|
Current method of UCC filing
I shouldn't get into these kinds of discussions. It really isn't fair. To cut right to it, private and public are both the same thing to me. Everything is a cycle, and so I don't compartmentalize two different things, they are actually the same thing. If this sounds crazy then don't read any further, it will only get worse.
It would be wise to look at this as a continum, or which came first the chicken or the egg, the private or the public. See, that is a Catch-22 question. My answer would be, Who cares?
Well, maybe it is best to try and define private and public as two distinct things for analysis purposes, but it would be neurotic to stay in that mode.
My first concern is why does anyone go into debt? Why not live in equity? See, when you go into debt you create a tort in the public. To go into debt is to hi-jack public funds. The public responds and wants to know where your public hazard bond is so that a tort claim can be had to zero out the injury. And since you don't know where your public hazard bond is, you, as the debtor, seek a remedy elsewhere.
So, you get into a statute staple/death pledge, and now you want out of the contract, and you want to take property with you when you leave the 'valley of death'. And the mortgage company doesn't want to let you out of your tort, because they have been carrying the liabiltiy for you, and they figure they have something coming for their trouble...and you are going to take off with their house?
Sounds like you are in the public all the way on this one. I am not sure that you would even want to be in the private here. I don't know of anyway to overturn the statute staple without the UCC, or at least get the mortgage company to re-stipulate or re-contract with you in regards to the statute staple.
If you tendered a bill of exchange of some sort instead of another promissory note, it sort of looks like you are pursuing a statutory 'tender of payment/default' situation. I haven't really followed all of this technology for mortgage elimination, but it seems like a check on a closed account might be simpler that a bill of exchange if you are pursuing that avenue.
Somewhere down the road you are going to have to go into court to get the matter resolved. See, it is only the priest/chancellor who can forgive the statute staple/ death pledge. You have to have your ducks in a row when you go see the devil. The devil is one sharp cookie, and if you can't get things straight with him, ...he will accuse you!!! Oh no! Now, what are you to do? Look what happened to Daniel Webster and Faustus. Do you think that somehow your fate will be any different?
All right, I am sorry. I have implied that the devil is the good guy, and the home owner is the bad guy. We like to think well of ourselves, and so what if we have signed a death pledge and are in agreement with hell...go figure. So, we are the good guys wearing a white hat, etc., etc.
Back to sanity: since the message did not indicate that the author had in his possession a Letter of Marque, I am assuming that the collateral was filed on a UCC under prize and booty? Did you do a UCC-11 search before you filed the UCC collateral? If not, go do the search. If you have done the search, and no one has a priority claim, then you might be okay.
But see, now how can you make a "claim upon which relief can be granted"? Where are you going to make your claim? Do you understand that a claim is a 'transfer' of title. Do you understand that a claim in the public is always an "insurance claim"? Do you understand that in order to get the insurance claim in your favor that you are going to have to subregate the policy to you...and what kind of a bond are you going to use for that and where are you going to register that bond, etc. What gave you the lien right in the first place? If you are neutral in the public (that is the public cannot reach parity with a man, so there is no remedy for a man in the public, etc), then are you foreign to the public? If you are foreign in the public, then where you can file your claim? Is the UCC enough? (hint: UCC is private law...how are you going to get in the public with your prize and booty?)
You see, it is not as simple as Accepting for Value and sending in a bill of exchange for the settlement, now is it? If you can answer the above questions to your satisfaction then you may prevail. If the above questions are completely beyond your present comprehension, then I would think you are going to have a hard time. But don't dispair, because the attorneys and judges, for the most part, cannot answer those questions either. But I would suggest that if you cannot educate the court with the right answers, then they won't help you along. The court operates with a cookie cutter mold. If what you have doesn't fit the mold, the court will just rule against you and leave you to take it up on appeal. Now what's it going to be: an appeal in admiralty or a writ of error in law/equity? You say you didn't appeal the summary judgment...so now you are going to do a libel of review?
Okay, now let me back out gracefully. I cannot predict what any particular court will do, and neither can Barton. Barton and I have been friends for a long time. He is a darn good researcher and has brought much light out from the darkness. But what happens when you run into a judge who is ignorant of UCC? or what if you run into a judge who is smarter than you on the UCC? It is unpredictable how things will fall out.
I don't know how you used the bill of exchange, so I can't predict any jail scenario. But if they have not charged you yet with anything, I would guess that you won't be charged. Just remember that UCC, insurance, bonds, debt, bills of exchange, promissory notes, cheques, and the like are all in the admiralty/maritime. Are you ready to go there? I gotta' warn you...salt water tastes yucky!
|
