:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

We generally hold Free Conference Calls every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time)
Join us on our next Conference Call and invite your friends.

Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Remember: Our Trustee's Holiday Season Break begins at close of business on: December 15, 2017!
Which means he will not be available from then until: January 15, 2018; during which time there will be no conference calls and no support calls to our Trustee. However, the Fulfillment Office will only be closed from: December 22, 2017, until: January 8, 2018.

So, make sure that you take care of any of your end of year needs now, before our offices close.

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.


We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

After reading this announcement, you may remove it by clicking the “X” in the upper right corner of the announcement's green background.

Foreclosure on land patent

The mystery of Land Patents unveiled.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

Asterix
Registered
Posts: 1
Joined: Thursday June 11th, 2015 7:13 am MDT

Foreclosure on land patent

Postby Asterix » Friday June 19th, 2015 8:49 am MDT

Red text comments were inserted by Admin:
The Subject Title of this topical thread (Foreclosure on land patent) presupposes the impossible. The Land Patent is not a thing that can be collateralized; Wherefore, it is not something on which a foreclosure can be based. Therefore, the posts following this lead post will be titled: "Foreclosure …"

Some States have court cases that ruled that taxes can be assessed on patented land . I have not found any case or situation where the state or government has foreclosed on a patented land for failure to pay taxes.
Does anyone here have knowledge of an attempted forecloser on patented land
This is my first post and I have not read all post up to this time so if this question has been addressed please someone point me in the right direction.

I hosted the Title of Liberty many years ago and have never lowered it. And yes we can't obey any law if we don't know what the law is. Especially Gods law. Gossip or hearsay is not the law.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Foreclosure …

Postby Admin » Friday June 19th, 2015 9:27 pm MDT

:h: Asterix:
Thank you for your inquiry.

Regarding the Title of your post: “Foreclosure on land patent”, no such thing can ever be possible—the Land Patent has no intrinsic monetary value; wherefore it cannot be the subject of any foreclosure. Still, given that was only the title of your post, let’s review the content of the post as follows:

Though it is true that it is impossible for “Land” to be foreclosed upon for any reason, property appurtenant to the land that is securing a debt can be foreclosed upon; regardless of an existent land patent. Regardless of existent land patents, almost every foreclosure case in the country confirms that fact. The land patent does not, and cannot, interfere with you right to contract.

Please be aware that even though the word “land” as used in: Land Law, Feudal Titles and land patents, is an exact synonym for the word “domain”, the word used in common usage can include the property appurtenant to the land as well. Thus, it is important to first discover (from the context) whether a particular usage is inclusive of the property appurtenant to the land or if it is being uses exclusive of said property; as it is in: Land Law, Feudal Titles and land patents.
We find the definition of Land in: Land Law 9 (2nd ed. 1988), where, Peter Butt wrote:’Land’ is not restricted to the earth’s surface, but extends below and above the surface. Nor is it confined to solids, but may encompass within its bounds such things as gases and liquids. A definition of ‘land’ along the lines of ‘a mass of physical matter occupying a space’ also is not sufficient, for an owner of land may remove part or all of that physical matter, as by digging it up and carrying away the soil, but would nevertheless retain as part of his ‘land’ the space that remains. Ultimately, as a juristic concept, ‘land’ is simply an area of three-dimensional space, its position being defined by natural or imaginary points located by reference to the earth’s surface. ‘Land’ is not the fixed contents of that space, although, as we shall see, the owner of that space may well own those fixed contents. Land is immoveable, as distinct from chattels, which are moveable; it is also, in its legal significance, indestructible. The contents of the space may be physically severed, destroyed or consumed, but the space itself, and so the ‘land’, remains immutable
(Bold emphasis added to the above quote.)

Wherefore, when reading things like court cases, you must be aware of the context (underlying cause, venue, statutory construction [as in definitions, etc.]) in which the case is framed. Thus, given that the court cases you referred to were ruling that taxes can be assessed against ‘land patent secured land’ the term land as used in such rulings must be referring to “real estate” that is: ‘the land with the property appurtenant to the land’ held in fee simple title.

