No Name

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
93 messages Options
12345
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

No Name

Hallow
Gifts and Gratuitous Promises
“A gift of goods or any kind of chattels is good, if accompanied by delivery, and the donor could not recover them back. But where one person obtains property from another the presumption is that he purchased the property; hence, if the giver should sue for the value of the articles, the other party in setting up his defense would have to prove the gift, and this he could not do by the plaintiff if he denies there gift. Other evidence would have to be given to prove the gift”.
 Digest of Canadian Mercantile Laws, William Anger (1913)

I read that from the said book years ago. It was based on this information that I suggested to people that they get something in writing to prove a gift. E.g. someone has a picnic table on their lawn with a sign on it, take me, I am free. Go ahead and scoop the table but have the giver acknowledge the gift in writing.

Now, the name in question here is the name they will say mom and dad gave you. This name is the one indicated on a SoB in the possession or control of the Registrar General. It is that name that there is no proof delivery was made. The key to understanding what I am saying is, mom and dad gave you the name, but what proof have you that you received a name from mom and dad? What proof has you or anyone of delivery? The name you did get and use is the one on a BC and that BC did not come from mom and dad. It is not an acknowledgement of the gift of a name from mom and dad to you.

As Christine said on call 114, the only way to prove you received the name from mom and dad, is if you got a paper with the name on it directly from mom and dad, the givers.

We have no such paper nor does such a paper exist; therefore, delivery of the name has not been made to us. The RG holds it, child’s full name, and has since the date of registration.

As per the letter from and the testimony of a Deputy Registrar General, the name indicated on the Statement of Live Birth (SoB) becomes a legal name. The name indicated on the SoB, the one mom and dad gave you is “the name”, the credit side of the ledger. The name appearing on a birth certificate, if used to go downstream, used to connect with service providers, contracting etc., evolves into and becomes “a legal name, the debtor side of the ledger.

So forget about whatever you did to date having used the BC, the debtor account, it matters not, and focus on the gift you never received, the credit account. That is what the Registrar General holds.

If you see the name you did not receive as the credit side, it is easy to discern how Sean was able to settle the charges in the traffic matter, when he produced the BC, not as evidence of his identity but of his interest.

Go here, clik on more info, and listen to call 114
http://restorethekingdomofgod.blogspot.com/

I AM

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

iamsomedude
Administrator
Hallow wrote
So forget about whatever you did to date having used the BC, the debtor account, it matters not, and focus on the gift you never received, the credit account. That is what the Registrar General holds.

If you see the name you did not receive as the credit side, it is easy to discern how Sean was able to settle the charges in the traffic matter, when he produced the BC, not as evidence of his identity but of his interest.
Thank you for this.

And hopefully everyone will see that when everything is held is trust, all that exists are interests. The surrender of those interests merges "the usufruct" from the estate from which it is derived and extinguishes the debt. "The usufruct" is the debtor side of the account

Man holds the usufruct of the Earth, thus has a duty to God (debt obligation) for the Earth belongs in usufruct to the living; the dead have neither right nor claim. Thus the DEAD, need your usufruct to survive and the 4 General Orders of Christ (Matthew 10:8) are: Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out the devils: the surrender of the usufruct heals the sick (the bankrupt); cleanses the lepers (restores the CREDIT of the nation); raises the dead (EXTINSGUISHES the Debt); and casts out the devils (Attorneys have no controversy: the ACCUSOR is silent; the DEVOURER rebuked).

The action against the NAME itself is an offer to provide "honest services" that once accepted underwrites the "right to receive proof of claim of further obligation" and the failure to provide the "proof of claim" means there is "no right" thus only "wrong" and since "force of the state (ie: courts)" are sought, there exists only "force and wrong" of which are the "greatest enemies of peace" (ie: anti-Christ) thus the "enemy of peace has been found" of which is now a "false claim" and "trespass" against the "intangible right to receive honest services" of which stands defined by Act of Congress as "scheme or artifice to defraud" the State as the OWNER of the NAME.

~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

franc
How does one properly surrender those interests and to whom? Also, what does it mean to surrender those interests? What it means to me is give up whatever I am using. All that exists are interests. So, for example, if I purchase a car and use it to get around, I do not own the car (Creator owns it), all I have is interest in the car. If am to surrender that interests, does it mean that I have to give up the car and start walking everywhere? Apologies if this seems to be a childish questions, but if I want a solid understanding of it, I have to ask it.

Thanks,
franc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
Ok. You get a car. The contract is presented to you. How would you sign the "contract" to "assign an interest" ??? 

