Trust Verbiage on Signature Line is different from verbiage in notary certificate

Hello, Please help me with this trust verbiage issue…

I was instructed by the signing company to have the signer to sign " there name, Individually and trustee" on all signature lines in the seller Package documents regardless of the trust verbiage printed after the signer name under the signature line on those docs. They emphasized that all the signatures should be consistent through out document. (BTW, I have that in writing) Typically, I would have the signer sign exactly as the trust verbiage is worded under the signature line and repeat it exactly in my certificate.

The problem is: the notary certificates in the document listed the signers name, with successor trustee verbiage. (I emphasize successor) , Therefore, I adjusted each notary certificate to read…,…“signers name, individually and trustee” as they requested and this is how the signer signed.

The signing company is refusing to pay me since I crossed out the original verbaige in my on the notary certificate that they provided and changed it to how they wanted the signer to signed.

Recieved a call from signing company stating that I am not allowed to adjust they notary certificate and due to my error I will not get paid.

Never experienced this in my 2 years as a signing agent. Please advise. I am I to notarize something different than the actually signature verbiage I am witnessing?

PS: I am a Michigan Notary

1 Like

As a notary, we only recognize their names, not their capacities on the Jurat and Ack.

@WeOCnotary-Rcho_Mission_Viejo that is a state specific issue. Here in FL we would state “individually and as Trustee of the blah blah blah” in our certs IF the doc is signed both individually and as Trustee. If only as Trustee, that would be an ack in a representative capacity. No one can swear to the truth of something on someone’s behalf which would require a jurat, hence no jurat in representative capacity

1 Like

It was not your responsibility to change the verbiage or acknowledgements. It was the Lender / Title Companies responsibility to send the docs with the correct verbiage. One thing I have learned, lately, and FYI I have been a notary for over 20 years, the notary always gets the blame regardless of who makes the mistake. Don’t take the extra step to make sure the docs right Example: Had a FL purchase yesterday and when I asked if the Buyer would have a 2nd witness available I was told by the TI Manager “our mortgages do not need witnesses” I called 2 different title companies and both said “2 witnesses are required” So because the TI put it in writing (email) I did not witness the mortgage. Lets see if TI calls me today after reviewing the docs calling me out on it

When I have a set of documents that involves trust verbiage, LLC managing member, successor trustee, etc. I always call or email the title company to clarify how the signer should sign and how the acknowledgements should be done. I still do this after 11 years of experience because I have found that it is different depending on the state that the documents are originating from and from lender to lender or title company to title company. Doing this quick pre-check will save you from future situations and its worth the extra time to check in. Additionally, title companies will appreciate your extra attention to detail!


@bohardnotary Concur :100: percent. Your process does precisely mirror my technique as well for these types of Signing Orders.



@mobilenotaryinohio FYI - depending on the location of the property, that first TI Manager may have been right

In FL, by statute, mortgages to not require witnesses - only deeds of conveyance. However, several counties have imposed their own individual recording mandates where two witnesses are required on mortgages (Dixie County was the first and it was done due to increased fraudulent transfers in that county).

Thankfully you got it in writing so you’re covered - most times, though, it’s just easier and more prudent to have the people have their two witnesses there rather than argue with your hiring party.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.