The nick name syndrome šŸ˜”

I agree with rparker about the need for caution, and frustration with signers who just allow name discrepancies to go unresolved for years or decades.

There are a few phrases in rparkerā€™s post that I donā€™t fully agree with, or would only apply in some states.

She then offered to bring the neighbors over to confirm that that was her name; which I said was not allowable.

Today, if itā€™s OK with the title company, it would be OK with me (unless something made me suspicious). Iā€™d need to administer an oath to the neighbor that the person in front of me was Margaret Jones. Before VT law was changed in 2019, I couldnā€™t do that unless I personally knew the neighbor.

So, youā€™re not really legally known as Margaret Jones then?

There are two different ideas tossed together here. One is the idea of a ā€œlegal nameā€. I have not been able to find any general purpose state or federal law anywhere that defines what a legal name is. Sure, there is the federal RealID law, and state laws for obtaining a driver license or notary commission, but I just canā€™t find a general purpose law. So I donā€™t know for sure what is or isnā€™t a legal name. I donā€™t know if a person can have more than one legal name at a time. I asked about this at a seminar put on by the Vermont Secretary of State, and the attorney (and former deputy Secretary of State) running the seminar said it was fuzzy.

ā€œKnown asā€ is a separate idea from legal name. A person can conduct business, including personal financial matters, under an alias so long as there is no deceit. For example, I hold a patent under the name ā€œGerryā€ even though that is my nickname. The IBM lawyers who drew up the application did it at the last minute, and didnā€™t have time to change it to my birth name. They said itā€™s perfectly fine. So if Margaret Thompson is conducting some of her personal finances under the name Margaret Jones, so what? Itā€™s fine, if she can prove she is the owner of the property and is entitled to perform the transaction.

Legal name would be the name on you state or federal ID, SS# ID, Military ID, US passport, any ID that would be your Primary ID recognized by your state or federal government. It would be listed in your stateā€™s notary handbook. And when it comes to any notarization, the requirements state that the signature on the document matches the ID. That is the standard I hold to especially after experiencing these three closings that I mentioned ony post. Itā€™s not worth losing my commission and source of income over. I would have considered the credible witnesses but didnā€™t think it necessary since she already had a current government issued photo ID which is the standard required in Virginia. I donā€™t know if Vermont has different requirements than Virginia so you would want to make sure you are following Vermont law

Sorry, but the fact that you wrote it doesnā€™t make it true. Show me the general purpose law that says so.

It would be listed in your stateā€™s notary handbook.

My state doesnā€™t have a handbook. My state hasnā€™t adopted any administrative rules for notaries, except emergency COVID rules. All I have is the law. I searched the law for ā€œlegal nameā€. I also searched for the words ā€œlegalā€ and ā€œnameā€ and couldnā€™t find anything saying the notary had to use the legal name of the signer, or even the legal name of the notary.

The oath/affirmation form provided by the Vermont Office of Professional Regulation has instructions that the notary should complete the oath using the notaryā€™s legal name, without defining what that is. It isnā€™t clear if this is legally enforceable, since the form was not created through the proper rule making process which, among other things, gives the public a chance to comment on the draft rules before they are adopted.

Even if the form is legally enforceable, the notary could pick any ID they want to show to the notary who is notarizing the oath/affirmation. Or, they could do what I did: I went to a notary who knows me and she notarized the form with the name she knows me by, without seeing any ID. (It just so happens itā€™s pretty much the same name as on my various IDs).

Once again, the only hint of a requirement is for the notaryā€™s name; there are no requirements for the signerā€™s name other than being able to convince the notary itā€™s genuine.

This might help.

https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/fullchapter/26/103

Check paragraph 5365 Identification of Individual. It will let you know what Vermont requires for identification. Just trying to help and I appreciate your input.

You still have a post in the forum that says

Legal name would be the name on you state or federal ID, SS# ID, Military ID, US passport, any ID that would be your Primary ID recognized by your state or federal government. It would be listed in your stateā€™s notary handbook.

I asked for proof, in a general purpose law, that your claim is true. The Vermont notary public law does not support this claim. Even if it did, it isnā€™t a general purpose law. I again ask for proof.

The best I can do is from Merriam Webster dictionary

Legal Definition of general law
: a law that is unrestricted as to time, is applicable throughout the entire territory subject to the power of the legislature that enacted it, and applies to all persons in the same class
ā€” called also general act, general statute

Beyond that, I follow Virginia law for notaries which says that my prime responsibility is to confirm the identity of the signer who has a document needing notarized and clearly spells out how that is to be done. I have been following those steps since 2008 and over 10,000 notarizations. May you have a fruitful career as a notary

My point is the notary does not need to decide what the legal name of the signer is. The notary just needs to establish that the signer has the identity claimed in the document is being signed. The notary doesnā€™t even have to believe there is any such thing as a legal name.

1 Like

I do the exact same thing.

Oh my gosh, same. That is exactly what I would have done in the situation