Why Use Electronic Signatures? Because Clients Like The Convenience
By no means did I conduct an official poll. But I did ask my current clients to answer some questions about their experience with the Instanet Solutions Authentisign and here is what they had to say:

-
Did you find the instructions easy to follow? Yes, for the most part we did.
-
Do you think electronic signatures are safe to use? Yes , because they are password protected.
-
Would you have preferred to print and sign documents? Why or why not? No. Reason being is because we have such a hectic schedule all the time. If we would have to come into the physical office to sign closing would take 6 months! We like the electronic signatures so much better this time around!
-
Do you believe that the electronic signatures saved you time? Why or why not? Yes, it really provided a lot of convenience.
-
Would you recommend the use of electronic signatures to other home buyers? Why or why not? Yes. Time saver and gas saver!
-
Additional comments: We loved it!
As a result of this feedback, I will be going back and asking these same questions to current and previous clients. I have been using Instanet Solutions Authentisign for about 3 years now. At $139/year, you just can't beat it. It saves times, money, gas, paper, printer ink and more. You just can't beat the convenience. The listing agent on this particular transaction is even going to check out the possibility of using Instanet Solutions Authentisign.
In addition, you can have a dedicated toll free number of your choosing for only $79/year or you can simply use the assigned number for free. The advantage to using either of these toll free numbers is that when someone prefers to fax back their signatures, they will used the coversheet with a barcode on it as the fax coversheet, so that the document is scanned into the appropriated transaction file. It's a no brainer for me.
Even for agents that only have a few transactions per year, this cost of this service pays for itself in a single transaction.


Comments (7)Subscribe to CommentsComment