Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the wp-migrate-db domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /srv/app/gotoiba-dev/htdocs/web/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121
Are we required to use a “same name” affidavit for loans where a customer’s name on the loan documents does not match the name on his or her Illinois driver’s license (e.g., “Bill” versus “William”)? What are the possible consequences of having a customer sign a loan document using a nickname? – IBA Compliance Connection

IBA Compliance Connection

Your go to source for compliance!

Are we required to use a “same name” affidavit for loans where a customer’s name on the loan documents does not match the name on his or her Illinois driver’s license (e.g., “Bill” versus “William”)? What are the possible consequences of having a customer sign a loan document using a nickname?

—

by

No, we are not aware of any law or rule that would require you to use a same name affidavit for a customer that signed loan documents with a name other than what is on his or her driver’s license, although this practice may be advisable. Loan documents using a nickname very likely are enforceable — several Illinois court decisions have found that commercial agreements with inconsistent party names are enforceable, and we believe that the same reasoning would apply to a loan agreement with an individual.

However, note that on a UCC financing statement, you must use the borrower’s full name as it appears on the debtor’s most recent, state-issued, unexpired driver’s license. In addition, secondary market purchasers may require the use of affidavits. For example, Freddie Mac requires a signature affidavit or name affidavit when a borrower’s signature contradicts the typed name on a loan document.

For resources related to our guidance, please see below:

  • Sullivan v. Cox, 78 F.3d 322, 326 (7th Cir. 1996) (contract enforceable even though it failed to include the full name of a business that was a party to the contract — “Central Emerald” instead of “Central Emerald Sewer Service, Inc.”)
  • Bires v. Waltom, LLC, 662 F.Supp.2d 1019, 1038 (N.D. Ill. 2009) (contract enforceable even though there was a discrepancy between a business name used in the body of the contract and the name on the signature line — “WalTom Racing LLC” versus “WalTom, LLC”)
  • Illinois Uniform Commercial Code, 810 ILCS 5/9-503(a)(4) (name of debtor is sufficient “only if the financing statement provides the name of the individual which is indicated on the driver’s license”)