People not familiar with Land Law often think that the term:“Fee Simple”, has something to do with the price paid for the property in a real estate purchase transaction. However, “Fee” as use in that term is a short form of the word: “Fealty”. Thus, the phrase “Fee Simple Title” refers to the fact that the ownership of the land and the ownership of the property appurtenant to the land is held by the exact same party/parties. That phrase is the opposite of the term: “Feudal Title”; which means that the owner of the land and the owner of the property appurtenant to the land are two distinctively different parties.

Our Land 101 article covers these matters and makes it entirely clear that the land patent (Title) to the land does not interfere with your right to contract. Respectively, should any party, regardless of their land patent secured landownership (which is always initially free from property taxes or other encumbrances at the time the land patent was issued), desire to enter into a contract to secure some contractual financial obligation (like a mortgage and/or property tax) with the value of their property appurtenant to the land, the land patent will not limit them from their right to so enter into such a relationship.

However, it is certain that such court rulings are not referring to the Land (the Domain alone) because the Land/domain is: intangible, immoveable, indestructible, immutable and it cannot be bought, sold or traded; thus, it cannot possibly ever be used as collateral for any form of debt. In fact, case law clearly shows that Real Estate that has been sold in any form of foreclosure separates the landownership from the property ownership; technically resulting in a Feudal Title where the new property owner has the ongoing contractual right to access their property that remains on the land even though they do not own the Land itself. Such foreclosure sales are called: “unresolved sales”—in other words: ‘feudal title’ with the property owner’s ongoing right of access to the land.

Beyond that we appreciate the supportive sentiments you expressed in the balance of your post.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Dan
Registered
Posts: 3
Joined: Thursday June 18th, 2015 6:36 am MDT

Re: Foreclosure…

Postby Dan » Monday June 22nd, 2015 7:26 am MDT

This is my first post. After reading Admin's above explanation, from the point of view of the Assign, I am wondering if my understanding is correct.

It seems that reference to the "issuance of the land patent" is meant to be the original grant that was caused to be made patent; and that the statement regarding the time of "issuance of the land patent" does not refer to the time one accepts the benefits of the land patent to his or her appurtenances thereof, i.e. parcel, of that original tract of land.

If this be the case, then it would seem immaterial that there be an existing Note and Mortgage on the parcel for which the benefits of the land patent are being accepted; and that having accepted the land patent benefit to the parcel would likewise have no effect on the existing Note or Mortgage, or for that matter would have no effect on property taxes and other existing kinds of debts running with that individual parcel.

In my case I presumed to have paid off an existing mortgage in 2012. In 2013 I accepted the land patent benefit to that parcel (my domain). And since 2014 there is an ongoing attempt to foreclose on said mortgage. Much to my chagrin it appears that the land patent provides no defense against the attempted foreclosure.

As a separate issue, 28 USC 1338(a) confirms that the (federal) district courts have original jurisdiction on Patents, Copyrights, and etc., and that States have no jurisdiction on these kinds of issues. Yet it appears that even this apparent lack of subject matter jurisdiciton for the State is no defense in the said foreclosure attempt.

It would be very beneficial learn the whereabouts of document on Land Patents aimed specifically at the Assign regarding such questions of the effect(s) of accepting the benefits of the Land Patent to one's parcel.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Foreclosure …

Postby Admin » Monday June 22nd, 2015 6:02 pm MDT

:h: Dan:
You seem to be missing something quite important! Respectively, you would do well to read the entire Land 101 article referred to in our above response. However, for now, let’s first review the section of that referenced article to see if it will clear the matter up for you; as follows:
In Land 101 article, Team Law wrote:Land patents do not limit the ability to contract. Wherefore, one can contract to subdivide land and separately grant it to others, or sell off any part or the whole of it at will while keeping the remainder, or use any part of the related appurtenant property as collateral for debts like: property taxes, mortgages, credit cards, etcetera,…

