Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Anon
I just happened to take another look at the Deed Upon Sale and it was signed and notarized in another state (I'm in California). Also the line just before the notary signature says "I declare under penalty and perjury of California State laws..." and then right under is his notary stamp from Oregon and his signature.

I'm hoping this is illegal..... I'll keep looking and relooking at documents for other defects.

it's all about chipping away ...small piece at a time at their fraud!




Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
Authentication of documents by an out of state notary is common and is usually permissible under the laws of most states.  Refusal to recognize notarizations of other states would present many obstacles to ordinary commerical transactions. 

For example, suppose that you had been transferred to a new location by your employer (or were a member of the military transferred to a new out of state location) and needed to execute a deed for the sale of your real estate in the original state.  Should you have to return to that state in order to execute a valid deed?

Also, States probably have to recognize each other's notarization laws under the full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article IV, Section I: "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.").

This is generally a good thing and is essential to our national commerce.

*

You are quite correct that documents presented as evidence merit very careful scrutiny and that all aspects of such evidence should be critically assessed and questioned.

I will separately post a description of a recent defect I ran across in an affidavit submitted as summary judgment evidence which presents a more patent challenge.
Quote 0 0
Anon
I just received this email:

Hello,

An Oregon notary may only notarize in Oregon. In order to notarize in CA, the notary needs to be commissioned in CA as well. At the very least the Oregon notary who is notarizing in Oregon should cross off "California" and replace with "Oregon."

If you have further questions, please let us know.

Notary Public Section
http://www.filinginoregon.com

Phone 503-986-2200
Fax 503-986-2300


Quote 0 0
To OP:

You are correct, the OR Notary should have crossed out CA and inserted OR and then initialed next to the pen and ink change.  That would have been the correct way to acknowledge the Notary action.

The reality is that clerical errors occur all the time.  For errors that are not material, and I would suggest that this would fall into that category, there is a proceedure called a "Scrivener's Affidavit" where the originator of the error can attest to what the error was and how it should have read.  Not being conversant on CA law I am not sure whether this document is admissible, but it is widely used for such common errors.  When clerical errors such as this occur it rarely effects the validity of the intended action.

BUT, don't take my word for it and I'm sure you won't.  You are on the right track to check and re-check every aspect of the paperwork and maybe you will find some material breach that will stand the test of a court action.  Lord knows these mtg folks were some of the most complacent possible.  Good luck on it. 
Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

I think that some may also be confusing what the declaration "I declare under penalty and perjury of California State laws..." is imparting.

In order for a document to be an affidavit in California, someone is swearing to it.  If the oath is made in Oregon, one can get into a symantics argument about whether a false oath is a crime in Oregon or in California.

I am shooting from the hip here as to both Oregon and California law, but I have seen case law on a similar question relating to a forgery.  Again, I am relying on a possibly false recollection, but if my memory served me correctly, the issue was a deed which was forged in California but which involved Texas real estate.

The original crime was in that instance committed in California, where the forged instrument was created.  But my recollection was that the Texas Court found that because the forged instrument related to Texas real property it was a separate crime in Texas, as well, subject to prosecution in Texas.  That is the act of forgery didn't need to happen in Texas for it to be a crime in Texas, because the person was reaching into Texas to attempt to convey a forged title to Texas real estate.

By analogy, if someone swears an oath in one state in suport of an affidavit to be used as evidence in a case in another state, there may very well be two crimes which are committed.  The first would be the original false swearing taking place in the state of execution.  The second would be the pleading or tender of that false affidavit as evidence in the state where the affidavit was presented as evidence.

My impression is that the language shown is intended to memorialize that the persons executing understand that the document is being used as evidence in a California case and that they might be subject to prosecution in that state if the affiant is falsely swearing.  This seems to me not to be a problem.

Bear in mind that absent some express indication as to the intended use of the affidavit, the affiant could readily claim that the affiant was unaware that the affidavit was to be used as evidence in the other state and it is kind of hard to see how that affiant is committing a crime in the state where the false evdience is pled, IF the affiant was unaware of the intended use of the affidavit. 

This is probably an academic distinction in most foreclosure cases where the affidavit is rather expressly tailored to a particular proceeding and where the text of the affidavit itself contemplates use in the foreclosure case in another state's courts.  It would be more of an issue with regard to an affidavit setting forth facts which might have been reasonably made independent of a foreclosure proceeding, but which then finds its way was evdience across state lines.

*

I would point out that it is not at all unusual for a person to prepare an affidavit in one state for use in judicial proceedings in another state.  I should think that insertion of language which expressly shows that the affiant knows that false statements are a crime in the state of intended use would be a very reasonable thing for a court to require as to out of state affidavits.

Again, I want to emphasize that this is my LAY impression.  I am NOT a lawyer.  I also haven't researched this particular question.
Quote 0 0
Anon
Here is more info I found in the California codes:

1189.  (a) (1) Any certificate of acknowledgment taken within this
state shall be in the following form:


State of California )
County of ___________ )
On ______________________________________ before
me, (here insert name and title of the
officer), personally appeared ___________ ,
who proved to me on the basis
of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose
name(s)
is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and
acknowledged to me
that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized
capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their
signature(s) on
the
instrument the person(s), or the entity upon
behalf of which
the
person(s) acted, executed the
instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
of the State
of
California that the foregoing paragraph is true
and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ________________________________ (Seal)

(2) A notary public who willfully states as true any material fact
that he or she knows to be false shall be subject to a civil penalty
not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000). An action to impose a
civil penalty under this subdivision may be brought by the Secretary
of State in an administrative proceeding or any public prosecutor in
superior court, and shall be enforced as a civil judgment. A public
prosecutor shall inform the secretary of any civil penalty imposed
under this section.
(b) Any certificate of acknowledgment taken in another place shall
be sufficient in this state if it is taken in accordance with the
laws of the place where the acknowledgment is made.
(c) On documents to be filed in another state or jurisdiction of
the United States, a California notary public may complete any
acknowledgment form as may be required in that other state or
jurisdiction on a document, provided the form does not require the
notary to determine or certify that the signer holds a particular
representative capacity or to make other determinations and
certifications not allowed by California law.
(d) An acknowledgment provided prior to January 1, 1993, and
conforming to applicable provisions of former Sections 1189, 1190,
1190a, 1190.1, 1191, and 1192, as repealed by Chapter 335 of the
Statutes of 1990, shall have the same force and effect as if those
sections had not been repealed.


Quote 0 0
Anon,

  Email me at robin_hoood_09@yahoo.com for more info on the notary issues. I just went thru that.

DO NOT GIVE UP THE FIGHT!!!!

Happily at war with a bank since December 2008!!!
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...