Certificate of Accuracy

[yukof]

I've been asked to provide a Certificate of Accuracy by a new client.
I've never done this before or even heard about it. Is it simply a
declaration that says something like:

I hereby declare that the translation I have provided is accurate to
the best of my knowledge...

kind of thing?

Would someone be kind enough to provide a sample they've used?

Thanks a dozen!!

Yuko

[Nora Stevens Heath]

Yuko asked:

> I've been asked to provide a Certificate of Accuracy by a new client.
> I've never done this before or even heard about it.

As you suspect, it's just a signed declaration (usually on your
letterhead) to the following effect (using my boilerplate):

As a professional translator for the Japanese language, I hereby
certify that the above [accompanying, etc.] translation is true and
correct to the best of my knowledge.

Hope that helps--
Nora

--
Nora Stevens Heath <no...@fumizuki.com>
J-E translations: http://www.fumizuki.com/

[Chris Moore]

These are required often for legal documents or those that will be submitted to a government agency. They should have a statement saying that the translation is complete and accurate, as well as name date and address (official looking letterhead). It is best to print out both the certificate and the translation and bind them physically such as with a staple and then sign it (or stamp a seal on each relevant page). Because of the extra work and liability involved, you should charge a certification fee that is separate from the translation fee and doesn't reflect the length of document (a single page translation certificate should not be discounted for being shorter than a 10 page document, although with a particularly large document it may go up). The cost of the fee is arbitrary but might be about ¥5000 plus or minus up to 50% depending on how it will be used and the issuer's preferences (birth certificates/personal registries for individuals at the low end, contracts/agreements for corporate entities moving up). Agencies will typically have a fixed rate they use every time, especially for personal identification type documents.

This is for certification where no specific requirements are in place. Depending on the context the certification is to be used in you may need to meet more stringent standards. Documents in certain countries require a member of an official certifying or translator body to create the document. The stricter the requirements, the higher the fee in general.

I'm sure others will have different guidelines or rates, but maybe this will give you somewhere to start?

Chris Moore

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Honyaku Mailing list.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to honyaku+u...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/honyaku?hl=en?hl=en

[Minoru Mochizuki]

I believe that's all there is to it and I wonder how meaningful it is from
the legal point of view as it is simply saying that it is to the best of
your knowledge and nobody is really gauging what you know of your ability. I
too only do to the best of my knowledge, i.e., I do not intentionally or
wantonly provide a bad translation. I do not even say that I am an
accomplished translator. If someone is willing to buy my service, I simply
"try" to satisfy him/her, hoping that the same client comes back to me next
time the client needs a similar service.

I am certified by a professional association but I know too well what
happens in the certification process as I was a grader myself.

Minoru Mochizuki

[Christopher Girsch]

>I am certified by a professional association but I know too well what
>happens in the certification process as I was a grader myself.

Hi Minoru,

I have toyed with the idea of certification at ATA, but not until it is
a typed test. I don't even remember how to hold a pencil.

What happens in the certification process? Can you describe here
what you know? I have my reservations of the certification process
and would like to know what goes on.

Chris Girsch

[Minoru Mochizuki]

There is nothing to be disclosed specifically about the certification
procedure in public other than what you can get officially from ATA.

Minoru Mochizuki

-----Original Message-----
From: hon...@googlegroups.com [mailto:hon...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf

[Gerry Peters]

Hello Yuko,

Each country will have different preferred language and governing laws.
I have used the following for U.S.-adjudicated patent-related
documents...

---BEGIN SAMPLE 1---

DECLARATION OF ACCURACY

I hereby declare that I am a professional translator of the Japanese and
English languages; further that, among other qualifications, I am or
have been certified (formerly referred to as accredited) by the
American Translators Association for Japanese-to-English translation;
further that to the best of my knowledge and belief the attached is a
complete and accurate English-language translation of the accompanying
Japanese-language original; further that all statements made herein of
my own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
and belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements
were made with the knowledge that willful false statements and the like
so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under Section
1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code and that such willful false
statements may jeopardize the validity of any application for patent
associated herewith or any patent issued thereon.

[insert table listing document title and number of pages in source and
target documents]

Executed on [insert date] at the address shown below in the [if in the
U.S., insert county and state here].

