Securing your land ownership

Started by glenn kangiser, August 13, 2009, 12:23:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

glenn kangiser

Land Patents - highest law in land ownership - even above state, county, etc.  My understanding is that if they want to mess with you they have to buy it from you, per a lady in Nevada successfully fighting gov. BLM I think.  A relative of Wayne Haiges as I recall.

She said to get an exhaustive chain of title all the way from the original patent to me (the current owners) - certified copies of every document.  That's a start.  More info from Team Law.

I'm studying up a bit more on this and wanted to post it for others that may be interested.

Land 101

http://teamlawforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=3

Patents

http://teamlaw.net/PatentHowTo.htm
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Windpower


Thanks Glenn

I have searched for this info and got nowhere

even talked to my brother the  Real Estate Broker

who knew nothing about allodial titles or land patents



Often, our ignorance is not as great as our reluctance to act on what we know.


Virginia Gent

This should be a sticky topic, in my opinion; some quality advice for all.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
~Thomas Jefferson~

ScottA

Good info Glenn.

BTW having an army helps insure land ownership as well. Just a hint.

rwanders

It would seem to me that my title would still depend on how rigorously each transfer was made-----an original patent would only guarantee clear title to the first "private" owner.  Any flaw at any point after that could prove to be a "cloud" on every subsequent owners' title. That's why buyers title insurance is important to obtain as part of the closing. A sellers policy does not protect the new owner.
Rwanders lived in Southcentral Alaska since 1967
Now lives in St Augustine, Florida


glenn kangiser

Quote from: ScottA on August 13, 2009, 07:13:23 PM
Good info Glenn.

BTW having an army helps insure land ownership as well. Just a hint.

There are many like minded individuals around these parts. :)
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

glenn kangiser

Quote from: rwanders on August 13, 2009, 08:23:28 PM
It would seem to me that my title would still depend on how rigorously each transfer was made-----an original patent would only guarantee clear title to the first "private" owner.  Any flaw at any point after that could prove to be a "cloud" on every subsequent owners' title. That's why buyers title insurance is important to obtain as part of the closing. A sellers policy does not protect the new owner.

I think that is where the team law sandwich thing comes in.  They want the paper back to the last warranty deed and I read something about going from the first Patent to the current owner  then filing to accept the terms of the patent and assuming that all between have done as they were supposed to.  It is necessary to obtain all certified copies of all transactions back to the original patent for an exhaustive chain of title.

Their goal is to get you in a position to accept the original patent rights - which will overpower any claims by county or others against it.

Somehow you file to accept the terms of the original patent, which nearly always says such as in mine, something such as "To John C. Fremont and his heirs and assigns to have and to hold" or similar.  The exhaustive chain of title proves that I am an assign of John C Fremont and accept the terms of the patent.  This locks the local officials out of the oversight of the land after proper papers are filed, as the patent is from the Federal Government.

I don't know all about it yet but am studying about it and collecting my legal papers.  Recently got my three certified copies of the patent from the General Land Office at the BLM.  I have all of the certified copies of the deeds for the exhaustive chain of title clear back to Fremont.

You still have the right to contract your rights away by building permits and paying land taxes if you wish.  We pay land taxes.

There is a forum at team law also but I haven't had much time to study there.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

glenn kangiser

Also - here is my link to Landrights.

http://www.landrights.com/

The sign - I have these posted all over the place and so do some of my friends.  A fireman friend blew it up to double size and had it laminated.  I laminate mie after printing them out in color on my printer.  They are good for about a year that way.

http://www.landrights.com/NoTrespassing.htm

Patent sign

http://www.landrights.com/landpatentnoticeblank.htm

I have filled in and posted the patents notice on my property also.

I'll sticky it for now - we'll see how active it is.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Virginia Gent

Quote from: glenn kangiser on August 13, 2009, 10:33:29 PMYou still have the right to contract your rights away by building permits and paying land taxes if you wish.  We pay land taxes.

