The Secretary of State found it impossible to enforce that law. Low integrity notaries who continued to ignore it are probably the reason for the disclaimer requirement on all Californian notarial certificates.
Just a wild guess: I suspect most of the damage done by American notaries advertising themselves as notarios publicos is in filling out immigration forms, most of which are not notarized. Of course, an unnotarized document wonât contain the California disclaimer.
2 Likes
Culturally the role of the notario seems to be higher than the lewyers.
This is cut and paste The trust issue and ânotarioâ fraud
The direct translation of notario to ânotary publicâ is a major source of confusion that fraudsters exploit.
- Immigrants from Latin America, who are familiar with the high standing of a notario in their home country, have been misled by U.S. notaries who falsely claim they can offer legal help for complex issues like immigration.
- The consequences of this fraud can be severe, including application denials, lost money, and even deportation, because the notary is unqualified to handle legal matters and bears no responsibility for filing papers incorrectly.
My opinion is the disclamer is actually an attempt to give protection in this sue happy state for some notaries (such as loan signers) that push the limit on giving legal advice.
My guess about why the disclaimer exists is that some who request notarizations then go on to show the notarized documents that the notarization means more than it really does. And California notaries are supposed to notarize unless they can find some good reason not to.
I, as a Vermont notary, can refuse to notarize just because I donât feel like it. So if the requester strikes me as someone who will use the document for something that isnât fully candid, I can just refuse.
LOL this is so funny
this is one of my points. I was made aware of a signing where the attorney was representing her client and them attorney called in the opposing party and her cleint to notarize thier signatures on a contract and clearly the attorney had a financial interest in the docs as her client was 1)paying her 2)significant amounts to gain from the oppsite party as listed in the contract and the attorney notarized both of the parties signatures. this is a big no no from what Ive learned. shes been an attorney for a long time, shes commisioned as a notary in a state where they dont have any education requerments for notaries. The thing is shes an attorney, shes knew better and now shes getting sued.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.