Now, remember in Land Law, land patents, fee simple titles and feudal titles: Land and the property appurtenant to the Land are two separate distinct things!
  1. ”’Land’ is simply an area of three-dimensional space, its position being defined by natural or imaginary points located by reference to the earth’s surface. ‘Land’ is not the fixed contents of that space… .Land is immoveable, as distinct from chattels, which are moveable; it is … indestructible. The contents of the space may be physically severed, destroyed or consumed, but the space itself, and so the ‘land’, remains immutable.” By definition, ‘Land’ is intangible and cannot be bought, sold or traded.
  2. ‘Property appurtenant to Land’ is all of the tangible, moveable and fixed physical contents of the space within the boundaries of the Land; which contents may be physically severed, destroyed or consumed. By definition, ‘property appurtenant to Land’ is tangible and can be bought, sold and/or traded.
Again from: Land 101 article, Team Law wrote:So the real question is, ‘does the Land Patent have anything to do with a mortgage?’ And, the answer is—‘No.’ That also means that whether or not you have or have ever had a mortgage related to your property ownership, such a mortgage has no relation to your having received that grant or assignment secured by the Land Patent.

The same thing goes for property taxes, ‘Land Patents have nothing to do with property taxes.’ Of course, that also means that whether or not you have or have ever had property taxes related to real estate ownership, such taxes have no relation to your having received a Land Grant or other assignment secured by a Land Patent.

Thus, though you were correct about the fact that the original Land Grant referenced in a land patent is granted and then made patent (forever sealed). Respectively, the land patent’s issue date is the date when it was signed by the President, King or Governor and has nothing to do with acceptance of the same thereafter.

Still, that does not limit you from your right to contract.
To demonstrate the point, because the Land Patent is the Title to the land, let’s hereafter refer to the Land Patent as “Title”; and, let’s use PA2L as an abbreviation for: “property appurtenant to land”; and, consider the following examples:
  1. If you were a farmer growing crops out of the soil (PA2L) on your land, could you harvest the crops [PA2L] and sell them to others?
      Of course you could.
    Would having Title to the land limit your ability to sell your crops?
      Of course not.
    Would you have any ongoing interest in the said crops after you sold them?
      Of course not; you would have traded your crops for the funds you charged for the crops; and nothing more.
  2. If you dig a hole in the ground [PA2L] to make a swimming hole in your back 40 acres and you don’t want to keep the contents [PA2L] you removed from the ground to make the hole, can you sell that PA2L to someone that wants your clean fill dirt?
      Of course you can!
    Would your Title keep you from selling the same?
      Of course not.
    Would you have any ongoing interest in the said crops after you sold them?
      Of course not; you would have traded your crops for the funds you charged for the crops; and nothing more.
  3. Finally, could you sell a tree [PA2L] growing on your land to someone that wants to buy it today with the contractual conditions that you will care for it and nurture it while it grows for the next 20 years and then the new owner will come and pick up the seasoned tree?
      Of course you could.
    Would having Title to the land limit your ability to sell your tree?
      Of course not.
    Would you have any ongoing interest in the said tree after you sold it?
      Of course not; you would have traded your tree for the funds you charged for the same; however, you would have whatever burden related to the care of the tree that you agree to when you took the funds for the mature tree 20 years ago.
        Thus, the terms of that contract would remain applicable to the parties thereto related until the contract is completed
Therefore, if there is anything related to your interest in the PA2L that is worthy of a price you can contract for, the Title to the land will not limit you from entering into such a contract.

Respectively, if you contract to borrow funds and pay a mortgage or otherwise secure your PA2L as a guarantee that you will pay your debt (mortgage, property taxes, etc.) which you secure (collateralize) with an agreement to allow the party you owe the funds can sell your PA2L to guarantee your payment on the debt, will your Title to the Land limit you from making such agreements?

The answer remains—“No!”
The Title/Land Patent does not limit your right to contract; and, likewise, the Land Patent cannot save you from your debts secured by the PA2L.

Unless you are a Team Law beneficiary, we cannot help you learn how to learn the law to deal with the particulars of your personal situation.

However, you indicated that you: “presumed to have paid off an existing mortgage”; which seems to have something missing there. You see, in almost every case we are aware of, when a party pays off a mortgage the know it is paid off and there are some final actions that take place almost immediately thereafter; like, the Trust Deed is closed and the Trustee of the Trust created by such a Deed distributes the closing documents that show the full title to the PA2L is returned to you; or, something similar to that takes place when the debt is fully paid off—there is a closing and an entry regarding the same is entered in the County public records. The bottom line: you know (not presume) the debt is paid in full and the collateralizing instrument is canceled and or returned to you.