Elaborate on that please, Glenn. I thought you had to pay land taxes and if I'm not mistaken, just about every county/city forces you to get permits to build on your own property, does it not? If so, how you do avoid all of that to be able to keep your rights? Or am I misunderstanding something? I'm not a property owner, yet, so I'm not as knowledgeable as everyone else on all this stuff.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
~Thomas Jefferson~


glenn kangiser

Some go so far as to find the old laws that prevent you from having to pay taxes on your land.  It is mentioned in some of the information on Team Law.  How successful they are is likely between them and the assessor and how far they will go to prove a point.  Things like this are not always successful.

Yes they force you to pay and lien to collect but as I recall it is trickery they have tied into the Social Security laws and making you into a corporate entity by using all capitols for your name on their contracts with you.  Sorry, I am working full time now and don't have time to dig deeper on this - and don't fully know the details myself.  A building inspector mentioned something of a "Straw Man" -- Allodial Title and other interesting things.

I have not pursued it farther as I do pay my property taxes for benefits I receive and do not object to that.  That is my right to contract with them to pay the tax they impose.

Other interesting stuff - On www.landrights.com check out the UCC 1-207, and the term "Without Prejudice" .  I use it when signing my Federal and State income taxes.  http://www.landrights.com/UCC_1-207.htm

When you use things like this study it well as you may be questioned as to what it means if you use it and go to court.  The best explanation is in the mentioned website and I have to reread it every so often to help clear it up for myself.

Also check out the flag used in most courts.  A gold fringe on it - It is not the US flag.

Some of this may seem a bit off topic but it all ties into seeing how the system is systematically taking away the rights the founding fathers wanted us to have.

Our public servants swear to uphold the Constitution , but as soon as you turn your back on them you will find them chiseling away at the very foundation of it through loopholes and deception.

Here I am mostly wanting to stir your interest so that you will dig into it further and see for yourself what is happening.  Please share your findings of interest with us here.  I will drop in when I can ---

I even have to work tomorrow. d*
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Virginia Gent

So in order to stay a Sovereign Citizen, all I have to do is sign UCC 1-207 or "Without Prejudice" whenever I sign a contract, and then I cannot be held responsible for said contract, and is therefore null & void in the eyes of the law, because signing the above means that it was, basically, forced upon me; an example would be Federal/State Income Taxes.

Also, according to the Team Law's Open Forum, Land 101, did I read correctly that, in registering to vote, I have signed a contract and, therefore, must pay property taxes whenever I purchase a piece of land? Here is the text I'm having trouble believing:
"The other property ownership limitation people generally concern themselves with is property taxes. In fact, property taxes are purely contractual. They are not constitutionally controlled, that is to say, they do not have to be uniform, apportioned or excise in their nature, because they are contractual. They are related to the Voter's Registration contract. To understand property taxes, it is helpful to understand that the STATE OF 'X' (where "X" is related to a common State name) is a private corporation. Signing up as a registered voter is a voluntary choice. Once a person is a registered voter they become a participant in collaterally securing any property tax issue passed by the voters to any property they have in that state. This is why those in positions of governance always call this country a Democracy—because if 50%+ of the registered voters vote for a bond issue, all of the registered voters are subject to it."
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
~Thomas Jefferson~

glenn kangiser

My understanding is that the UCC 1-207 -- All Rights Reserved -- Without Prejudice --- statements mean you are not forfeiting your common law rights - Common Law is the true law of the land.  You are not giving up your rights for their color of law rights and deceit they use to trick you out of your rights.  You are not giving up your rights for things they have not disclosed to you.  I have read that this opens up Constitutional issues they do not want to deal with.

More self education is in order for me on this.

On the second part - I think you are getting an idea of the trickery they use to force most unknowing people to give up their rights.  Again - I need more study on this.  There are Constitution issues with some of the taxes needing to be properly apportioned per the census also. 

It's all a big can of worms. 

