Printable View
"Get Clear Title - Accept the Warranty Deed " Title of video. Results still being tested
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqpBT6-3-oo
Interesting video with an easy to follow process for getting the deed to you property, free and clearl but as stated above this is still in the testing stages. Input is welcome fB
edited to correct link to vid
Although the theory makes sense this idea is newly being circulated and hasn't been verified as a way to obtain one's property free and clear.
The thread topic should be changed and so should the statement that this will lead one to obtaining the stated results. At least for now.
Thanks for your input. I have added some verbiage that should make it clear this is a new concept and is in the testing phase. Greatesuggestions. fBQuote:
Originally Posted by EZrhythm
From http://real-estate.lawyers.com/resid...ate/Deeds.html
Formalities Required for Deeds
All conveyances of land made during the lifetime of the grantor must be in writing in all states. Also, the rules of deed formality require at least the following:
Also, a deed is not valid as a conveyance until it has been delivered and accepted. The deed must be delivered to the grantee and accepted by the grantee.
- An identification of the grantor or grantors who are conveying an interest in property by the deed
- An identification or description of the grantee or grantees, including their names and, in some states, their addresses
- Words of conveyance that show that the parties intended to transfer title
- An adequate description of the land being conveyed, and
- The signature of the grantor
There is a space on the warranty deed where the grantee should sign as acknowledgment of acceptance. It is usually left unsigned and blank. I have one that shows this exact "incompleteness".
If this method has merit, and is supported by law, one can finally acknowledge acceptance and conveyance of "all that certain land..." from the grantor in "fee simple forever".
Since an acknowlegment wasn't actually executed as of yet, the acknowledgment itself can dictate the specifics of the acceptance and the express will and intent of the grantee. The grantee is of course the "Legal M. Name" trust vessel of which you make use of as a non-obligated and non-liable beneficiary. You also are in capacity of Director/Executor of that "Legal M. Name" resulting trust if you so choose.
Therefore, one may execute a NOTICE AND CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT which spells out the terms of the acceptance. The "sum of Ten Dollars, ($10.00) and other valuable considerations..." could be defined by demand in lawful money pursuant to 12USC411. One may expressly define one's standing and character and the capacity in which one executes this acknowledgment. Everything we have learned about redeeming lawful money and our True Name and character can be utilized for this "acceptance".
I think we need our "big guns" here to comment on this approach and hash out its viability and accordance with our understanding of law and trust.
Calling on:
David
Michael
allodial
we need some expert input and insight for this method.
Excellent, Frederick.
I noticed a bit of conflict in the wording on lawyers.com and also how there isn't any reference to black letter law.
"...Also, a deed is not valid as a conveyance until it has been delivered and accepted. The deed must be delivered to the grantee and accepted by the grantee.
Recording Deeds
Although deeds are not required to be acknowledged in order to be valid as between the grantor and grantee, most deeds are acknowledged because it is usually a prerequisite to recording the deeds with the county recorder. An acknowledgment is a statement that an instrument was in fact signed by the person whose signature appears on it. A certificate of acknowledgment is a notary public's formal statement that the person identified the signature on the document as his own in the notary's presence and that the person was the individual who signed the document."
I have a fundamental treatise on chattel mortgages.
Chattel refers to movables.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
What about immovables such as real estate?
Interesting read David, thanks for posting it. fBQuote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
I believe what is being presented here is that the process of grant and conveyance of land was never completed by the act of acknowledgment of acceptance. This leaves the opportunity to express the manner of acceptance and define the intent as well since the document is wanting. The Warranty Deed is an open offer which has yet to be formally acknowledged and recorded as such; it is still incomplete. This is why any process claiming from, and attached to, it has a defect. The defect is that the owner/grantee may some day complete the process and record the acknowledgment of acceptance which is why insurance is obtained by parties who rely on the defective document.
Once the acknowledgment of acceptance is on record the ownership of said property is "first in line and first in time" rendering ALL other former claims a nullity since the recording of this process creates a new number and book entry in the liber book (doomsday book) rendering the former document inferior and void.
There are a few elements within the deed that may be clarified via the formal acknowledgment:
1) The intent to pay with lawful money
2) The character of the named grantee (Legal M. Name) and the capacity of the living man/woman who Directs it in True Name.
3) The intent of NO RESIDENCY and the intent to have, hold and use the land in and as a PRIVATE dominion by Divine providence and inheritance.
This is an important issue, and a potentially useful method, to hash out as it dovetails, in my opinion, with the other forms of remedy and law we utilize.
Great synopsis Anthony Joseph and I agree. Now to put together a reliable certificate of acceptance, adding in the things you have brought forward. Great. fBQuote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph
Here is a first draft sample:Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell
Attachment 702
RE: "Get Clear Title - Accept the Warranty Deed " Title of video. Results still being tested
http://<a href="http://www.youtube.c...qpBT6-3-oo</a>
Interesting video with an easy to follow process for getting the deed to you property, free and clearl but as stated above this is still in the testing stages. Input is welcome fB
fredrick - the link above is incomplete. Could you please provide a full one.
Many Thanks.
Dawgboy
Here is the link copied directly from my browser, I hope it works for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawgboy
I loaded the Youtube page and copied the address so it should be working
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqpBT6-3-oo
fB
I’m having only one issue with Robb’s land ownership.
Sure you can go in and acknowledge the deed but it still does not change anything on the deed in fee simple. You’re the owner but still liable for the property tax. If that’s what you trying to diminish the property tax, that’s not going to happen.
Here’s what I mean.
In English law, a fee simple (or fee simple absolute) is an estate in land, a form of freehold ownership. It is the most common way that real estate is owned in common law countries, and is ordinarily the most complete ownership interest that can be had in real property short of allodial title, which is often reserved for governments.
Fee simple ownership represents absolute ownership of real property but it is limited by the four basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat, and it could also be limited by certain encumbrances or a condition in the deed.
How ownership is limited by these government powers often involves the shift from allodial title to fee simple such as when uniting with other property owners acceding to property restrictions or municipal regulation.
In the United States, fee simple owners are subject to property tax and other assessments for items such as roads and water/sewer improvements on the land.
Freehold: Then what freehold land states: In certain jurisdictions, including England and Scotland, a freehold (also called frank-tenement and franktenement) is the ownership of real property, being the land and all immovable structures attached to such land. This is opposed to a leasehold in which the property reverts to the owner of the land after the lease period has expired
Leasehold: A leasehold thus differs from a freehold or fee simple where the ownership of a property is purchased outright and thereafter held for an indeterminate length of time, and also differs from a tenancy where a property is let (rented) on a periodic basis such as weekly or monthly.
Allodial title constitutes ownership of real property (land, buildings and fixtures) that is independent of any superior landlord, but it should not be confused with anarchy as the owner of allodial land is not independent of his sovereign. In common legal use, allodial title is used to distinguish absolute ownership of land by individuals from feudal ownership, where property ownership is dependent on relationship to a lord or the sovereign.
In particular, land is said to be "held of the Crown" in England and Wales and the Commonwealth realms. In England, there is no allodial land, all land being held of the Crown; in the United States, all land is subject to eminent domain by the federal government, and subject to the imposition of taxes by state and/or local governments, and there is thus no true allodial land.
I never though I would ever back up a opinion but this makes sense,
The Constitution nowhere empowers the federal government to practice eminent domain. That is, nowhere in the Constitution is that power granted in the first place. Nor does the Constitution anywhere say that people hold their property by fee simple and not allodial title.
Link
Search Fee simple : ownership represents absolute ownership of real property but it is limited by the four basic government powers of taxation, eminent domain, police ...
Even in Indiana Code:
IC 32-24 ARTICLE 24. EMINENT DOMAIN
IC 32-24-1 Chapter 1. General Procedures
IC 32-24-1-1 "Condemnor" defined
Sec. 1. As used in section 5 of this chapter, "condemnor" means any person authorized by Indiana law to exercise the power of eminent domain.
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.9.
IC 32-24-1-2 "Owner" defined
Sec. 2. As used in section 5 of this chapter, "owner" means the persons listed on the tax assessment rolls as being responsible for the payment of real estate taxes imposed on the property and the persons in whose name title to real estate is shown in the records of the recorder of the county in which the real estate is located.
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.9.
I agree with your viewpoint here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chex
The specific type of ownership which is subject to "taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat" can only be that way via contract agreement or a trust structure whereby the parties fulfill the terms of either by their actions. It is non-constitutional as it falls under contract and/or trust law.
Therefore, since the deed is still wanting completion, the terms and intents of the grantee can be spelled out via the formal acknowledgment of acceptance. Taxation, police power, eminent domain, etc. are all in assumpsit. The demand of lawful money of exchange as part of the formal acceptance creates the separation from taxation since ALL taxation in this day and age is based upon signature endorsment of the FED's private credit and currency.
Can not the character of real property change according to the grantee's acceptance terms and the manner in which it is conveyed? The grantor is usually operating in an office of trust for the creator of the property being conveyed (The State). However, the grantor is also releasing terra firma and pedis possessio by walking away and agreeing to the grantee rightfully standing upon the land.
This goes to Michael Joseph's question, "Can property ever leave the State?" Perhaps not, however the terms and remedies can be spelled out so as to avoid the "contracted" subjections to the conveyed real property under "normative" conveyance including any and all debt scavengers who utilize the defective deed to their advantage.
Possibly there is a lead - .
David I cannot get either of the 2 links you posted to work for me from this threat
Very interested
first one went to advertisiment for image service and second said could not load because of errors
can you either repost in the thread or summarize or send to me via e mail or such? etc...? Thanks
Welcome 5201! Thank you for bringing failed links to my attention. I have attached them here in the website.
IC 32-24-1-2 "Owner" defined
Sec. 2. As used in section 5 of this chapter, "owner" means the persons listed on the tax assessment rolls as being responsible for the payment of real estate taxes imposed on the property and the persons in whose name title to real estate is shown in the records of the recorder of the county in which the real estate is located.
As added by P.L.2-2002, SEC.9.
IMO, allodial title, is not required at all. 'As used in section' does not alter the status of the people. Government can only make laws concerning things over which they have authority. Government has no authority over the property rights of the people. Those rights are inalienable. And as for Indiana is concerned, this ends Article 1 of the 1816 constitution:
Sect. 24. To guard against any encroachments on the rights herein retained, we declare, that every thing in this article, is excepted out of the general powers of Government, and shall forever remain inviolable.
Article one, of course mentions the right to property, and all other inalienable rights (limited only by controversy between owners of those rights, the people). Government has been excepted out of the inalienable rights of the people. We get the common law from England, but England had one king. With no nobility, and only a representative government, common law is not the same as in England. Fee simple does not mean a thing next to the inalienable rights of the people. The question for land ownership, that is most important IMO, is who is in possession? Who has had peaceful possession? Who paid the previous owner his asking price? Is the one in possession one of the people? An owner in common law has dominion over what he owns. We have no king but only servants. Who here thinks that the servants replaced the king?
Why do you consider this a threat? For my part, the bank is paying my real estate taxes http://jesse2012.com/mortgagetx.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by 5201
which seems a nice compromise while we figure this one out.