[insert signature, printed name, address and other contact info]

---END SAMPLE 1---

...the language about fines and jail time is what makes this a
declaration rather than an oath/affidavit (oaths/affidavits in U.S.
jurisdictions requiring notarization to be valid but declarations not so
requiring, I believe), and the language about jeopardizing patent
applications is language that the USPTO requires if this is being
submitted in connection with a patent application.

Here is a sample form that I have seen used by a U.S. law firm in
connection with a visa (immigration; not credit card <g>) application...

---BEGIN SAMPLE 2---

- CERTIFICATE OF ACCURACY -
Pursuant to U.S. Federal Regulation [59 FR 1900, Jan. 13, 1994, ��3.33]
regarding translation of document, I �c�c�c�c�c�c�c�c do hereby certify
that I am competent to translate this document, and that this
translation is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.
No inference or determination regarding the validity of the source
document or its content is made.

Translator's Signature: ______________________

Date: [insert date]

Sworn to before me this ___ day of __________________ [insert year]

__________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

---END SAMPLE 2---

I thought Nora's and Chris's replies were very good. Chris gives much
helpful advice and volunteers many useful details, but I would like to
take minor exception to one small, but I think significant, point
mentioned in passing by Chris with respect to what qualifies as a
legitimate rationale for charging a fee for certification.

But before discussing the rationale for charging a fee, I want to first
question the economics of charging a fee at all.

Though it might be reasonable to request a small fee, similar to the
small fee that some notaries public charge to notarize a document, the
notaries who smile and say they do notarizations at no charge always
made a better impression on me than the ones who charge a fee, and so I
gladly join ranks with them in not charging a fee.

Think of how little upside there is to collecting a few tens of dollars,
and compare that with the good impression you can make on the client by
waiving the fee. Seems to me that the opportunity cost of not waiving
the fee is much higher than what you could collect as a fee.

If you do charge a fee, I think the only legitimate rationale you might
use is to cover the administrative hassle, as the liability rationale
referred to by Chris leaves the client wondering about the standards of
a translator who balks and wants to charge extra when they're asked to
certify that their translation is accurate. By the same rationale should
we as translators quote one rate for translation and another rate for
accurate translation? I think you can see the problem with this
approach, yes? Does not create a warm fuzzy feeling on the part of the
client.

And whether a translator knows it or not, I doubt their professional
liability for the quality of the work they deliver is substantially any
different depending on whether they have signed as to accuracy. Or even
if for the sake of argument we were to assume that your liability might
be higher when you have signed as to accuracy than when you have not,
I'm afraid that the small fee you might be able to charge for
certification is probably going to be trivial in comparison with the
amount of potential liability in the event of an inaccurate translation.

A translator who thinks that s/he is not already potentially liable for
the accuracy of their translations, even without signing, probably needs
to do an Internet search using such keywords as negligence, errors and
omissions, and product liability.

(I am not an attorney, this is for educational purposes only, and this
should not be construed as legal advice.)

---Gerry

==================================================================
Gerald T. Peters, U.S. Patent Agent & Japanese Translator
JTT Patent Services, LLC
New Hampshire USA & Takatsuki JAPAN
23-21 Yayoigaoka Takatsuki Osaka 569-1021 JAPAN
TEL (within Japan): 080 4232 0566
TEL (forwarded internationally): +1 206 203 5010
FAX (forwarded internationally): +1 206 203 5020
EMAIL: in...@jttpatent.com
WEB: http://www.jttpatent.com
==================================================================

[yukof]

Thank you so much for all the answers!
I think in my case I only need a simple statement, as I'm not dealing
with something as serious as a patent.
All of this is very, very informative.
Live and learn!

Thanks again!

Yuko

YUKO FUKAMI ARCHITECT | Translation+Transcreation, Cross-Cultural
Communications
Berkeley, CA | 510.848.4412 | fukam...@yahoo.co.jp |
yukof...@comcast.net

[Chris Moore]

Hi Gerry, (and other list members)

Okay, you're right. I hadn't really thought through that particular statement regarding liability. I was kind of trying to paint in broad strokes, to give my impression of industry standards, and many places do ask for a fee.

