I’ve been noticing a pattern of being summoned to customers, even lawyers, who provide their document without any notary public section language of Acknowledgment nor Jurat that I have to ask them which one they want to use.
Many customers don’t have knowledge to know which type to choose that can be time consuming. I can’t advise them in California except the difference of the two types. I then recommend they call whoever provided them with the document much of the time.
Another annoying issue is when other states try to create their own version of California’s Jurat in an effort to satisfy their preferance to merge them with their particular acknowledgment verbiage. They don’t bother to look up the info online for California just improvising whatever they so please.
1 Like
I notice title companies and lenders located somewhere other than my state do not provide acknowledgements that are compliant in WA State. They do provide them but usually Resides at has to be added it’s supposed to appear on a WA State ack.
When they are not in CA, they probably expect a notary to provide a compliant acknowledgement. I’m just used to the fact the state of the transaction is not what they look at for the acknowledgement - I just make sure it complies.
I don’t know what you do in CA. I just know the lenders and title companies aren’t accommodating my location. So I make sure an acknowledgement I return does comply.
1 Like
In as much as WA has passed the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, just as my state, VT, has, I’m surprised the acknowledgement certificates are supposed to contain the words “resides at”. The acknowledgement certificate I would use for an individual who is signing for him/herself would be
Sample certificates from the Vermont Secretary of State are available, but the typesetting is horrible.
I just edit in Adobe. Hasn’t ever been a problem.
