:-) It would appear that we are both in the same situation. I have received a load of 'opinions', but none could be confirmed by legal fact. What is interesting is the fact that all of us have had to sign a document sometime during our lives, yet we do not know WHY we had to sign it. I understand that it does not matter what document it is, or what it contains, it is the fact that a signature asking to confirm its correctness/truth is on the document.
My search found that a signature of sorts was already required in Roman times. In the UK there was some law in 1700s regarding fraud and signatures. But could not find anything since. Very strange that no one has been able to provide a simple reason to such a ubiquitous practice..
I am not in a hurry. The accompanying sorry saga about all sorts of facts has been going on for 2 years now. So, I suggest, let's see what next week may bring....-)
Thanks for reply.
Just a thought: document having a 'declaration of fact' which has to be signed to render the document legally sound, appeared on my assessment. Signatures are almost universal, worldwide requirement. would your US or other colleagues come up with their legislation, should there be any(?), which I could follow up and perhaps find an equivalent?,
I am also pursuing the same...
I have now received clarification from a Senior Professor who is a lecturer in law at Glasgow Uni. There is NO law, that would tell us anything about legal position of 'signatures'. The Declaration of fact clauses appearing in many forms, is there purely to protect the questioner from any future litigation, should the author decide to take action on the grounds that the information was 'incorrect'. The author's signature is just a safeguard.
So, the case has been solved, answer received from a different source.
I should thank you for your efforts, and perhaps arrange for a refund of my deposit, as no one came up with an answer to my question.
Many thanks and regards