The answer is found all over this site AND I have discussed this on talkshoes.

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, 1:21 PM franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] <[hidden email]> wrote:
How does one properly surrender those interests and to whom? Also, what does it mean to surrender those interests? What it means to me is give up whatever I am using. All that exists are interests. So, for example, if I purchase a car and use it to get around, I do not own the car (Creator owns it), all I have is interest in the car. If am to surrender that interests, does it mean that I have to give up the car and start walking everywhere? Apologies if this seems to be a childish questions, but if I want a solid understanding of it, I have to ask it.

Thanks,
franc


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2738.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

franc
Oh! Now that you mention contracts, my comprehension would be that interest is assigned by adding the following to the contract, either above or below the autograph: "All offers accepted pursuant to 40 stat 411. All rights retained without recourse" Is this correct?

But, what if the contract was executed before stumbling onto this information? How is interest assigned after the contract is executed?

Also, this would work if one gets a car from a dealerships, which requires a driver's license (but that is another story). If one was to get a car from a private party, no one but the two parties would see the contract. DMV does not care about the contract. All they care about is how much one pays for the car.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
if only there were a process taught somewhere by someone by which one
novates a contract in favor of another.

if only …. ;)



On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:49 PM, franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Oh! Now that you mention contracts, my comprehension would be that interest
> is assigned by adding the following to the contract, either above or below
> the autograph: "All offers accepted pursuant to 40 stat 411. All rights
> retained without recourse" Is this correct?
>
> But, what if the contract was executed before stumbling onto this
> information? How is interest assigned after the contract is executed?
>
> Also, this would work if one gets a car from a dealerships, which requires a
> driver's license (but that is another story). If one was to get a car from a
> private party, no one but the two parties would see the contract. DMV does
> not care about the contract. All they care about is how much one pays for
> the car.
>
> ________________________________
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2740.html
> To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
> NAML
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
In reply to this post by franc
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Jack MeHoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

> if only there were a process taught somewhere by someone by which one
> novates a contract in favor of another.
>
> if only …. ;)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 5:49 PM, franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Oh! Now that you mention contracts, my comprehension would be that interest
>> is assigned by adding the following to the contract, either above or below
>> the autograph: "All offers accepted pursuant to 40 stat 411. All rights
>> retained without recourse" Is this correct?
>>
>> But, what if the contract was executed before stumbling onto this
>> information? How is interest assigned after the contract is executed?
>>
>> Also, this would work if one gets a car from a dealerships, which requires a
>> driver's license (but that is another story). If one was to get a car from a
>> private party, no one but the two parties would see the contract. DMV does
>> not care about the contract. All they care about is how much one pays for
>> the car.
>>
>> ________________________________
>> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
>> below:
>> http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2740.html
>> To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email
>> [hidden email]
>> To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
>> NAML
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

franc
In reply to this post by Jack Mehoff
Ok, sure. You must be referring to the CR(tm) process. Keeping with the car example, with whom does one
novate a contract in favor of another, the DMV? The Department of Transportation? Some other agency? Does it matter?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
This post was updated on .
Ok, is the car "paid off"? If not, whom would you contact? If the car has
tags or you have a certificate of title, whom would you contact? I will
wager dollars to donuts that if YOU sat down and thought about it really
hard, you could figure it out.

Now, the REAL question.

What ya gonna do?

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018, 7:33 PM franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] <
ml+s83190n2743h78@n6.nabble.com> wrote:

> Ok, sure. You must be referring to the CR(tm) process. Keeping with the
> car example, with whom does one
> novate a contract in favor of another, the DMV? The Department of
> Transportation? Some other agency? Does it matter?
>
> ------------------------------
> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2743.html
> To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email
> ml+s83190n1h76@n6.nabble.com
> To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here
> <http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=1&code=aWFtc29tZWR1ZGUyQGdtYWlsLmNvbXwxfC0xMjg3NjAwMjM2>
> .
> NAML
> <http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

franc
The car is "paid off". The car has tags and I have have a certificate of title, therefore, I am to send the CR(tm) process to the the chief counsel at the DMV in order to surrender my interests in the car to the United States. Then what? What do you foresee as the result? Would this novation affect the certificate of title and/or tags or the tags' annual renewal?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
Ok, now what happened when you accepted the  Certificate of Title as evidence not of your ownership but if your interest AND did the same thing with the BC to assign the usufruct of that ANY interest AND used THAT as the consideration to formulate the "public policy" while using that "property interest" ?




On Jul 13, 2018 3:48 AM, "franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]> wrote:
The car is "paid off". The car has tags and I have have a certificate of title, therefore, I am to send the CR(tm) process to the the chief counsel at the DMV in order to surrender my interests in the car to the United States. Then what? What do you foresee as the result? Would this novation affect the certificate of title and/or tags or the tags' annual renewal?



If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2745.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Fathers son
In reply to this post by franc
Surrender” means that a beneficial holder of a public security, often a bond or note, is returning its security to the issuer (via its agent).  This “surrender” can be voluntary or mandatory.  We usually see a “voluntary” surrender when the holder has a choice in whether to take action (such as to participate in an exchange offer).  If the holder voluntarily surrenders its security, the holder gives up the ability to subsequently trade the security, pending completion of the transaction.  On the other hand, with a “mandatory” surrender, the holder has no choice but to return its security because surrender is automatic and requires no action on the part of the holder.  The most common “mandatory” surrender is when a security is cancelled on a global basis pursuant to a plan of reorganization.  In either case, the surrender event is handled through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) for any U.S. issues held in global form.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

franc
In reply to this post by Jack Mehoff
Nothing happened yet. I have not done the acceptance of the  Certificate of Title yet and I have not done  the acceptance of the BC either. Has anyone in this forum done these things? If so, I would like to talk to you.

Also, when doing the acceptance on the Certificate of Title, one would write the acceptance language on said certificate and send it in to the Chief Counsel of the DMV. Most likely there will be no response and one would remain without said certificate. How would one eventually transfer the car to another without the certificate?

I don't know what "use THAT as the consideration to formulate the "public policy" while using that property interest" means. I don't do very well with theory or legalese. I am practical and learn best by doing. Show me.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Redlightning
The acceptance of the BC(wharehouse receipt)  is a myth
Think about it...if you had a receipt for a tv u bought and did an acceptance of the receipt and sent it to the merchant, what would that get you if you didnt bring the tv back?
I tried it...wrong way to go...look to the statutes for your colorable easement to plenary status.
What you want is an administrative  court order to prove what you have done and made it through your interest for administration.
Once one holds the order , then one has the proof for the right to order an administrator to perform.
There are many acts to perform which can be ordered.
I like the provisions in 12 cfr reg 9 a lot.
 
hint ....status change !




On 7/13/2018 2:43 PM, franc [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] wrote:
Nothing happened yet. I have not done the acceptance of the  Certificate of Title yet and I have not done  the acceptance of the BC either. Has anyone in this forum done these things? If so, I would like to talk to you.

Also, when doing the acceptance on the Certificate of Title, one would write the acceptance language on said certificate and send it in to the Chief Counsel of the DMV. Most likely there will be no response and one would remain without said certificate. How would one eventually transfer the car to another without the certificate?

I don't know what "use THAT as the consideration to formulate the "public policy" while using that property interest" means. I don't do very well with theory or legalese. I am practical and learn best by doing. Show me.


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2748.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Redlightning
In reply to this post by Fathers son

This post has some merit but misses the mark cause its too general.
On the chance that we may share some intellectual interests , I welcome your private message so we can continue our discourse in a confidential setting.

On 7/13/2018 10:21 AM, Fathers son [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] wrote:
Surrender” means that a beneficial holder of a public security, often a bond or note, is returning its security to the issuer (via its agent).  This “surrender” can be voluntary or mandatory.  We usually see a “voluntary” surrender when the holder has a choice in whether to take action (such as to participate in an exchange offer).  If the holder voluntarily surrenders its security, the holder gives up the ability to subsequently trade the security, pending completion of the transaction.  On the other hand, with a “mandatory” surrender, the holder has no choice but to return its security because surrender is automatic and requires no action on the part of the holder.  The most common “mandatory” surrender is when a security is cancelled on a global basis pursuant to a plan of reorganization.  In either case, the surrender event is handled through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) for any U.S. issues held in global form.


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2747.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
The surrender is the instrument itself ... The TRUST CERTIFICATE in whatever damn form it happens to be in: car title, boat title, birth cert, what the fuck ever.

You have an interest in that PROPERTY and "the State" is the LEGAL TITLE OWNER thus has all the duty to settle any debt coming against that PROPERTY but NEEDS (ie: BORROW) your EQUITABLE INTEREST interest so the. USUFRUCT can merge back with the INTERESTS (ie: FULL OWNET ESTATE) can merge also the DEBT CAN EXTINQUISH (ie: CONSOLIDATE)  ... You retain DISPOSAL RIGHTS. If you do not know what DISPOSAL RIGHTS are, go over and look at the Harvard Study Guide in the usufruct part of the site. Hell, there is even a court case in that document that outlines it. 

OR

You can keep withholding that interest and service the damn debt yourself as FULL OWNER: holder in due course of ALL THE RIGHTS: USE, FRUIT, and DISPOSAL.


On Jul 13, 2018 3:56 PM, "Redlightning [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

This post has some merit but misses the mark cause its too general.
On the chance that we may share some intellectual interests , I welcome your private message so we can continue our discourse in a confidential setting.


On 7/13/2018 10:21 AM, Fathers son [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] wrote:
Surrender” means that a beneficial holder of a public security, often a bond or note, is returning its security to the issuer (via its agent).  This “surrender” can be voluntary or mandatory.  We usually see a “voluntary” surrender when the holder has a choice in whether to take action (such as to participate in an exchange offer).  If the holder voluntarily surrenders its security, the holder gives up the ability to subsequently trade the security, pending completion of the transaction.  On the other hand, with a “mandatory” surrender, the holder has no choice but to return its security because surrender is automatic and requires no action on the part of the holder.  The most common “mandatory” surrender is when a security is cancelled on a global basis pursuant to a plan of reorganization.  In either case, the surrender event is handled through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) for any U.S. issues held in global form.


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2747.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML





If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2750.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Redlightning
You sound a bit on edge ....Can you prove with a court order or bank statement, manufacturers certificate of origin with it conveyed to your GMEI registered  ultimate parent holding entity with corporation service company as the registrar for  any of what you posted ?

On 7/13/2018 4:09 PM, Jack Mehoff [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] wrote:
The surrender is the instrument itself ... The TRUST CERTIFICATE in whatever damn form it happens to be in: car title, boat title, birth cert, what the fuck ever.

You have an interest in that PROPERTY and "the State" is the LEGAL TITLE OWNER thus has all the duty to settle any debt coming against that PROPERTY but NEEDS (ie: BORROW) your EQUITABLE INTEREST interest so the. USUFRUCT can merge back with the INTERESTS (ie: FULL OWNET ESTATE) can merge also the DEBT CAN EXTINQUISH (ie: CONSOLIDATE)  ... You retain DISPOSAL RIGHTS. If you do not know what DISPOSAL RIGHTS are, go over and look at the Harvard Study Guide in the usufruct part of the site. Hell, there is even a court case in that document that outlines it. 

OR

You can keep withholding that interest and service the damn debt yourself as FULL OWNER: holder in due course of ALL THE RIGHTS: USE, FRUIT, and DISPOSAL.


On Jul 13, 2018 3:56 PM, "Redlightning [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA]" <[hidden email]> wrote:

This post has some merit but misses the mark cause its too general.
On the chance that we may share some intellectual interests , I welcome your private message so we can continue our discourse in a confidential setting.


On 7/13/2018 10:21 AM, Fathers son [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] wrote:
Surrender” means that a beneficial holder of a public security, often a bond or note, is returning its security to the issuer (via its agent).  This “surrender” can be voluntary or mandatory.  We usually see a “voluntary” surrender when the holder has a choice in whether to take action (such as to participate in an exchange offer).  If the holder voluntarily surrenders its security, the holder gives up the ability to subsequently trade the security, pending completion of the transaction.  On the other hand, with a “mandatory” surrender, the holder has no choice but to return its security because surrender is automatic and requires no action on the part of the holder.  The most common “mandatory” surrender is when a security is cancelled on a global basis pursuant to a plan of reorganization.  In either case, the surrender event is handled through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) for any U.S. issues held in global form.


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2747.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML





If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2750.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML




If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2751.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

iamsomedude
Administrator
This post was updated on .
Don't need some MSO ... The registration of the vehicle and certificate of Title shows the transfer of ANY interest to the State for safekeeping IN TRUST and IN TRUST the Trustee holds LEGAL TITLE while the beneficiary holds EQUITABLE TITLE.

We know this because when people actually listen and act as such, all actions come to a screeching halt. Right now the ONLY court order we have is a "perfected apoeal" and the only evidence I have is right there on the main menu page: Mortgage Redacted PDF ... and there have been traffic tickets that disappear and a grand jury matter vanished because " the file did not exist"

Now, if you think you got something to add, start by explaining that PDF and show us WHY it accomplished what it did WITHOUT any action by the "secured party" when the foreclosure action initiated.
~ Boris

We are called to be architects of the future, not its victims;
Resistance is futile.

