Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cowboy
Soooo, has anyone gotten of the property tax rolls.... ?
|
JG: Depends.
Estate (real property) is held with qualified ownership. According to the state constitutions I read, only estate is subject to taxation.
Private property, absolutely owned by an individual, is not listed as subject to taxation.
However, most Americans register their property transactions as "real estate" which means said property is subject to ad valorem taxes.
If one checks the local or state code regarding private property, one should find a glaring hole.
Recapping, if one wishes to establish title to private property not subject to ad valorem taxes, three facts are necessary:
1. Right to own,
2. Alienate title with lawful money,
3. No superior claim exists.
I'd put a legal notice, 30 days before sale, requesting all claimants to said property to come forth or forever waive their claims. After 30 days, the newspaper will send you an affidavit attesting to no response.
Then buy said property with a minimum of 21 silver dollars (7th amendment protections).
And if one is "out" of national socialism, usury, and other related impairments, one should be able to defend against any claimants for your private property.
(I can find no law compelling the recording of private property).
Official Code of Georgia Annotated states:
O.C.G.A. 44-2-1.
Where and when deeds recorded; priority as to.
“Every deed conveying land shall be recorded in the office of the clerk of the superior court of the county where the land is located. A deed may be recorded at any time; but a prior unrecorded deed loses its priority over a subsequent recorded deed from the same vendor when the purchaser takes such deed without notice of the existence of the prior deed.
The word “shall,” on first reading, gives one the impression that it is mandatory. But there’s another side to this word play...
“There is no Georgia statute compelling the recording of a deed.”
Encyclopedia of Georgia Law, 8 A, p. 265, Sec. 132
Is this not contradictory?
What makes BOTH the statute and the encyclopedia right?
What if “shall” didn’t mean “shall”? Go back and review the little section on law pertaining to mandatory versus directory statutes.
There’s the key: shall means may if a private or public right is impaired by its interpretation as shall.
And there’s more to it than meets the eyes.
“Sole purpose and effect of recording of deed is to afford third parties constructive notice of the existence of the deed."
City Whsle. Co. v. Harper, 100 Ga.App. 151,
110 S.E. 2d 561 (1959)
The court ruling is clear and to the point. The sole purpose for recording deeds is to give notice.
Therefore, if one used the "Legal Notices" to give constructive notice, one has complied with the due notice requirement.
http://www.suijuris.net/forum/land-o...us-estate.html