As I say - I don't know enough about it yet but hope to continue learning more.  Several people have clued me in a bit over the years and raised my interest to where I study it and understand a bit more each time I read it but still I need to spend more time studying it.  Not much time at this point though.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Virginia Gent

I've been savoy on the whole Sovereign Citizen movement for a while now and have seen some werid theories like that accepting mail with your state in all capital letters or a zip code makes you a Federal Citizen, to stamping UCC 1-207 on all money is a must since the Feds have a monopoly on money and make it impossible for you to use anything else.

All of this stuff is new, however. The land stuff is quite interesting though. I think I will bea frequent visitor to this thread =p

Is it possible to UNregister to vote, then, if registering requires me to pay a property tax?
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
~Thomas Jefferson~

glenn kangiser

I don't know.  Part of the problem with stuff like this is that there are two sides to what goes on also.  The other party has to be educated and forced to legally agree also.

For that to happen you will have to know your subject better than they do. 

I understand there is a way to opt out of SS, but I have not done that either.

"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.


MountainDon

Quote from: glenn kangiser on August 14, 2009, 11:18:27 PM


Also check out the flag used in most courts.  A gold fringe on it - It is not the US flag.


From the book, So Proudly We Hail: The History of the United States Flag,

The placing of a fringe on Our Flag is optional with the person of organization, and no Act of Congress or Executive Order either prohibits the practice, according to the Institute of Hearaldry. Fringe is used on indoor flags only, as fringe on flags on outdoor flags would deteriorate rapidly. The fringe on a Flag is considered and 'honorable enrichment only', and its official use by the US Army dates from 1895.. A 1925 Attorney General's Opinion states: 'the fringe does not appear to be regarded as an integral part of the Flag, and its presence cannot be said to constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statute. An external fringe is to be distinguished from letters, words, or emblematic designs printed or superimposed upon the body of the flag itself. Under law, such additions might be open to objection as unauthorized; but the same is not necessarily true of the fringe.

Also see Flags of the World...  http://flagspot.net/flags/us-fring.html

It's simply decoration, like a fancy picture frame.

Just because something has been done and has not failed, doesn't mean it is good design.

glenn kangiser

It is Military, maybe used by choice in the courts, but assuming there is no significance may not be giving us the full story. 

It seems that government usually has a motive for it's actions.

At least you can see what the story is behind it and decide whether to dig deeper or not.

http://www.usavsus.info/  Scroll down to the Flag info for the differences and what this website has to say regarding their viewpoint.  I have not deeply researched the facts.  Just bringing it out for those who may have an interest in learning of it.


Yes there are tons of opinions trying to play down the significance.

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/admiralty

http://fotw.vexillum.com/flags/us-fring.html
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Whitlock

Make Peace With Your Past So It Won't Screw Up The Present

Whitlock

Make Peace With Your Past So It Won't Screw Up The Present

glenn kangiser

"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Whitlock

Cheap Housing Is Illegal
By Steve Gillman
I saw a story on the evening news a year or two ago, about the cost of housing in California. Apparently it had become so expensive to buy or to rent in some areas, that people were converting backyard sheds into extra bedrooms and renting them out. This solved not only the home owners problem of covering the mortgage payment, but it also provided cheaper rent for the tenant.

I did the same thing many years ago, renting a converted shed out for $45 per week. I even lived in it myself for several months at one point, in order to collect even more rent for the bedrooms inside my home. Of course, like the examples in California, as well as many of the solutions to housing problems, it was illegal.

The story reminded me of some interesting housing I saw in Mexico when I was hitchhiking through there at age seventeen. Three factory workers gave me a ride and offered to let me stay the night with them. They lived in a tiny futuristic plastic appartment provided by their employer. It had two sets of bunk beds, and a tiny kitchen, and a bathroom that was made of one continuous piece of plastic (looked like it would be easy to clean).

The entire apartment or "module," or whatever you call it was probably less than 200 sqaure feet. Certainly not spacious living. On the other hand, it was clean and functional, and the climate allowed for use of the paths and benches in the surrounding gardens in any season. This kind of unit is so small and cheap to construct that even in the United States it could be rented profitably to single men for $200 per month, meaning the rent would be $50 if split four ways. Of course such apartments would be illegal almost anywhere in the United States where they are needed, due to all sorts of building code issues.

