Talk:Signing agent

Untitled

Speaking as a certified notary signing agent, I believe that the proper term is Notary Signing Agent. Signing Agent is really too generic, unless the article is expanded to include information on attorneys in fact, who can also be signing agents at a real estate closing, although in a completely different sense (which is part of the reason that Notary Signing Agent would be a preferred term). In addition, the [NNA|National Notary Association], which is the leading authority on the American Notary office, uses the title Notary Signing Agent. As for courtesy signer - the term is even more imprecise and ambiguous than signing agent. It appears to be a soft, friendly title that somebody in banking dreamed up. I agree with the comments below that the use of aka and redirect could be appropriate, but in any case, the name of the main article as it stands should be Notary Signing Agent.

Camden Tommy 22:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

The fact that both attorneys and notaries are signing agents performing the same function (of course the attorney having more power to discuss and advise on the legality of RTC, TIL, ECS, MTG, DOT, etc. and the ability to perform loan signings in Delaware, Georgia, Massacheusetts, South Carolina, and West Virginia) would be a strong argument against a name change to notary signing agent. The industry uses both notary signing agent, signer, loan signer, loan signing agent, mobile notary, mobile signer, and signing agent which signing agent seems to be more poplar term. Also, the NNA has used it extensively such as the NNA website signingagent.com which also makes more refs to just SA. Also keep in mind that the NNA has a trade mark on "NNA Notary Singing Agent" and sells notary supplies so it would seem that they would have an interest in using the term notary singing agent. --I already forgot 23:10, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

How familiar are you with the term courtesy signer? I think that this term has gained enough popularity over the past couple of years that it should be added as one of the names that describe the Notary Signing Agent position. The words courtesy signing and courtesy signer have generated a bit of traffic on Google. I propose we add the name courtesy signer to the list of names for signing agent.

--Swift Access 10:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Without going into my personal knowledge of the term, google returns 34 hits for courtesy signer and 119 hits for courtesy signing. That compares to 138,000 for signing agent, 62,000 for notary signing agent, and 34,500 for loan signing agent. The list of terms used to describe a notary signing agent would be long. So, instead of creating multiple articles on the same subject and providing a long list of terms, redirects should be used. If a search term redirects to another page its obvious it’s an aka term.--I already forgot 16:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough... --Swift Access 23:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

UPL

Pointing to (not explaining) an interest rate, a payment amount, or anything else on a page is not practicing law, it's not illegal, and it's not prohibited (in states that allow signing agents). Handing a document to a borrower and saying "this document shows your projected escrow balance," or "this document shows the mortgage and title fees associated with your loan" is not UPL. Signing Agents aren't required to be robots who merely pass papers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichiganAl (talk • contribs) 17:41, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia editors are not qualified to state "it's not illegal, and it's not prohibited in any state". I happen to think that position is wrong, but being a Wikipedia editor, I'm not qualified to so state in any article. As for the National Notary Association, I don't consider them a reliable source. An organization that promotes being a notary as a get-rich-quick scheme, and continues to promote being a notary as a money-making career after the market is saturated, is not credible in my book. --Gerry Ashton 19:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

(Ok, I deleted the references to every state - Alex)

What do you consider a credible source then? Please, cite some documentation other than your opinion that signing agents can not point to a term or identify a document. You discredit my citation from a national organization, but show not one piece of evidence, a prior case, where a notary signing agent was disciplined, fined, decommissioned, jailed, or otherwise for pointing to terms or identifying a page. Gerry, with all due respect, you don't own the definition of a signing agent. Please allow some input from someone who has knowledge on this subject. As a full time signing agent with over 4000 signings under my belt, NNA certified, LCS certified, and as an author and sometimes trainer on the subject, I'm more than qualified to contribute to this definition. My definition is well research, and includes input from several leading signing agents in the industry. And in states where signing agents aren't allowed, the definition of a signing agent is irrelevant anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichiganAl (talk • contribs) 20:11, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to wikipedia MichiganAl. I don't know if you are the same Michigan Al from NotRot but keep in mind that things are done differently at wikipedia as we are creating an encyclopedic entry and not a definition. The content needs to be from a neutral point of view and must be encyclopedic unlike a dictionary. The entry also needs to be written with credible refs to back up statements and must take into consideration that we have an international user base that is not limited to just the united states. I also have extensive knowledge in the field (watched the so called leaders of the industry pop up an proclaim themselves as such) but have refrained from adding material unless it can be backed with properly cited credible references. I have plenty of refs (actually could write a book on the industry and it's practices), but I still see signing agents as just mobile notaries with a special title and a worthless unregulated "certification" from private organizations looking to make some money of the title... but thats my pov that has no place in this article. Anyway, welcome and take a look at WP:BRIEF, WP:PILLARS, and WP:EDIT for more info.--I already forgot 03:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

---

The information I posted in the article section was backed with a credible reference and link to the information. Whatever we might think of the NNA, when it comes to discussing a "signing agent", they are a credible source. So if, as the WP brief says, views are allowed to speak for themselves rather than being cast into one "correct" viewpoint, then I just ask that my view be allowed to speak for itself without being deleted. If someone would like to add on or clarify something they think needs to be further expanded, I welcome it. Thank you for the clarification regarding encyclopedic entries, I will keep that in mind.

In addition, although I may share your opinion regarding the NNA, there's no organization more responsible for the creation and proliferation of the signing agent than the NNA. So at least for the purpose of defining the term "signing agent", they are an authority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichiganAl (talk • contribs) 21:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

My concern with the passage is much less now that it acknowledges that some states do not allow signing agents. As for what is and is not allowed, the sub-prime mortgage fiasco is just getting started. When the wave of lawsuits resulting from that mess start go to trial, I suspect a lot of practices that have been flying under the radar will get some attention. and many practices will have to change. But that's just speculation; time will tell. --Gerry Ashton 23:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It will be interesting to see what happens in the future. My personal speculation is that there will be an even greater need for an impartial buffer in the transaction. As you say, time will tell. But even with the current sub-prime crisis, we've just seen North Carolina pull Senate Bill 764, which was an attempt to move towards attorney-only real estate closing.