notary or anyone else who attests that he has witnessed something when he has not done so is guilty of perjury. Period. His Notary seal is invalid and his signature is of no account. Since the document in fact was not notarized, it is not a valid document. There is a good reason for requiring this. Suppose someone stuck some other documents in the pile and got them "notarized" by this person. Could be lots of damage done and money stolen.

Posted by Tom Mccombs | Monday, January 09 2012 at 2:52PM ET

The fact that you, a serious observor of this industry, would even pose such a question is revealing in and of itself. It is an example of the "No Harm No Foul" school of thought that we [the mortgage industry] decide which legal obligations we need to actually comply with.

NY Trust law requires delivery of the actual notes to the trustee? Well as long as we know they are in Countrywide's office in California, that's close enough. NY Trust law doesn't really apply to us, when we decide it doesn't.

http://financialservices.house.gov/Media/file/hearings/111/Levitin111810.pdf

This is why the courts and judges will become even more important in triggering the changes necessary to restore the mortgage industry.

Posted by Bernard Lomax | Monday, January 09 2012 at 4:30PM ET

I thank you humlby for sharing your wisdom JJWY

Posted by MxDttTGBiAXYXQDK | Monday, January 16 2012 at 8:23PM ET

Do not confuse 'management or organization approval of a document' with a Notary who has "observed" 'management or organization approval of a document' by witnessing the actual signing. There is a reason for notaries. Notaries seem to have forgotten (or never really understood) what their certification stood for. Organizations groomed them and told them what to do. Wish there was a count on the number of folks who lost homes and property due to Robo-signing and no verification of packages with no witnessing of signatures.

Posted by Sandra Newport | Wednesday, December 12 2012 at 1:38PM ET

I'm stunned that there is even a QUESTION about how a notary should be conducting themselves.How about.....according to the LAW?Makes it easier if we ALL just follow the LAW...for a change.Fast and loose has been a bit tiresome.

Posted by BARBARA WEST | Wednesday, December 26 2012 at 12:15PM ET

Posted by BARBARA WEST | Wednesday, December 26 2012 at 12:16PM ET

Add Your Comments: