Page 3 of 18 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 175

Thread: Say Goodbye to Property Taxes?

  1. #21
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by KnowLaw View Post
    I haven't had any contact with the county treasurer, only the county attorney's office, which is seeming to see if it can lure me into some kind of discussion or controversy. Since I'm in the private realm, I don't view his response as anything more than a weak attempt at "scare tactics." He's at a disadvantage because he doesn't know who he is dealing with, whereas I know the ammunition he has in his arsenal (which is limited in this case).

    I have made my tender of payment (together with notarized and recorded a letter of credit) and remain in a position of honor. There is no controversy, just as you stated in your Coupon Authorization.


    I don't see anything on the table to refuse for cause. Perhaps you are reading something into his response that is not there?
    It was this I was referring to:

    Quote Originally Posted by KnowLaw View Post
    About two weeks after having sent my response to the county treasurer regarding the property tax statement he sent, I received a correspondence from the County Attorney's office which was short and basically not very substantive in content (meaning that it didn't address any of the legal issues at stake). It did seem to be cordial, however.

    The only passage in which he seemed to address anyone's concerns was encapsulated in the following brief statement: "...having been advised by the Anywhere County Treasurer that the property taxes on the above parcel have not been paid, I wanted to remind you that the taxes will be delinquent if not paid in full by January 3, 2011. Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions regarding this matter."
    That response by the attorney could be construed as another presentment/offer for you to agree with his interpretation or opinion. This is why most people have doubts about the R4C process; they think that a letter like that means "it didn't work" and not what it really is - A NEW OFFER to continue arguing the "contoversy". Of course, unless there is proper and certified proof of service of such an offer, there is no evidence you received it unless it is you that acknowledges receipt or argues what is contained in it.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    It was this I was referring to:

    That response by the attorney could be construed as another presentment/offer for you to agree with his interpretation or opinion. This is why most people have doubts about the R4C process; they think that a letter like that means "it didn't work" and not what it really is - A NEW OFFER to continue arguing the "controversy". Of course, unless there is proper and certified proof of service of such an offer, there is no evidence you received it unless it is you that acknowledges receipt or argues what is contained in it.
    Now this interpretation begins to sound like the AFV process, of which I am also familiar. And you might be correct if we were playing on an even playing field, where one fiction at law was corresponding with anther fiction at law.

    But the truth and fact is: There is more to what I was describing than what I am willing to admit to on a Public forum, which is why I didn't respond to or acknowledge that correspondence from the county attorney.

    There is also the fact that the wording of his correspondence ("...having been advised by the Anywhere County Treasurer that the property taxes on the above parcel have not been paid...") indicates that he is not providing a legal determination but rather is just mimicking the response of the county treasurer, as though the county treasurer knows the law and he (the county attorney) does not.

    At any rate, that response came before I had thought to provide a notarized Letter of Credit upon which to draw the suggested relief on the Coupon. It also was before I revised and sent the new format for the Notice of Memorandum of Law that I originally sent which comprised the first notice that was sent to the county treasurer. The first one was printed on both sides of one sheet along with an additional sheet. It was two pages, when it should have been three pages. The county attorney was indicating that he ignored the back side of one of those pages in the photocopied example he provided in his correspondence. So, I had to correct that mistake. This was one of the two additional mailings to the county treasurer that were required before I was able to get the process of my first mailing corrected. Each one was served with a Certificate of Mailing, which I have read is sufficient in their court to serve as evidence of service. Both the Letter of Credit and the original Coupon for redemption at the FED contained canceled stamps on their face, indicating that this matter was out of the jurisdiction of the statutory court. This last is another reason why I did not respond in any way to the county attorney's letter.

    While I see what you are suggesting, I don't think that it necessarily relates to my specific case in this instance. The county treasurer now has a valid instrument in his hands if he wishes to take advantage of the relief it offers. At the time that the county attorney sent his correspondence, he was responding to the first presentment of tender of payment, which it turned out was a faulty presentment on my part. The subsequent two mailings to the county treasurer were meant to correct the faulty nature of the first.

    I haven't heard back from either of these two public officials since having corrected my process. A happenstance that is not totally unexpected on my part in this case.

  3. #23
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by KnowLaw View Post
    Now this interpretation begins to sound like the AFV process, of which I am also familiar. And you might be correct if we were playing on an even playing field, where one fiction at law was corresponding with anther fiction at law.

    But the truth and fact is: There is more to what I was describing than what I am willing to admit to on a Public forum, which is why I didn't respond to or acknowledge that correspondence from the county attorney.

    There is also the fact that the wording of his correspondence ("...having been advised by the Anywhere County Treasurer that the property taxes on the above parcel have not been paid...") indicates that he is not providing a legal determination but rather is just mimicking the response of the county treasurer, as though the county treasurer knows the law and he (the county attorney) does not.

    At any rate, that response came before I had thought to provide a notarized Letter of Credit upon which to draw the suggested relief on the Coupon. It also was before I revised and sent the new format for the Notice of Memorandum of Law that I originally sent which comprised the first notice that was sent to the county treasurer. The first one was printed on both sides of one sheet along with an additional sheet. It was two pages, when it should have been three pages. The county attorney was indicating that he ignored the back side of one of those pages in the photocopied example he provided in his correspondence. So, I had to correct that mistake. This was one of the two additional mailings to the county treasurer that were required before I was able to get the process of my first mailing corrected. Each one was served with a Certificate of Mailing, which I have read is sufficient in their court to serve as evidence of service. Both the Letter of Credit and the original Coupon for redemption at the FED contained canceled stamps on their face, indicating that this matter was out of the jurisdiction of the statutory court. This last is another reason why I did not respond in any way to the county attorney's letter.

    While I see what you are suggesting, I don't think that it necessarily relates to my specific case in this instance. The county treasurer now has a valid instrument in his hands if he wishes to take advantage of the relief it offers. At the time that the county attorney sent his correspondence, he was responding to the first presentment of tender of payment, which it turned out was a faulty presentment on my part. The subsequent two mailings to the county treasurer were meant to correct the faulty nature of the first.

    I haven't heard back from either of these two public officials since having corrected my process. A happenstance that is not totally unexpected on my part in this case.
    What I offer here is not intended to convey any AFV method. I only wish to provide others with the knowledge that any presentment (response, letter, etc.) sent relating to an issue you are engaged in can be viewed and used as a NEW offer to contract and reopen the "controversy". Without having full knowledge of your situation, I cannot comment about whether or not it relates to your specific case. It seems like you have a good handle on it and are proceeding as a competent self-governor.

    This issue of avoiding and/or abating property taxes, while maintaining exclusive use and possession, is of great importance to many since, for most, it is a life spent of energy and sweat equity at stake, not to mention the right to have and keep land and a home. Any other information and experiences you can share on this topic would be greatly appreciated.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    Property Taxes are paid by the Registered Owner by and thru an a priori agreement.

    Again what is Property? Property is Right of Use. The Registered Owner has the Right of Use via Agreement. The Trustee has the management of the Right of Use. And the tax is collected on the RIGHT OF USE.

    Something tells me if I look at a Deed of Trust I am going to find an agreement within that says the Borrower agrees to pay the Property Taxes.....let me see if I can find one now....

    Attachment 151

    Well now, look at that. It is indeed found within a pre-existing agreement. Wherein that agreement has made known a new term BORROWER and the BORROWER is exactly the same as LEGAL M. NAME or cestui que trust.

    And i will wager that the Grantor is lawfully siezed of the estate - therefore the Property never leaves the State. Starting to see why SR#62 is not required to be Public Law?

    For those playing catchup at Heinz field, Property is Right of Use. The Deed incorporated by reference a Survey and the Survey is Recorded on a Plat and the Plat is located on a Book of Maps and the Book of Maps is Registered at a book and page WITHIN a Trust Asset Registry known as Register of Deeds or County Clerk and Recorder.

    And that agreement does not say the Borrower will repay in Pesos. It says the Borrower will repay with the money of the STATE.

    The State is concerned with their Property. So now I ask, what again is Property. If you have not seen it yet. Go to the Top and read again.

    But read this first


    Plus something tells me the agreement is Probated - Dead Hand - irrevocable Trust Agreement. The Grant cannot be undone.

    Attachment 152


    One thing to consider is what Registry will the Property - and the Agreements that govern the Property - be Registered? Under who's Law Form?

    Why not re-deed absent the agreement to pay property taxes?
    1. Know who you are
    2. Know who has the burden of proof
    3. NEVER argue
    4. Document and/or know your remedy

    I'll give you legal advice, as long as it's not illegal advice...

    I'm sure you think your religion is the only way to heaven, but I just can't buy it right now...

  5. #25
    OR, deed the property to the County in Trust...
    1. Know who you are
    2. Know who has the burden of proof
    3. NEVER argue
    4. Document and/or know your remedy

    I'll give you legal advice, as long as it's not illegal advice...

    I'm sure you think your religion is the only way to heaven, but I just can't buy it right now...

  6. #26
    Anthony Joseph
    Guest
    How does one protect their exclusive right of possession and use when "deeding the property to the County in Trust"?

  7. #27
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Anthony Joseph View Post
    How does one protect their exclusive right of possession and use when "deeding the property to the County in Trust"?
    What gives a man exclusive right to use anything? Especially if another man expended his energies to form it?

    so then in order to dissect the foregoing we must first comprehend what is Right, Possession and Use and furthermore what exactly is the County Registry? And who has Proprietory interest in the County Registry?

    Right: A valid Right is a grant to a Person for certain Control, Benefit of Use or Privilege of particular Property. A Right, also known as Right of Use is equivalent to Property. As a valid Right is equivalent to Property, it presupposes the existence of Property, which implies the existence of a Trust relationship and a valid Trust deed defining the nature and limits of the Right for the Beneficiary. In the absence of Property, a Right cannot exist in reality.

    Possession: is the intentional act and fact of occupation, use, employment or effective control of a Form of Matter. Possession is distinct from Ownership in that a Person who possesses a Form of Matter may have no rightful claim or title. [a tenant may possess a Form but has no rightful claim to the Form]

    Use: is a skill employ of a right for some benefit. Hence, the ancient principle “Right of Use”. Right of Use is equivalent to Property. The Use of a Form of Matter assumes Possession. A Person, who takes Lawful Possession of a Form of Matter and Uses it over an accepted period of time, assumes those Rights of Use implied by such Use, whether or not such rights have yet been formalized by Deed or Title. [Example: If I build and maintain an access road across a Property [the Property is NOT the land] and I begin to use said Property, without any rebuttal, then I have assumed a Right of Use and therefore this is an unrebutted Claim to said Property and therefore my Right of Use stands.]

    Property is any Right of Use expressed into a Trust relationship with other Forms of Matter whereby there exists a claimed Form of Ownership, Form of Trustee(s) administering the Form as Property and Forms of Beneficiaries. Hence Property is the Rights of an Owner to Use the Form of Matter, never ownership of the object or concept itself. Therefore Property is equivalent to Rights of Use of an Object or Concept [Form], not Rights of Ownership of an Object or Concept [Form]

    The Ownership Rights of Property cannot exceed the Ownership Rights of the original Owner that conveyed the Form into the first Trust in the beginning. The Settlor made the Law and surveyed the Forms of Matter and the governing terms and conditions upon the surveyed Forms. The Beginning expresses a claim upon Forms of Matter.

    Owner: is a Person who holds the rightful claim to a Form of Matter or title to Property. The Claim is recorded in a Registry of a Trust whereby the written claim produces Title to Property. And now go again and read what Property is the Right of Use.


    ------

    Now, there may be an existing agreement which will not allow the Owner to transfer interest or said another way, if the Owner transfers interest and a "loan" is outstanding, more than likely the Lender can evoke the "Due on Sale" clause and demand the entire outstanding balance due within 30 days of the notice of Loan Acceleration.

    ------

    Now, if in the foregoing you are stating that you have "somehow" removed the Property from a Trust Asset Registry - County Registry- and you have claimed the Property - within your Estate, then perhaps we have something a bit different. Of course, when I say you have claim the Property - have you issued forth a Survey upon the Form of Matter, have you created a Registry to document your Claim? Are you Trustee or Beneficiary? What exactly do you mean by Property?

    There are many claims to the Roadways - and there are many districts that Overlay and Abut the existing Roadways. Is one claim more superior to the other, you bet. Thus the need for agreement.

    Perhaps we need to discuss how one comes to Possess Property? And specifically does that Possession include Ownership? How does one come to Ownership of Property?
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 03-23-11 at 06:18 PM.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  8. #28
    Senior Member Michael Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    peaceful inhabitant on the Earth
    Posts
    1,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Metheist View Post
    OR, deed the property to the County in Trust...
    because that would violate the Garn St. Germane Act and also more than likely the Deed of Trust would open the door to allow the Lender to Accelerate the Loan by Due on Sale Clause.

    And the Military as Trustee - See Lieber Code will enforce the Agreements. Remember Sheriff Grice - "I am just following orders"....

    Most men and women do not have a rightful Claim to deed any Property to anyone. Senate Resolution #62 need not be Positive Law it is a matter of fact in regard to Trust Law.

    However, lets say there are no banker liens - outstanding loans - the Deed might just spell out a new Agreement. And since we are talking about Trust Law only one signature is required. Please go to any deed and tell me who signed the Deed? Did the Grantee sign the Deed? I think not.
    Last edited by Michael Joseph; 03-23-11 at 06:27 PM.
    The blessing is in the hand of the doer. Faith absent deeds is dead.

    Lawful Money Trust Website

    Divine Mind Community Call - Sundays 8pm EST

    ONE man or woman can make a difference!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Joseph View Post
    because that would violate the Garn St. Germane Act and also more than likely the Deed of Trust would open the door to allow the Lender to Accelerate the Loan by Due on Sale Clause.

    And the Military as Trustee - See Lieber Code will enforce the Agreements. Remember Sheriff Grice - "I am just following orders"....

    Most men and women do not have a rightful Claim to deed any Property to anyone. Senate Resolution #62 need not be Positive Law it is a matter of fact in regard to Trust Law.

    However, lets say there are no banker liens - outstanding loans - the Deed might just spell out a new Agreement. And since we are talking about Trust Law only one signature is required. Please go to any deed and tell me who signed the Deed? Did the Grantee sign the Deed? I think not.
    I have been pondering this question MJ!

    Please tell us the point?

  10. #30
    On my warranty deed the Grantor is "legal name" and the on the signature page we find the same "legal name."

    Deed says in fee simple. no Grantee signature. fB
    Last edited by Frederick Burrell; 04-01-11 at 02:38 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •