Slow but true release by 9th Circuit

[Sweed]

Hi David,

Was Robert Balik successful in removing a Notice of Federal Tax Lien from the County Recorder by filing the UCC-3 Termination you have attached?

I noticed section 9 was not filled out, and section 8 did not have a box checked.

Regards,

Sweed

[Notorial dissent]

Probably because the Recorder might just know something the County judge apparently doesn’t, that he has no authority over a Federal Lien. And why should the Recorder be involved at all, in a personal capacity, when they do not personally exist in that transaction. As a rule a Recorder makes no determination as to validity of a document, their purpose is to record documents, and unless there is something patently wrong with a document, there is very little reason they would refuse one, unless for statutory reasons.

As to the Federal Lien, the only ones who can legally remove it are either the party that entered it, in this case the IRS, or a Federal Judge can order it removed/voided, but that is it. A state judge has no authority to do so. Also, any interference with that lien by an outside party could at the very least constitute the filing of a false document, a Federal offense, and probably a state one as well, and with interfering in a collection proceeding, again a Federal crime. Filing a UCC-3 is a real good way to find oneself on the road to an extensive education in the Federal Judicial and Correction systems.

[Sweed]

The Notice of Federal Tax Lien is just that, a notice. A notice of a thing is not the thing.

The majority of Notice of Federal Tax Liens filed are not supported by an order, judgement or decree of a state court or federal court. There has been no hearing or due process. There is no Federal Tax Lien filed at the county or state level.

The Notice of Federal Tax Lien is filed fraudulently.

So, Nd, you are saying it is ok for the IRS to record fraudulent documents, but I can't avail myself of the remedies?

As for the county recorder, I am aware their job is to simply rocord the proper documents that have been filled out correctly. From personal experience, I know they arbitrarily reject recording documents.

[Shoonra]

Federal tax liens are created and governed by federal law and do not have to comply with the local and state laws about the filing of liens. The states are adopting a uniform law relevant to this, to eliminate some confusion and wasted motion.

Plenty of court cases make clear that a Notice of a Federal Tax Lien is, itself, a valid lien document that can and will be filed in the county registrar's office, notwithstanding the hoops that other kinds of non-federal liens have to jump through.

[Codee]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Federal tax liens are created and governed by federal law and do not have to comply with the local and state laws about the filing of liens. The states are adopting a uniform law relevant to this, to eliminate some confusion and wasted motion.

Plenty of court cases make clear that a Notice of a Federal Tax Lien is, itself, a valid lien document that can and will be filed in the county registrar's office, notwithstanding the hoops that other kinds of non-federal liens have to jump through.

There need not be a paper called lien. A lien is an encumberment and the paper is but meer evidense. A notice is good evidence because it is also evidense that you have had a chance to respond since its notice date.

[Sweed]

In order for the IRS to place a lien or levy on your property they must present their case before a competent jurisdiction, in this case the district court where the lien has been filed. Furthermore, the law requires a court order before the IRS or anyone can lawfully and legally seize anyone's property.

Instead, they file a "Notice of Federal Tax Lien" in the county record without the review of a judge or jury. The procedure is simply administrative, but is represented to the county recorder as judicial and with a judge's authorization. The IRS has received no such authorization from a judge, and holds no such authorization or power within themselves. Imagine a government run with out checks and balances. The IRS has taken it upon themselves to bring the case against you and also to pass judgment. They say you are guilty as charged and that is enough. But according to the Internal Revenue Manual it is not enough. The IRS must perfect the lien and/or levy in a court of law in order to attempt any collections on the alleged debt. Furthermore, tax court is not a court of law. It is color of law only.

The lien and/or levy is perfected with a Warrant of Distraint. This is a legal document that gives the IRS the power to collect delinquent taxes or seize and sell sufficient property to satisfy delinquent taxes. According to the Internal Revenue Manual a Warrant of Distraint, or a court order, must accompany a Notice of Levy. The Notice of Levy receives it's authority from the warrant.

[rottweiler]

The notice is one thing, if a seizure is challenged properly a court order needs to be produced or it is reversed with a order signed by a judge. Go to Tax Court, USDC, etc. and the seizure will stand up. It needs to be done in the same jurisdiction that the IRS uses. That would be the A/M at the district court of the United States and I believe the fee is $59. A libel of review is critical to see if a court order was obtained before the seizure took place. It is easier for the IRS to get others to grab stuff and just turn it over to them by using extortion instead of getting a court order first so that is what they do, knowing very few will figure out their elaborate scam. If the IRS did try to obtain a court order first they would have to sue in the name of the party at interest, that would be the IMF. Now that would not look too good to Americans to see that now would it?

Originally Posted by Codee

There need not be a paper called lien. A lien is an encumberment and the paper is but meer evidense. A notice is good evidence because it is also evidense that you have had a chance to respond since its notice date.

[rottweiler]

A sitting State judge has no authority over the county recorder???????Now I know for sure the apocalypse is near. The Recorder is in contempt of court.
I would be acquiring a copy of that County Recorders insurance bond, oath of office and starting a suit. Cash register noises would be dancing in my head.

Originally Posted by Notorial dissent

Probably because the Recorder might just know something the County judge apparently doesn’t, that he has no authority over a Federal Lien. And why should the Recorder be involved at all, in a personal capacity, when they do not personally exist in that transaction. As a rule a Recorder makes no determination as to validity of a document, their purpose is to record documents, and unless there is something patently wrong with a document, there is very little reason they would refuse one, unless for statutory reasons.

As to the Federal Lien, the only ones who can legally remove it are either the party that entered it, in this case the IRS, or a Federal Judge can order it removed/voided, but that is it. A state judge has no authority to do so. Also, any interference with that lien by an outside party could at the very least constitute the filing of a false document, a Federal offense, and probably a state one as well, and with interfering in a collection proceeding, again a Federal crime. Filing a UCC-3 is a real good way to find oneself on the road to an extensive education in the Federal Judicial and Correction systems.

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by rottweiler

A sitting State judge has no authority over the county recorder???????Now I know for sure the apocalypse is near.

Presumably a state judge does have authority over the county recorder ... but he knows better than to try to interfere with a genuine IRS tax lien. If he were to make that sort of mistake, a court would overrule him. This is the sort of mistake that isn't repeated.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Presumably a state judge does have authority over the county recorder ... but he knows better than to try to interfere with a genuine IRS tax lien. If he were to make that sort of mistake, a court would overrule him. This is the sort of mistake that isn't repeated.

So the judge will simply overlook the default by the Treasury? That did not happen.

Shoonra is ignorant of the diversity inherent in the 'saving to suitors' clause - concurrent jurisdiction. But she certainly admits that international bankers have the States and United States in their pocket. The judge is simply frightened to call the county clerk and recorder in contempt.


Regards,

David Merrill.