I think the point is that you are providing a service that has value to the customer (even if you decide to offer it as サービス). For the most part I was thinking of people applying for official documentation (such as visas, work permits, driver's licenses) based on translations of official documentation (birth certificates, criminal record searches, driver's licenses). In your patent related case, I can see how you would be better off building good-will with what will likely be a repeat client with highly lucrative business, just as the gas station gives me a free box of tissues once a month or any other business providing something/some service of value for free.

As an example that illustrates the value of the service, I recently did work for a company that is bidding on a large civil-engineering project overseas and wanted certification of their in-house translation that was already finished of a previous contract for related work. In the end it was settled that I would do a check/re-write as necessary of their translation first and then issue the certification that I had ensured the accuracy of the translation. The certification itself was the service they valued, more than the translation. In fact, the contract in question had stamps on each page for 8,000-10,000 just to notarize that it was an official contract, again showing that notarization is a service with value. 

You could do it for free if you think the good will and future opportunities are worth more to you than the minimal short term gain you get for it, but JAF didn't blink twice in charging to certify a translation of my Canadian driver's license for getting my Japanese one, and they already have nearly every driver's license in world already translated on file to just pop in my name and a few dates and hit print with. Large translation agencies charge these fees all the time. If you don't want to charge I'm sure that's okay with your customer and it may lead to later opportunities. 

Chris Moore

[Gerry Peters]

Hi Chris,

Pleased to meet you virtually and thanks for your follow-up comments.
Are you in Japan? I am down in Kansai, so please let me know if you are
ever in town and want to get together for a drink or whatever.

If I followed the example you gave in your follow-up post, it sounded
like you were describing a situation where a client was asking you to
certify as to accuracy of something translated by someone else. That is
definitely a situation where it makes sense to charge the full price of
translation. As difficult as it may be for a client to believe, I have
found that it can actually be more time-consuming (depending on where
the translation came from) to check/correct the work of someone else
than to translate something from scratch. This is what leads me to
question the methodology employed by many agencies whereby they
supposedly guarantee quality by having x sets of eyes review the
translation. Especially given the low rates typically offered for
proofreading, I think it is just as likely that the reviewer will
destroy a good translation as improve a bad one, but that is another
subject.

So getting back to certification, I am with you 100% about charging as
much as your full translation rate for certification of someone else's
work.

Sounds like we are agreed about the embarrassing implications of
charging different rates for translation vs accurate translation.

Thanks for your providing so much helpful detail, which I think should
be very helpful to those trying to learn the ins and outs of
certification. To tell you the truth, I was a little nervous when Yuko
said something along the lines of "I'll just use a simple statement
since this isn't for anything as serious as a patent" (or words to that
effect). I hope she appreciates that any situation in which a
certificate of accuracy is being requested is one in which the
translator is probably potentially under the same scrutiny as they would
be were they testifying under oath (i.e., they might be held to same
standard as would apply to perjury), since in such cases the translation
is most likely being submitted as evidence before an administrative body
or in a court of law, and in such a case it is the translator who is at
least partially staking their reputation on the accuracy of the
document.

The notary lends their credibility to the doc by staking their
reputation on the fact that they witnessed it being signed by the person
whose signature appears on the doc, and the translator lends their
credibility to the doc by staking their reputation on the fact that the
doc says in the source language what it appears to say in the target
language.

The robosigning scandal now hitting the U.S. mortgage industry, in which
persons not competent to notarize legal documents did so on a massive
scale, might be instructive, since what we as translators do when we
certify a document is very similar, from the point of view of the
administrative body or court, as what the notary does, inasmuch as it
forms a part of the "paper trail" or "chain of custody" that allows the
authority (administrative body or court) to accept the document as
evidence in the proceeding before it.

P.S. This is slightly off-topic, but speaking of the robosigning
scandal, did you happen to notice that a U.S. judge recently rejected
the very concept of MERS (electronic registration of securitized
mortgages as was done on a massive scale during the recent housing boom
in the U.S.)? See, e.g.,
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/judge-finds-mers-has-no-right-transfer-mortgages
. If interested, I can send you links of video depositions of some of
the poor souls who notarized thousands (or more) loan assignments per
day with little or no clue as to what they were doing. And it is
instructive to note how "the smartest guys in the room" are long-gone
when it all hits the fan, so we should not let others pressure us into
compromising our integrity. It is our reputations, not theirs, that are
ultimately on the line. ---GTP