In our experience, when people use couched terms like: “I presumed the mortgage was paid off”; it means there is a lot more to the story than what was revealed. It usually goes something like: “we were learning from this guy on the internet that if we filed some kind of “blah blah blah”—which is to be interpreted as they did something other than complete the terms of the contract in accord with its terms— and because of that “they presumed the debt was paid!” Well, guess what.

That does not cut it. The contract is still in full force until the parties complete it as it was agreed upon or they agree to a mutually agreed upon alternate resolution of the terms.

Again, the Land Patent exists. It is the Title to the Land. Your acceptance of it can’t change those facts. And, it cannot interfere with your right to contract. Respectively, we cannot comprehend why so many people seem so bemused by the myriad of internet based (and other) predatory marketers’ alleging that if you get a land patent you no longer have to pay in accord with your existing agreements. That is simply not what land patents are for and it is certainly not what they do.

Also, foreclosure cases are never land patent related cases. Foreclosure cases only deal with one question: “Did the Defendant/Respondent pay the mortgage in accord with the terms of the agreement?” If the answer is:
  1. Yes; the Defendant/Respondent wins.
  2. No; the Defendant/Respondent loses.
The court simply has no subject matter jurisdiction to hear any other issue. Respectively, the land patent is not at issue and does not interfere with your right to contract so the federal court cannot acquire jurisdiction as you suggested.

Finally, as noted above:
    Land is a distinctively different thing from PA2L;
  • Land is intangible and immutable; and,
  • Land cannot be bought, sold or traded.
So, it should be clear that Land cannot be used as collateral for a debt even though PA2L can be. Respectively, though Supreme Court rulings properly state: “Land patent secured land cannot be taken for debt or taxes”; they would be equally correct to say: “Land cannot be taken for debt or taxes.”

At Team Law, we help people learn how to learn the law so they can learn how to apply the law properly. Respectively, learning how one can use Land Patent secured rights, and more, to permanently secure your control over PA2L, such that it can never be taken out of your control against your will, is elementally reserved to Team Law beneficiary support. Accordingly, we welcome you to continue learning with us regarding this matter once you become a Team Law beneficiary.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Dan
Registered
Posts: 3
Joined: Thursday June 18th, 2015 6:36 am MDT

Re: Foreclosure …

Postby Dan » Tuesday June 23rd, 2015 11:18 am MDT

Red text comments were inserted by Admin:
With regard to: Forum Rule 16, the bulk of this reply was redacted. Respectively, the part that remains is a bit out of context; but, we retained it because it included a quote from Dan's former inquiry that we did not reply to previously and we expect it needs a reply—so, we retained it.


I understood the bulk of what was reiterated in your Reply; … confirmation (i)s needed…:
In this topical thread above, Dan wrote:… it would seem immaterial that there be an existing Note and Mortgage on the parcel for which the benefits of the land patent are being accepted… .

I will attempt to gain beneficiary status soon, as I could use the help.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Foreclosure …

Postby Admin » Tuesday June 23rd, 2015 4:36 pm MDT

:h: Dan:
Given that in our first reply to your original inquiry in this topical thread, we omitted responding the quote that remains in your response above, we are pleased to have that opportunity now.

We simply wanted to clarify the fact that there can never be an existing note and/or mortgage collateralizing property appurtenant to land at the time when a land patent is issued; at that time, both the land and the property appurtenant to the land must be free and clear of all debt based encumbrances; further, if there are any existent limitations, like: water rights, mineral rights, etc., those reservations must all be declared prior to, and be acknowledged in, the Land Grant made patent at the time when the patent is so sealed.

Thereafter, the land patent will not interfere with your right to contract. Still, you cannot make a contract to do the impossible—and, because it is impossible for the empty vacant intangible space, defined on the land patent as: ‘land’ (domain), to be bought sold or traded, it is impossible for the same ever to have a monetary value; thus, any contract alleging that the land itself (absent the property appurtenant to the land) has value secured by contract would render the contract a nullity for such a contract would claim it binds the impossible.

Your quote also refers to: “benefits of the land patent … being accepted”; which raises curiosity regarding what presupposed benefits people might imagine with regard to land patents.

Of course, that too is a topic that must remain under the opportunity of Team Law beneficiary support.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.


Return to “Land Patents”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests