Buckle in, because this is a long story. But I think it brings home several important points about notary misinformation, education, referrals, technology, and our responsibility to actually know the law.

Last year, I received a phone call from an attorney while I was in the middle of a closing. She was looking for information about completing a remote online notarization in New York.

When I returned her call, she immediately told me, “Oh, I already spoke to another notary, and this can’t be done, so I don’t need your help.”

Okay.

But because I was curious, I asked her to explain the situation.

She had an affidavit that was needed for a New York Surrogate’s Court matter. The person who needed to sign was outside the United States and was not a U.S. citizen.

The notary she had spoken with told her that the notarization could not be completed because the signer was not a U.S. citizen and did not have a Social Security number.

I explained that this was not correct.

That may have been a limitation of the particular platform the notary was using, but a platform limitation is not the same thing as a limitation under New York law. I explained that there are identity-verification options available for remote online notarizations and that citizenship, by itself, was not the deciding factor.

The attorney was not especially happy with my answer.

She asked, “Who am I supposed to believe? You or this other notary? You were both referred and recommended.”

Honestly, I understood her concern.

She was trying to protect her client, and she had received two completely different answers from two notaries who had both been recommended to her. I told her I understood and that she needed to do what she believed was best for her client.

Fast-Forward to the Second Phone Call

A few weeks ago, I received another call from the exact same attorney. Again, she was looking for a notary.

And again, I was in the middle of a closing.

I called her back about 30 minutes later and left a voicemail. When I did not hear from her, I called again at the end of the day. Technology glitches. Voicemails get missed. I simply wanted to make sure she had been taken care of.

She answered and told me, “I found another notary. I don’t need your services, and I’m very busy.”

Okay then.

I told her I was glad she had found someone and that I was simply returning her call.

A couple of weeks later, I saw her recommend that notary in an attorney group. Wonderful. I genuinely love seeing notaries receive recommendations.

However, at the end of her recommendation, she mentioned that she had received wet-ink signed and notarized documents from the notary at a reasonable fee.

That caught my attention.

I put it on my mental list of things to ask about. At first, I thought perhaps she had used a notary in another state that permits some form of remote ink notarization.

Then I saw the same recommendation again in response to another attorney who was looking for a notary. Once again, she specifically mentioned receiving wet-ink documents.

At that point, I decided I needed to understand what had happened.

The Notary Explained His Process

I sent the attorney a brief message explaining that New York does not currently authorize remote ink notarization. The temporary remote procedures used during the COVID-era emergency orders had ended, and New York’s permanent remote online notarization law created a different process.

At the same time, I picked up the phone and called the notary.

I introduced myself simply as someone looking for information about how he handled electronic notarizations when the signer was not physically present.

He explained his process.

The signer prints the documents.

The notary watches the signer sign them over video.

The signer overnights the documents to the notary.

The notary receives the documents, notarizes them, and sends them to the client.

I asked, “And you are doing all of this as a New York notary?”

He said yes.

I asked, “While you are physically located in New York?”

Again, he said yes.

At that point, I explained who I was and told him that the process he had described was not permitted under New York’s current remote notarization law.

He immediately disagreed.

“No, no,” he said. “That’s how we do electronic notarization in New York.”

I explained that this was similar to a process temporarily permitted under the emergency COVID orders. Those orders were no longer in effect. New York’s current remote online notarization law does not allow a signer to wet-sign a paper document remotely, mail it to the notary, and then have the notary complete the notarization after receiving it.

He then told me that he used a remote notarization platform and that the platform had a switch allowing him to select a remote ink notarization option.

And that is where one of the biggest problems lies.

A Platform Is a Tool, Not the Law

A remote notarization platform is a tool.

It does not dictate the law.

A platform may offer features that are legal in some states and not legal in others. The fact that a button, switch, drop-down menu, or setting exists does not mean that every notary is legally authorized to use it.

Technology companies provide the tools that make remote notarization possible. They may design their systems to meet certain state technology standards, but they are not responsible for deciding whether each individual notarial act you perform complies with the law governing your commission.

That responsibility belongs to the notary.

This is no different from using a notary journal.

You can purchase any journal you want. However, if your state requires certain information to be recorded and the journal does not provide a field for that information, it is still your responsibility to record what the law requires.

You cannot defend an incomplete journal entry by saying, “The journal didn’t give me a space for it.”

In the same way, you cannot defend an improper remote notarization by saying, “The platform gave me the option.”

