123Notary
Enter Zip, City, or County... i.e. orange,NY or 90019
Search Method:    regular time edocs
Mobile Notary / Signing Agent Discussion ForumDear Signing Agents,
You need to REGISTER and have a password to post or reply to discussion topics. Please remember, your password for your listing on 123notary.com is NOT RELATED to and is different from your password on the forum. Your password on the forum can be whatever you want it to be.
Lookup a specific signing company, word, or phrase
Mobile Notary / Signing Agent Discussion Forum
Register | String Format | Index Format | Active Topics | Hot Topics | Preview Topics | Advanced Search | Members | Profile | Tutorial | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 The 123notary.com Forum for Signing Agents
 Legal Issues
 CA Notaries: ab 2834 - Certificate Corrections
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
1 -1  Be the first person to vote!
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

cybermgm23

California
8 Posts

Posted - 04/02/2022 :  07:35:06 AM  Show Profile  Visit cybermgm23's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Assembly Bill 2834 has been introduced in the California Assembly by Asm Kiley, and would authorize a notary public to correct an error on a notarial certificate upon request. Currently, the bill is set for a hearing in the Assembly Judiciary Committee, Tuesday, April 26, 2022. The full text of the bill can be found here: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB2834

I am writing to let you know that the California League of Independent Notaries has been working closely with the author's office to make sure AB 2834 is the best bill possible for California Notaries and the public that we serve. While we have made progress, some outstanding concerns continue to be raised.

• In its current form, AB 2834 may cause confusion among notaries and the public, who are left to decide what a clerical error is and when to correct the certificate or issue a new certificate. Unless terms are clearly defined, reasons for correction will be at the whim of the requestor which may not comply with existing law.

• Surprisingly, the bill does not stipulate that a newly issued certificate is marked with corresponding information from the original document as to prevent it from being attached to an unrelated document. Without adequate safeguards in place, a requester with malicious intent may, for example, attach a newly issued certificate to a forged document such as a deed of trust or power of attorney, and thus result in fraud and abuse.

• Finally, we believe that the bill should include an adequate amount of time for a notary to respond to requests for certificate correction and include protections for notaries from any fines or undue liability if a notary cannot fulfill a request due to an unavoidable, exigent business or personal circumstance.

While the bill's intent may be good, as written, the bill will create confusion, make fraud easier, and expose notaries to increased liability and disciplinary action. For these reasons, we have suggested amendments that stipulate requests for certificate corrections: 1) are limited to a lapsus calami including elements such as venue, date, notary name and title, name of the signatory, and a missing notary signature or seal; 2) issuing a new certificate is limited to instances where the correction renders the original certificate illegible; 3) newly issued certificates include corresponding information from the original document and finally; 4) notaries are given fifteen days to respond to a request for certificate correction.

The CLIN would like to see a more common-sense approach to the practical correction of clerical errors on notary certificates that aligns with our mission to promote policy that strengthens the office of notary public and protects notaries common interests. We look forward to continuing efforts with notaries, stakeholders, and the author's office to craft a bill that includes responsible provisions to ensure that our notarial system remains as robust and reliable as it is today for decades to come.

At this time, we have taken a position of “oppose unless amended”. We’re not asking you to do anything, I simply wanted to reach out and inform you of the discussions we’ve been having on AB 2834 and let you know about the feedback we’ve received on the bill. In the weeks ahead, we’ll keep you informed on how the bill is developing. If we need you take action, we’ll let you know.

Matt Miller, President
The California League of
Independent Notaries
info@calnotaries.org
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:


Mobile Notary / Signing Agent Discussion Forum © 123notary.com Go To Top Of Page

Tips for using the forum
The most important feature on the forum is the search box. You can look up a particular word, phrase, name of a company, and see a potentially large list of search results with which you can obtain data. Filters are also valuable. If you want to find popular posts, you can use the number of views filter. You can also see whats new with the active topics link. Email us at info@123notary.com if you need any help using the notary forum.

Resources
The notary public resource page is valuable as it has links to all of the free information pages for notaries. Pages linked to the resource page include a page that teaches you everything you need to know to get the most out of your listing. Another page teaches you all the secrets of getting paid. There is a link to our free list of signing companies. There is also a glossary, learning tools, and much more. If you are a notary, the free tips we give are invaluable.

Popular pages
If you visit 123notary.com often, you might want to visit some of our most popular pages such as the California notary, Texas notary, Florida notary, and New York notary pages to browse the site. We also have valuable pages for notaries such as the free list of signing companies, and the resource page. Please also visit our get notarized and notarized letter page.