REGISTER Log On/Off
Main Menu
Main Pages Forums & Pictures Find Out About Us Surveys & Archive Members options Personal
|
control0
control1
control2
HR3808 Notarization bill would gut eyewitness notariztions
Difference Between Forums
Q&A Instructions
Author |
Message |
Dan
Joined: Jan 01, 1970
Posts: 448
Location: USA
|
Post subject: HR3808 Notarization bill would gut eyewitness notariztions
Posted: Thu Oct 07, 2010 11:12 pm |
|
At first reading of Notarization bill House Bill 3808, the assertions it would let banks off the hook seemed absurd, complete hogwash. It seemed obvious it needed to be done a long time ago.
But in practice it would pardon false notarization's etc. because instead of having a strong eye witness notarization requirement, it allowed the weakest state notarization to be used. In short whatever the banks could bribe a state legislature to pass. As Karl Denninger was right to point out. "Once this law is passed they will find some state that needs jobs, and bribe the legislature to enact ridiculously loose notary laws, such that a notary signature will become effectively meaningless.
This law will force every other State in the Union to accept that signature even though it signifies nothing.
Notarization is an extremely important legal protection. It provides verification that the person who is alleged to have signed a document in "wet ink" actually did so, and actually made a personal appearance and signed in front of the Notary.
Further, land titles and land transactions, along with the private property rights that vest thereupon, are inherently a state function, and their protection and verification is also a state function."
Denninger is right so the bill must vetoed until it is fixed.
Relevant section here. SEC. 3. RECOGNITION OF NOTARIZATIONS IN STATE COURTS.
Each court that operates under the jurisdiction of a State shall recognize any lawful notarization made by a notary public licensed or commissioned under the laws of a State other than the State where the court is located if--
(1) such notarization occurs in or affects interstate commerce; and
(2)(A) a seal of office, as symbol of the notary public’s authority, is used in the notarization; or
(B) in the case of an electronic record, the seal information is securely attached to, or logically associated with, the electronic record so as to render the record tamper-resistant.
Note it says "lawful notarization's", but here is the clue, it does not define what is a lawful notarization.
Instead of creating a good electronic record of the paperwork of a real notarized transaction, it opens the doors for banks to completely evade really signing contracts. It short it will enable fraud as sure as the Sun rises in the East.
We need as real across state lines notarization bill with full specified eyewitness verified Notarization procedures.
HR 3808
_________________ "I swear to speak honestly and seek the truth when I use the No 1st Cost List public record."
Last edited by Dan on Sat Oct 09, 2010 11:34 pm; edited 2 times in total
|
|
Back to top |
|
Dan
Joined: Jan 01, 1970
Posts: 448
Location: USA
|
Post subject: Re: Fix HR3808 Notarization bill.
Posted: Fri Oct 08, 2010 7:00 am |
|
I included this section in above for good reason. Denninger is right> I did not realize the implications of such a simple bill without a good definition of eyewitness notarization's.
"As long as a strong eye witness notarization requirement is included. Karl Denninger was right to point out. "Once this law is passed they will find some state that needs jobs, and bribe the legislature to enact ridiculously loose notary laws, such that a notary signature will become effectively meaningless.
This law will force every other State in the Union to accept that signature even though it signifies nothing.
Notarization is an extremely important legal protection. It provides verification that the person who is alleged to have signed a document in "wet ink" actually did so, and actually made a personal appearance in front of the Notary.
Further, land titles and land transactions, along with the private property rights that vest thereupon, are inherently a state function, and their protection and verification is also a state function."
Denninger is right so the bill must vetoed until it is fixed."
_________________ "I swear to speak honestly and seek the truth when I use the No 1st Cost List public record."
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Seeing Ourselves
Forums Last posts
Last 10 Forum Messages
Latest Articles
Disconnect Links
Visitors
We have received 53899313page views since April 27, 2005
|