:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

We hope you enjoy your experience here.

We hold free conference calls every Monday through Thursday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time).
Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Join us on, and invite your friends to, our conference calls;

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^:

Land Grants—

The mystery of Land Patents unveiled.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

Nicolette
Registered
Posts: 4
Joined: Monday August 10th, 2009 12:20 pm MDT

Land Grants—

Postby Nicolette » Wednesday August 26th, 2009 4:07 pm MDT

There is no land patent on my land but there is a land grant from the treaty of Guadalupe and California is not giving land patents anymore according the patent office supervisor how does this change things for me trying to get a patent or other protection for my land?

Many thanks.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants

Postby Admin » Thursday August 27th, 2009 9:09 pm MDT

:h: Nicolette:
The Spanish land grants that were granted before the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty you are referring to are land patents. Thus, if you have such a grant it is definitely land patent secured land. Accordingly, United States land patents are unnecessary for such land. In fact, that is exactly the nature of the Land that was the subject of the Summa Corporation vs. California case, which proved such land patents are more powerful and hold precedence even over California’s constitutional grant of all of the tide water lands in the State. The Spanish simply granted the land into private ownership prior to the State being formed. Once that happened the Land was never thereverafter available either to the feds or to the State. The land is simply private land patent secured land.

Thus, to answer your question, based on the information you provided alone, it appears that the land grant you referenced is land patent secured and it is irrelevant that California is not granting land patents anymore; even if they were granting the same they would have no authority to grant the same for your land because the land patent excludes California from any ownership interest (unless they somehow acquired jurisdiction from some other cause).

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.

Nicolette
Registered
Posts: 4
Joined: Monday August 10th, 2009 12:20 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants

Postby Nicolette » Thursday August 27th, 2009 9:23 pm MDT

I greatly appreciate your reply I'm working on stopping GMAC from holding us hostage to a contract that we did not agree too but I am not getting any response to the Administrative Commercial code claims that I have asked them to respond to. I was told by an advisor to inquire about a land patent on this land. I’m afraid I still do not understand if I have any power to keep this land or not. The Grant Deed was signed off when we bought this land but a lien was put on it at the signing of the mortgage. Do I have any power in keeping this land if there is still a lien by a mortgage company even if I can’t get them to prove I own them anything?

Again, thank you for replying.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants

Postby Admin » Monday August 31st, 2009 10:38 am MDT

:h: Nicolette:
Your original inquiry in this topical thread bordered on being a personal inquiry that would have required it to have been made as a private message to Admin; but, the nature of that inquiry left enough grounds for a general reply. However, your response brings your inquiry into the arena of a purely personal response having little to do with anything we can respond to on our open forum. Thus, because a complete response to your most recent inquiry would require both Team Law beneficiary support and a private message to Admin we are limited from providing such a response here.

Even so, there are a couple of things we can provide in a general response nature that may be of help both to you and to other readers of our Open Forum; accordingly, our response to those points follows:
  1. We get comments similar to your quite often these days; where a party claims not to have agreed to some specific terms of a mortgage contract. However, when we help them learn about the process they went through to secure the loan they agreed to it almost invariably turns out that they did agree to the terms of the agreement.
  2. The problem that most often occurs when people do not think they agreed to the specific terms of contracts they are being held accountable to is they did not understand the terms and or conditions of the agreement before they signed the agreement. However, in law at the time of their acceptance of the contract, they knew or should have known those terms and conditions and accordingly, they signed the contract.
  3. In most situations dealing with GMAC (General Motors Automotive Credit), they hold their own paper (accounts receivable debt contracts). Thus, we have never seen a situation where GMAC acquired paper other than from their origination chain. Then, through a series of mergers, acquisitions and developments between 2006 and the present, they moved from a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Corporation to a diversely owned federally recognized bank managing loans and mortgages of many types. So, though we cannot address the particulars of your mortgage in our Open Forum, considering that GMAC has, so far as we know, continued to maintain the practice of only carrying contracts originated in their own chain of service agents, it seems highly unlikely that the mortgage you are dealing with is one that was originated by someone outside of the GMAC family of loan originators. Thus, it also seems highly unlikely that the mortgage agreement is something you did not agree to when you contracted for the loan.
  4. The way people get involved in such situations (where they think they did not agree to the terms of their lending agreement) usually goes something like this:
    1. They go to a lender and apply for a loan.
    2. The loan package requires them to fill out a lot of paperwork from which they lender establishes their willingness to provide the loan.
    3. All of that paperwork and the information on it is used as a basis for the loan provided and a mortgage agreement is drawn up to reflect that fact and to define how the loan will proceed.
    4. The parties involved all agree to the terms with their signatures and or with their signature acts.
    5. The terms of the agreement may include the securing of the mortgage agreement with a Trust Deed.
    6. The respective Trust Deed provides for the grant of the property (related to the loan) to a Trust, which continues to hold said property until such time as the mortgage is fulfilled.
    7. The people agree to all related matters and accordingly sign all closing documents at the time of the property transfer; agreeing to all of the terms of those agreements (regardless of their lack of understanding).
    8. In law, contractual agreements are not based upon what the parties of the contract understand of either the process or the terms. Contractual agreements are based upon the signed consent on the agreement, given the fact that the parties of the agreement knew or should have known the terms of their agreement before they signed; thus, by signing the agreement the parties admit that they understand the terms of the contract and that they are bound by them.
  5. We have seen no exceptions to this pattern when dealing with GMAC; thus, we expect there is some point in the process where you proceeded forward with the lending process even though you did not understand the terms of the agreement you made.
Though the Uniform Commercial Code in most states provides for administrative processes that may seem to provide after the fact remedies, those codified procedures do not effect terms of contractual agreements to the contrary and they cannot generally compel parties to a contract to provide any more documentation than they have already agreed to provide by the agreements made in contracts. In fact, most mortgage contracts contain clauses that provide for the acceleration of the mortgage if the borrower makes such demands upon the lender.

