Agnes Chan
Visitor
|
Legal Validity vs. Bank Policy - 2005/05/31 10:03
Can someone please enlighten me on the rationale why a prominent local bank insists on accepting ONLY a Letter of Authorisation ("LOA") to obtain a redemption statement from a client which contains the exact signature as per their bank's records (I presume as per the loan documents signed, which I'm not privy to yet) ?
Is it not sufficient that we, being advocate & solicitor has witnessed the proper signature of the client on the LOA? (which was as per the signature in the SPA).
I'm concerned of a situation whereby the bank might as well challenge the validity of signature on the SPA since they do not accept the signature on the LOA.
Very often, clients may sign 'differently', and they may not remember how they have signed for a particular document. But more importantly, in the eyes of the law (& Lawyers), isn't it sufficient that the document was witnessed to be executed by the proper signatory?
I wonder if this is a question of trust for lawyers...
|