Hi Everyone,
Tonight I had a sensitive notary appointment wherein a family was traveling in a foreign country and one of the children's passports was stolen. The wife and two kids traveled back home today and the husband stayed behind with the child of the stolen passport. The U.S. Consulate advised the wife to complete Form 3053 when she came home and e-mail it back to their office to reissue the passport.
I have several questions and/or comments.
1. Form 3053 is neither and acknowledgment nor a jurat. There is a notarial section where the notary witnesses the signer's signature. Because it was a U.S. Gov't form, I completed my notary section according to the directions on the form. However, obviously, the Sec'y of State handbook states otherwise - that I attach a loose ack or jurat. I wouldn't have known which one to attach. Does the Federal Gov't supercede the CA Sec'y of State? I was wary of attaching a loose ack or jurat also because I didn't want the State Department to reject the form for "non-compliance" and delay the child traveling home. I felt that it was appropriate to comply with the State Department's instructions.
2. What do you do when the area designated for the notary seal states in large letters "NOTARY SEAL" right in the middle of the area? I could barely fit my stamp in and the extreme edges were set over type. Again, I didn't want to attach a loose form and risk a delay.
This was the first time I have had to notarize this form and would like any feedback and constructive criticism.
Thank you,
Monika
I believe your answer is right within the form - the Form 3053 I'm looking at states OATH: I declare under penalty of perjury that all statements made in this supporting document are true and correct" - right above the signature of the Parent or Guardian. Therefore, IMO you'd attach a CA compliant jurat.
https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/80106.pdf
I don't bleieve a non-compliant U.S. Gov't form trumps state law. Here in FL, I would not affix my stamp to any document without proper notarial wording and I know CA is far stricter than Florida.
In this case, in light of the presence of the "Oath", I would have attached a jurat
JMO
Monika, If you are in California, you always follow the laws of the State of California. I agree with Linda, it appears to be a Jurat. This document did not have the correct notarial verbiage for California. Actually, it doesn't have any notarial verbiage.
The form states their signature must be notarized. I would have attached a California compliant Jurat to this form. It makes no difference what someone else wants, it's a matter of following your State laws.
Never let emotions or circumstances have you doing something that is against the law.
P.S. Monika................many forms will have no notarial verbiage on them. It is not up to you to choose the type of notarization. It is up to the signer of the document to choose an Acknowledgment or Jurat. Or, the receiving party can choose. In this case, since a phone number was given, I would have called and explained the situation and let them know what I could legally do. You can always read directly from your California Handbook that you carry with you or send them to the SOS website to read for themselves.
I've dealt with this before, and many times since and even discussed here on the older forums. Here's what I wrote back then... the form has been redesigned some and I believe they will accept attachments now, but a few years ago, they wouldn't. I still handle it as I describe below, never attaching a loose jurat.
This is the form that one parent fills out to indicate that the other parent is not available when they need to get a passport for their child under 16. The feds DO want this notarized... and it's a PITA form that i've seen many times! Whatever you do, DO NOT ATTACH A LOOSE CERT to this form. It will likely be rejected. The Feds hate loose certs on their forms.
The problem is that I have been told by the Dept of State that this is a SWORN STATEMENT and that they want a jurat. Of course, there is no jurat wording on this form...so what to do?
I spoke with both our SOS and the Dept of State several times, and this is how I have been told to handle it...
Basically, for DS-3053, on the first page, they said to fill everything, as requested... including your signature, but do NOT seal. Simply write, "See section 5 on page 2 for more details." underneath the words, "Notary Seal". Then in the "Continuation of Special Circumstances" box on the second page write, "Per California Government Code 8202, the following notarial wording is required for all sworn statements in California..." and then use a jurat stamp or hand write the wording. Just make sure to keep it contained in the "Continuation of Special Circumstances" box on the second page.
I called the Dept of State and SOS about this not too long ago, and that was what they told me to do. It was difficult explaining it to them, but when they finally understood... they told me to make sure that the notes include a reference to the specific Gov't Code and make sure not to attach a loose certificate. That's what I was told... now, people at the acceptance agencies might get their undies bunched up over it, but they shouldn't if you document and are clear in why you're doing what you're doing.
On a side note... and I'm not sure we can even remind them to do this... but the lady at the state department said to make sure the absent parent (the one getting the signature notarized) also sends a clear photocopy of the ID that was used for the notarization with the form. They don't need a certified copy... just a photocopy for comparison to the notary's details. She did say, though, adding an affidavit by Document Custodian on the copy of the license is acceptable, but not required. But, it's not like we can openly offer that information to them...and she understood that.
She also told me that that state department is aware of various state and international notary laws and that she gets this question about twice a day. As long as the notary's details are written down and it is clear what they've done... the application shouldn't be rejected.
