This past Saturday, I had an interesting experience using ClearSign platform. Here’s what happen, the signer passed the KBA and didn’t pass the credential analysis. On the dashboard, I noticed the signer had two different addresses listed. One address was for an investment property, that was recently sold. The signer’s second listed address was the current residence, that matched the driver license. The platform camera would not clearly display the signer’s driver license, a good picture was uploaded to the dashboard. I had asked the signer for another form of I.D., such as a passport, unfortunately that wasn’t available. I was surprised that the system allowed the signer to access the platform by not passing both analyses and conveyed that to Amrock at 9:05 am EST. Amrock representative wasn’t able to explain this predicament, but instructed me to proceed with the RON assignment. Fortunately, I was able to record the conversation with the representative and able to virtually matched the signer’s driver license and face. Due to the circumstances, I wanted Amrock to make the decision on proceeding with the assignment. It’s these types of glitches that can open the door to fraudulent acts, we must be vigilant and protect ourselves. Here’s the funny thing, well not so funny. The assignment was taking place before Amrock phone lines opened for operations. I sent a chat message to Amrock at 8:50 am EST, but didn’t get a response until 10:00am EST, which stated the signing order needed to be converted to an in person assignment. I called Amrock a third time at 10:15 am EST, spoke with another representative. That representative told me, no documentation was entered into their system and not to worry for I would be fully compensated. I had communicated with Amrock by chat and two phone calls and received conflicting statements. This is a perfect example is to why documentations of all communications with hiring companies are so important. " Murphy’s Law is a phrase that says that whatever can go wrong will go wrong."
Do platforms tailor their identity proofing to each state? Or is it up to the notary to know the nitty-gritty of what the signer must prove in the notary’s state?
I’ve had a similar situation a time or two. If the KBA is passed, the notary has the ability to override the identity analysis. But it becomes incumbent on the notary to do the ID during the introductory process. (This is expected to be part of the process whether or not the ID analysis passes.) That means having the signer hold their ID near enough to the camera to take up most of the screen AND that the image(s) and information be legible – both front and back. (They also have to flex the ID card so that you can recognize any hologram imprint on the ID.) If the ID appears to be legitimate and the image is that of the person before you, you can then accept the credentialing and move forward. However, you can always not pass the person for credentialing, which ends the RON signing and pushes it back to AMROCK to consider other signing options.
#ashton, I would defer to the state’s statutes.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.