The tool does not replace your obligation to know the law.

“Then How Do I Perform an Electronic Notarization?”

The notary told me that he was going to look up the law.

So I stayed on the phone.

There was a lot of silence on the other end.

Eventually, he came back and asked, “Well, then how do I perform an electronic notarization?”

I explained the process to him.

He then told me he was going to call Albany.

And rightly so.

He should contact the state. He did not know me, and he had every right to independently verify what I was telling him.

I also told him very honestly that I did not want to see him lose his commission. I certainly did not want to see a client’s legal matter or real estate transaction placed in jeopardy because the notarization had been improperly performed.

I strongly suggested that he contact anyone for whom he had previously completed notarizations using this process and let them know that their documents might need to be reviewed or redone.

I did not call him to embarrass him.

I did not post his name.

I did not report him.

I called him because I did not want him to continue doing something that could create serious consequences for him and for the people relying on his work.

“But the Documents Were Accepted”

At the same time, the attorney responded to my message.

She told me that she understood what I was saying, but the documents had already been submitted, they had been accepted, and the transaction had closed.

My response was that I found it difficult to believe that a title company would knowingly accept documents if it understood exactly how the notarization had been performed.

Did anyone actually explain the process to the title company?

Because there is an important difference between a document being accepted and the person reviewing it knowing that the notarization may have been improperly completed.

A document can look perfectly normal on its face.

The certificate can be complete.

The stamp can be present.

The signature can be legible.

Nothing on the document may reveal that the signer appeared by video, mailed the document to the notary, and that the notary completed the certificate later.

The document being accepted does not prove that the process was lawful.

It may simply mean that no one knew how the notarization had actually taken place.

How Misinformation Becomes “Common Practice”

Why am I sharing this story?

For several reasons.

First, clearly, I need to do a better job of answering my phone and stop being in closings whenever people call me.

That is sarcasm, in case anyone missed it.

The reality is that this attorney had very little patience. She did not wait for information. She did not investigate the conflicting answers she received. She simply moved on to the next available person.

As a result, she encountered two different notaries who gave her incorrect information in two completely different ways.

The first notary told her that a potentially lawful remote notarization could not be completed because the signer was not a U.S. citizen and did not have a Social Security number.

The second notary completed a notarization using a process that New York no longer authorizes.

Both notaries had been recommended.

That is a problem for the attorney.

It is a problem for the client.

It is a problem for the transaction.

It is a problem for the people making the referrals.

And it is a problem for the notary profession.

The attorney then went into a professional group and recommended the second notary to other attorneys. Again, I am always happy to see a notary receive a recommendation.

But in this case, the notary was being publicly recommended based, in part, on a service he was not legally authorized to provide.

This is exactly how misinformation spreads.

Someone gives an incorrect answer confidently.

Someone else accepts it.

The document goes through.

No one catches the problem.

The notary gets recommended.

Another person hires the notary.

Eventually, people begin saying, “Well, this is how everyone does it.”

No.

That is not how the law works.

The fact that something went unnoticed does not make it legal.

The fact that a document was accepted does not automatically make the notarization valid.

The fact that a platform offers a feature does not mean you are authorized to use it.

The fact that someone was referred does not automatically mean they are knowledgeable.

And the fact that someone sounds confident does not mean they are correct.

Your Commission Is Your Responsibility

Notaries have an obligation to educate themselves.

You cannot depend entirely on your remote notarization platform.

You cannot depend entirely on a Facebook group.

You cannot depend entirely on what another notary told you.

You cannot depend on a client, attorney, title company, lender, or signing company to tell you what your notary law requires.

They may not know.

They may not care.

They may simply want the transaction completed.

Your commission is your responsibility.

Your education is your responsibility.

Your compliance is your responsibility.

And your platform is just a tool.

We also have a responsibility to consider speaking up when we see misinformation or an improper practice that could place another notary’s commission—or someone else’s transaction—at risk.

That does not mean publicly attacking people.

It does not mean embarrassing another notary.

It does not mean assuming that every mistake was intentional.

Sometimes people truly do not know what they do not know.

But when we allow incorrect information to go unchallenged, especially when it is being repeated in professional groups, we help it become normalized.

And once misinformation becomes normalized, it becomes much harder to correct.

So, what responsibility do we have when we see notary misinformation being repeated or an improper practice being treated as normal?

Do we say something?

Do we stay out of it?

And how do we correct misinformation without making every conversation feel like a personal attack?