It is my determination that you suffer from "Sanderson Syndrome". One of
the clear indicators is posting these types of questions on Fridays. While
there is no known cure (if sending Glen to Texas didn't cure him what
would?) I for one,  look forward to your future questions.

Chris Flynn


On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:21 AM, David Gaynon <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I have a question for the many experienced records managers who scan the
> list serv.  After reading about the issue with certain Xerox scanners it
> occurred to me that companies that have or may have used any Xerox scanners
> might run into authentication issues.
>
> Let me propose a hypotheses. Suppose you have a home mortgage company that
> as a regular part of its business model destroys original mortgage
> documents after scanning (excluding the note and deed of trust).  Then
> further suppose it uses a vendor to do the imaging.  This practice has been
> approved by their regulator.  The company conducts a QC program to be sure
> that all the images are clear and that there are no missing pages.  The
> company's QC program does not, however, check to see if the scanner changed
> numbers on individual documents.
>
> My question is this - in a US court proceeding what would be the challenge
> of authenticating documents if it is demonstrated that 20% of their
> vendor's scanners were purchased from Xerox and that one of them is in fact
> the scanner identified as the source of creating an inaccurate copy.  In
> this scenario it is not known which of the vendor's scanners produced the
> images that the company wishes to use in a court proceeding.
>
> So what do you think - does this create an authentication issue and how
> would you resolve it.  And what if the company is unable to locate the hard
> copy note and deed of trust which is apparently lost
>
> Readers should note - that does not refer to any real case and I am not in
> the financial services - I am only curious. And of course I understand that
> if any lawyers respond they would not be providing legal advice and no
> reader should presume that an attorney client relationship exists based on
> any attorney's response on a public forum such as this one.
>
> Regards,
>
> David B. Gaynon
> [log in to unmask]
> Huntington Beach CA, USA
>
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
> To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already
> present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the
> message.
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]