Essentially that means that if you agree to certain terms in an agreement and then you try to use statutory code to compel the lender to perform in a different manner than you agreed to in your contract, they can accelerate the mortgage (force you to return the full amount of the loan and pay for the damages you cause them by failing to perform in accord with the terms of your agreement). Any court in the country will comply with the terms of such agreements.

Thus, such administrative codes are often established to control less formal agreements where such controlling agreements do not define such terms of agreement. The bottom line for such State based statutory controls is the constitutional limitation that prevents a State from interfering with contracts.

Most of the time when we run into such situations, we find the people so involved thought they learned something from some predatory marketing group that call themselves “Patriots” and professed a belief in some very convincing “mortgage elimination” scheme they were selling. However, in the end, after following the predatory group’s advice, they find themselves threatened with losing the property. In the end, we guess you could say the so called “mortgage elimination” scheme works because the people end up eliminating the mortgage, to say nothing of their loss of all interest in the property that was once secured by that mortgage.

When such predatory groups sell their wares they provide no real support, but because Team Law helps people learn how to learn the law and that process includes learning about land patents they often find out about Team Law as they continue to investigate solutions to their overwhelming and growing problem. It is true, Team Law can help them learn how to resolve almost any legal problem; however, that does not mean that they will be able to resolve the matter they find themselves in without suffering from the consequences of their prior actions. We can certainly help them learn how to avoid such circumstances in the future and we can help them learn how to resolve their current situation equitably.

There is another element of your response that is indicative of a common error people make with their language when discussing matters related to Land and the property appurtenant to it. That problem is their failure in understanding the difference between Land and the property appurtenant to it. We suggest a review of the Land 101 article while looking for that distinction.

Accordingly, we suggest if you do not understand whether you have the power to keep your Land, you do not understand either how you got it or whether you have it.

We can say, even without seeing any respective Grant Deed or mortgage, land patent secured Land cannot be bought, sold or traded; therefore, it cannot be subjected to debt.

Beyond that to delve into this matter further would require Team Law beneficiary support at a level that could only be provided either on our Beneficiary Forum or through other Team Law beneficiary support channels.

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.

Nicolette
Registered
Posts: 4
Joined: Monday August 10th, 2009 12:20 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants

Postby Nicolette » Tuesday September 1st, 2009 2:24 pm MDT

Thank you for your response a lot to cover in your reply but must repeat we did not contract with GMAC they bought the contract from another company that then went out of business. I did review the land101 but will do so again because I see that I need more understanding if I am to understand your comments in this post.

Thank you again, many blessings; may they flow unbroken.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants

Postby Admin » Tuesday September 1st, 2009 2:44 pm MDT

:h: Nicolette:
We expected that GMAC would follow the path of other large mortgage holding banks and start purchasing paper from other lending sources; but yours is the first we have heard of. We expect they now work through many “agents” (loan brokers) and we expect most of those are private brokers that marked the GMAC product line.

Thus, we were not surprised at that and we were not sure from your original inquiry if the loan had actually been purchased by GMAC or if one of their contracting brokers sold it to you and then to GMAC. You clarified that with your last response; still, we wrote our response with that in mind and expect that it changes nothing from what we already showed you.

We look forward to hearing from you again; however, we provided all we can on this matter without Team Law beneficiary support; so, if you need additional help regarding this matter, after you review the Land 101 article or if you the further support necessary to review the details of your situation you will have to be a Team Law beneficiary and call us using the information found on the Contacting Team Law page.

We are certain that we can help you learn how to understand such contractual relations fully and learn how to properly deal with them in law.

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.

User avatar
SimplyThinkDreams
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 106
Joined: Thursday February 5th, 2009 4:45 pm MST

Re: Land Grants

Postby SimplyThinkDreams » Saturday September 5th, 2009 2:40 pm MDT

Nicolette,
In addition to reading Land 101 read through the Open Forum regarding Land. Also, listen to the audio file on Land Patents listed under Online Audio. In doing so you will be able to understand the difference between Land and the property appurtenant to the Land. Mortgage contracts deal with property appurtenant to the Land and not the Land itself. It is also very helpful to reference Black's Law Dictionary while reading your mortgage agreement. Look up every word in the agreement to uncover the true nature of said contract. An example of what you might uncover in such an inquiry is as follows:

The mortgages I have read in Pennsylvania use the term "legal title" in reference to a certain tract of land. If you look up "legal title" in Black's Law Dictionary you will find the following definition:
Black's Law Dictionary wrote:A title that evidences apparent ownership but does not necessarily signify full and complete title or a beneficial interest.

Nicolette
Registered
Posts: 4
Joined: Monday August 10th, 2009 12:20 pm MDT

Re: Land Grants—

Postby Nicolette » Sunday September 6th, 2009 11:31 am MDT

Thank you I appreciate your response. I will do the homework needed. many blessings, may they flow unbroken


Return to “Land Patents”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests