I Must Take a Closer Look at This

[allodial]

It seems to me, any agreements within the purchase contract, are only between the parties. Who can point to the contract and have standing if they are not even a party to the contract? I do remember seeing something in my mortgage about property taxes, but I paid the loan off. The money I paid with is no concern to anyone outside the contract. And that does nothing in showing a better claim or title. That contract is fulfilled. It seems maybe de-registering maybe the way to go. Owner of record becomes non-existent with that, and I think many of the statutes require an owner of record. This all seems to be a product of secret deception to me. Every bit of it is against the interests of the people.

Secret? I dunno. A lot is plain and obvious in the contracts. "The Purchaser agrees to pay all taxes due and to abide by the laws and zoning restrictions of the municipality where the Property is situated." What's secret about that?

Let's take a look at it from another way:

1. you believe corporations aren't living souls and cannot be greater than men?
2. yet you make a purchase from a corporation to acquire its rights and interests
3. you say its a secret deception because you presume that someone should just presume that you intended something even though you neither said nor did anything to the contrary of evidencing your being being satisfied with the level of rights and interests of a corporation (after all how can a turnip give you onion juice?);
4. you say its a secret deception because you failed to take action and people took you your will and freedom of choice seriously by taking it as face value that you failed to assert a claim any higher than a corporation;
5. you say its a secret deception because the clerk didn't treat you as a mentally incapacitated infant and do things for you that you did not do yourself and if she did those things or said those things on your behalf you would be perfectly OK with it.

Do get this: this is not to be derogatory or insulting I am very plainly laying out the perspectives and facets so as to edify.

The operating presumption is that you know everything there is to know about trusts, real estate law, etc. In the field of commercial law everyone who signs a check is presumed to know everything there is to know about commercial law. The conspiracy: the widespread failure to place reading law books at a higher priority than watching the Super Bowl.

***

Once a woman approached me because she wanted to get out of her rental agreement. I said that sure I'd love to see her get out of the agreement and into a better situation but she was asking me to do some things that she wasn't aware she was asking. The exchange went something like this:

I said to her to imagine herself in the place of a landlord and you have an agreement with a tenant that if they do not mow the grass every month, there will be an additional $100 fee (i.e. to pay a landscaping service, etc.). So what would you do if they did not pay the $100?

She said she would expect payment, etc.

I said so if I were to sit as a judge and say "Well I like this nice lady, she is pretty and I feel bad for her so you I wont allow you to collect your $100." I asked her how would you feel?

She said that she would not like that.

I said "There is another perspective. You are also asking me to treat your agreement and your word and your intellect as something easily dismissed and disregarded, to trespass and defecate upon the idea that you are a grown woman, a being with volition and free will by saying your ability to contract, your right to contract is trash and not worth anything, to regress you to the level of a child." So I said "Try to understand, that is what you would be asking me to do as a judge: to trivialize you and to trivialize the rights of the landlord.

So let me put this in words as if I might address the court and the world adding in the trivialization of you and the landlord's rights: "Well I like this nice lady, she is pretty and I feel bad for her so you I wont allow you to collect your $100. Her word is garbage, she effectively mentally defective and an incompetent eggplant. Contracting with her are like contracting with a bowl of grass and the landlord should have known that. No one should contract with her ever." I asked her how would you like that? She did not like that.

***

If your property is registered in that State or County, and you took the corporations rights (i.e. to hold the property and as long as you pay the tax), sounds like you involved other parties: including but not limited to whomever the tax is owed.

***



The above is from a contract published by the Kentucky Real Estate Commission. Anyone who signs that contract is given plain and clear notice as to the obligations that go along with it.