If you think you can, you are correct.
If you think you can't, you are correct.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Tony
I hope you will not get mad - again, I am really trying to understand.

I fully AGREE with you, I get this part, the BC, title of car, etc is evidence of MY equitable interest.  The State holds legal title, as usufructuary, I hold equitable rights.  Yes, I understand everything is held in trust, as no thing is "paid for" - just a promise.  Thus, someday, it will ALL be paid, but not tomorrow.  

I looked back on the mortgage discharge.  Since within the document exists the property address and Floridaaaahhh has open records, it did not take a detective to find out the property was previously owned by James Enright.  

http://www.pcpao.org/?pg=http://www.pcpao.org/general.php?strap=163035000003201700

I dug a little further and found in 2016, the IRS sold the property.

It appears on the UCC 1, the debtor is the hospital and the ALL cap name.  The secured party creditor, I suspect is the properly spelled Name, John Doe OR name reversed, Doe, John.  

With this said, once recorded, a copy of the UCC1 was sent to the mortgage company/attorney and the matter disappeared?

If I have misunderstood any thing or have any info incorrect, please forgive, I am just trying to really understand this.  And I have no mortgage or any other matter before me to deal with.  

I am a little confused now because the CR 'process" did not include the UCC forms.  But I suspect the "theory" is the same idea, demonstrating an "equitable interest" and a manner in which a piece of paper in front of them "discharges or sets off" their claim, if no paper, it is your ass, as it is nothing personal, it is just "normal banking business."  

Boris, I hope you will consider having a weekend seminar at some point.  No, I have no answers, as I can not thing of another thing to do that I have not done prior, including going to two Catholic churches during the "Jubilee."  
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: No Name

Jack Mehoff
Yes. The IRS did eventually sell the prooerty, but under OTHER circumstances. 

When we called the attorneys to inquire, at first, they were cordial and helpful. But when we called back, we were treated like someone saw a ghost. It was rather sureal. 

His philosophy revolved around the Knights Templar and one is worth their weight in gold and silver and the hospital was the last place the value was seen.

We tried to replicate the actions, but truth be told, we have ZERO clue as to what the attornys actually filed or even received, if anything. 

So, this site was built in an attempt to comprehend this event for it is the one and only piece of evidence I have ever seen showing the UCC filing to have ANY effect.

Until a month ago when Enright and Florida UCC were sued by State of Florida over a filing we did regarding Driving under suspended in Polk County.

So, now we are using the CR (tm) process just like I have recently outlined ... which by the way, is similar to out appeals approach which has now gone into the relief stage after "perfection"

 

On Fri, Jul 13, 2018, 9:39 PM Tony [via UNDERGROUND CANTINA] <[hidden email]> wrote:
I hope you will not get mad - again, I am really trying to understand.

I fully AGREE with you, I get this part, the BC, title of car, etc is evidence of MY equitable interest.  The State holds legal title, as usufructuary, I hold equitable rights.  Yes, I understand everything is held in trust, as no thing is "paid for" - just a promise.  Thus, someday, it will ALL be paid, but not tomorrow.  

I looked back on the mortgage discharge.  Since within the document exists the property address and Floridaaaahhh has open records, it did not take a detective to find out the property was previously owned by James Enright.  

http://www.pcpao.org/?pg=http://www.pcpao.org/general.php?strap=163035000003201700

I dug a little further and found in 2016, the IRS sold the property.

It appears on the UCC 1, the debtor is the hospital and the ALL cap name.  The secured party creditor, I suspect is the properly spelled Name, John Doe OR name reversed, Doe, John.  

With this said, once recorded, a copy of the UCC1 was sent to the mortgage company/attorney and the matter disappeared?

If I have misunderstood any thing or have any info incorrect, please forgive, I am just trying to really understand this.  And I have no mortgage or any other matter before me to deal with.  

I am a little confused now because the CR 'process" did not include the UCC forms.  But I suspect the "theory" is the same idea, demonstrating an "equitable interest" and a manner in which a piece of paper in front of them "discharges or sets off" their claim, if no paper, it is your ass, as it is nothing personal, it is just "normal banking business."  

Boris, I hope you will consider having a weekend seminar at some point.  No, I have no answers, as I can not thing of another thing to do that I have not done prior, including going to two Catholic churches during the "Jubilee."  


If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://underground-cantina.83190.x6.nabble.com/No-Name-tp2736p2754.html
To start a new topic under UNDERGROUND CANTINA, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from UNDERGROUND CANTINA, click here.
NAML
12345