Notary Misconduct at Closing?

[EdgarW]

Hello, all. This is my first posting at SuiJuris. I have been voraciously reading the posts in an effort to enlighten myself. It is heartening to see so many people of good will who are motivated to help others unselfishly.

I have been examining the Strawman theories for quite some time and have hesitated to act on it. However, something that happened during the closing on my first house nearly two years ago keeps nagging me, especially in light of my study of the Strawman.

The closing attorney happened to also be the notary public. After being beaten up by the mortgage company for a month, I didn't object at all when the realtor told me at closing that I didn't have to read the documents because the attorney did closings all the time. (Boy, was I a fool.) What really bothered me was that the attorney/notary directed me to sign my name as typed on the reams of paper. To be frank, I have only signed my name like that once before in my life, nearly 30 years ago, when I joined the military.

My true signature consists of my first two initials and last name, not first name, middle initial, last name, and Jr. My question: Is a notary authorized to direct purchasers how to sign their names? I have tried to find an answer in the Georgia Notary Public handbook but without success.

Any input would be appreciated.

Best regards,

EdgarW

Trapped in Wonderland;
Looking for the Way Out.

i'll posit something for you, and someone who knows better can correct me...

the attorney/notary was doing double duty.

the notary's responsibility is to verify your signature as a witness.

the attorney's duty is to make sure you comply with the terms of the contract.

so, by ensuring you signed as FULL NAME, he complied.

by witnessing your signature, he complied as the notary.

if you produced a document that showed your signature as FULL NAME, then that is what the notary should have verified you signed. if you produced a document that showed your signature as F. Name, then as a notary, that's how it should have been signed & witnessed.

i doubt you'd have any "case" of misconduct by the "notary" side the attorney.

contracts are usually done in your full legal name. and in the case of today, that's usually your FULL LEGAL NAME. fictions (banks) can only do business with fictions (YOU).

this is just my opinion.

the fact the attorney is also a notary seems like "double jeopardy" / conflict of interest to me, but that is also my opinion.

jon

[weishaupt1776]

Welcome, Edgar. (cool name)

I have never done this mortgage thing, but here is a suggestion, but don't dive in to it, because someone more informed than me could jump in.


First write a letter explaining that a valid signature does not exist according to the rules of Grammar.
It might be fun to ask for the original note, as you want to see it for evidence.

Demand that you want to re-conduct the proceeding & wish to execute your real name to validate it.
Write all rights reserved. Don't worry about all the UCC voodoo as the 1-308 is a codification of common law anyway.

Support your letter with an affidavit of the facts which you just explained.

Construct them in a logical order w/only 1 subject & 1 verb

The jist of it will be

Affiant was informed to sign in all caps by Atty Dirtbag.

Affiant Denies any evidence or material facts which show that it is possible to form a Sig in ALL CAPS according to the rules of grammar and believes that none exists.

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that "me" & "ME are both one in the same and believes that none exists

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that a notary is authorized to instruct people how to sign their names and believes that none exists.

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that there can be a valid signature when written in ALL CAPS

Put a default clause stating that if a point by point rebuttal or addressing of the Affirmations referenced by number is not sent back to you in XXdays(check your laws on response time), then there will be a default at law in your favor and will be their admission that a valid signature does not exist and that you & YOU are not the same.

Or that it will be their admission that all evidences & material facts which were denied do not exist.

[EdgarW]

Jon and Weishaupt,

Thanks for the replies. Because I am current on the mortgage, I am inclined to shake them up a bit. The attornotary (nice neologism, huh?) relied on my Georgia DL as proof of identity; it is clearly signed with initials and last name.

Best regards,

Edgar

[iamfreeru2]

Welcome Edgar,

Weis, I do not think that Edgar said he signed in all caps. He said he signed First, Middle initial, Last name, Jr. They will never have you sign in your uppercase Strawman name. Only the real man can enter a contract. You are the surety for the Strawman and the one that is liable.

iamfreeru2

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

Welcome, Edgar. (cool name)

I have never done this mortgage thing, but here is a suggestion, but don't dive in to it, because someone more informed than me could jump in.


First write a letter explaining that a valid signature does not exist according to the rules of Grammar.
It might be fun to ask for the original note, as you want to see it for evidence.

Demand that you want to re-conduct the proceeding & wish to execute your real name to validate it.
Write all rights reserved. Don't worry about all the UCC voodoo as the 1-308 is a codification of common law anyway.

Support your letter with an affidavit of the facts which you just explained.

Construct them in a logical order w/only 1 subject & 1 verb

The jist of it will be

Affiant was informed to sign in all caps by Atty Dirtbag.

Affiant Denies any evidence or material facts which show that it is possible to form a Sig in ALL CAPS according to the rules of grammar and believes that none exists.

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that "me" & "ME are both one in the same and believes that none exists

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that a notary is authorized to instruct people how to sign their names and believes that none exists.

Affiant denies any evidence or material facts which show that there can be a valid signature when written in ALL CAPS

Put a default clause stating that if a point by point rebuttal or addressing of the Affirmations referenced by number is not sent back to you in XXdays(check your laws on response time), then there will be a default at law in your favor and will be their admission that a valid signature does not exist and that you & YOU are not the same.

Or that it will be their admission that all evidences & material facts which were denied do not exist.

Weis,

I have found that you do not want to default them, you want to do an estoppel by acquiescence or an estoppel by judgment. These they cannot get out of whereby a default is easily defeated. Look them up in Black's Law or Bouvier's and you will see what I mean. Estoppel is superior to default in most cases.

iamfreeru2

[weishaupt1776]

Thanks, Man!

[vanton57]

As a mobile closer, I have closed both purchase and refi, as well as, equity loans. What allows me to be a mobile closer is that I am also a Notary Public.

As a closer and a notary, I am required to check ID and have the individual sign their name as the documents are drawn. So if the docs say E. F. Hutton, the individual will sign as E. F. Hutton. If the docs are drawn as Edgar Freak Hutton then they will sign Edgar Freak Hutton. Anything else will cause the loan NOT TO FUND. Now I have seen some very strange "signatures". I had one fellow that made a circle of some sort with another loop in it. The signature matched the ID he had provided to prove to me who he was. That was his signature. Signature does not mean it has to be legible but rather your signature and as long as you can attest to me that that is your signature and it says whatever the name is drawn on the documents, who am I to tell you different. Now if you had stated to me it is your initial, I would have made you go back and sign your full name, middle initial last name etc.

As far as the attorney wearing duel hats, nothing illegal there. You're not going to find anywhere written saying the closer (attorney) and the notary have to be two separate individuals.

Now, with all that said, you DO HAVE THE RIGHT to sit and read every single word on every single document ESPECIALLY on a purchase because there is no right to cancel. The closing attorney was not there for your interests so you should have hired your own attorney to bring with you to closing and have the documents reviewed by someone looking after your interests if you had so chosen to do so. (BUT, that attorney would have looked at it and said it was ok to sign it). I seriously doubt you would have any cause of action per se though unless you challenge the legality of how the loan was funded with your signature rather than by actual assets the lender risked.

In my last purchase closing when the closer started running the paper through rapid fire, I stopped everything by reading each document since the closer was not telling me anything except this is your note, this is your mortgage etc. My husband was on my right the closer to my left and he didn't sign anything until I told him it was ok to sign. :O) Irritated the heck because I drug that closing out for over an hour after they had me waiting over 2 hours for my closing appointment. It irritates the socks off of me to have someone think they have the right to waste my time so I chose to waste their time. The real kicker, which they didn't realize at the time, I understood most of what I was reading because of my training background.

[logos]

Edgar,

IMHO no one can tell you how to affix your autograph. A notary once told me I couldn't sign my affidavit in red ink whereupon I informed him that just because the financial institutions he does business with direct him to sign in black ink doesn't mean everyone else must sign that way, and furthermore that he had no right or authority to dictate how I do so. He notarized the affidavit. The appearance of one's autograph is a personal matter.

BTW, living beings have an autograph, while fictions have signatures.

On another note, many lawyers, judges, rich people and corporate types like to write their autograph wherein the letters are difficult to differentiate so they can later more easily deny having signed the document at all. A handwriting expert would have more difficulty validating such an autograph vs a clearly formed one.

Does this mean you sign as the human being, made responsible for the contract? Does it mean, then, your strawman (the one in the deed, mortgage, etc.) got to make the payments to them on your behalf, the human? And you did not know anything about this?

When did you consent to make payment on behalf of your strawman?

Got it be a way out of this.