I saw a news program a while back about a church in California that took homeless people off the streets and provided all meals and a place for them to stay for six months at a time. It was a working ranch with many different enterprises going on. The residents - men only as I recall - were housed in large bunk rooms, and worked every day, learning new skills that could lead to jobs in the future. There was a waiting list to get into the program, so it was apparently something people on the streets needed and wanted.

Of course, if a private company did the same thing for profit, and went one step further by giving each resident $2,000 when they left after six months, it would be illegal. It would violate minimum wage laws, and probably some building codes and other laws. As a society and government, we instead "protect" the people from such exploitation, and keep them on the cold streets.

A more personal example: A friend of mine was forced to leave his own little cabin which he had built on property he owned, because it did not meet the minimum square footage requirements of the county. He had lived in tents and cars before, and thought this was his place to finally"settle down," but he didn't have the money to meet the requirements of our "concerned society."

What am I suggesting? Perhaps it wouldn't be so bad to treat men and women as adults, rather than as children that need to be "protected." Maybe if people choose to live in small or "substandard" housing, it is because that is their best option at the time. How does taking away those options make things better for them? My friend began another stretch of "couch surfing" at 54 years old, by the way. Is it possible that individual people are better equipped to choose what is best for them than are society's "planners" and legislators?

It just is not true that governments raise the standards in these things. We have decent housing in general because we have the money for it. If you think this isn't so, just imagine creating a law in the Sudan that nobody could build anything other than a nice home according to United States standards and codes. All it would accomplish is far more homelessness.

People often don't notice how much government gets in the way of serious problems being solved, because most who live here can afford the "mandated" solutions. But consider for a moment if an investor was free to build and rent apartments any way he wanted as long as they were safe. With any imagination at all, you can probably see how he could provide cheaper rent and still make a great profit. So you can see that new housing options are prevented by existing laws.

Would investors build "slums?" Probably some of what was built would be called that, but remember that every resident living there would be there by free choice, having decided that it was the best option available. Does it really make sense for outsiders to say, "No, you can't live there, because it's too small, too crowded, and too ugly. I'm going to protect you from your own decisions! Back to the street you go!"

Let's let adults be adults and stop using laws to make their decisions for them. Let's stop making cheap housing illegal.

Make Peace With Your Past So It Won't Screw Up The Present


harry51

Government getting in the way of people taking care of their own needs? Preposterous!! Our infinitely wise and benevolent ruling class and their bureaucratic minions would never stoop so low!

Seriously, the argument could be made that many of these "for our own good" rules and regulations are in place primarily to channel our money and earning power in the direction of politically connected institutions and industries. And I would argue that no one ever built a slum, slums are created by the people who live there. The sad truth is that it takes only a few people in a neighborhood with no self-discipline, low standards of cleanliness, or criminal inclination to cause the area to degenerate into a slum.
I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson

Sassy

Good article, Whitlock!  Makes ya kinda mad, when you think about it...   d*

http://glennkathystroglodytecabin.blogspot.com/

You will know the truth & the truth will set you free

Virginia Gent

So question ... how do I go about finding the owner/whereabouts of a Land Patent for a specific piece of property? I don't have one in particular in mind currently, but I figure this would be a good skill to acquire/learn until I do have one in mind, including the money of course.
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
~Thomas Jefferson~

glenn kangiser

#23
Get an  abstract from the title company that shows every owner all the way back to the patent, homestead etc.

We got ours then got certified copies of every title from the county recorder all the way back to and including the patent.  We also got the patent certified copies from the bureau of Land Management.
"Always work from the general to the specific." J. Raabe

Glenn's Underground Cabin  http://countryplans.com/smf/index.php?topic=151.0

Please put your area in your sig line so we can assist with location specific answers.

Whitlock

Make Peace With Your Past So It Won't Screw Up The Present