UCC - Really Necessary?

dochand · #1 04-03-2004, 11:48 AM

I have what may appear to be a DUH? type inquiry.

I get mixed reviews from the forum regarding UCC. To some it is the god-send and to others it does not appear to be a necessity to attain that which we all desire - to be rid of the cloak of oppression and reclaim our status as 'sovereign' individuals who answer only to the Creator.

So - I pose the inquiry for responses.

"Is it really necessary to file a UCC-1 in order to proceed with other avenues of recourse (ie. Cancellatura, etc...)?"

All comments and opinions are welcome.

Thank you and God bless you all!

Doc

#2 04-03-2004, 01:15 PM

Personally, and as some of my posts clearly indicate, I still haven't been able to make sense of it all. The "theory" I understand perfectly. The "practical reality" of it? Entirely different matter.

Why the mental block on my part?

I'm rather certain it's based on the sum-total of all my combined experiences with agents, BB, authority figures, whomever and whatever form they take (teachers, employers, etc.)

Each experiences has taught the same two&lessons:

1)Those in "power" perceive everything as a challenge to their authority.

2) Those in "power" do NOT want to be "educated" regarding what might be their true ignorance regarding the thing.

They don't want to be challenged, and they don't want to be educated. They want only to be left alone and for everyone to do what their told.

Now, for me, personally, those are the "rules" "they" have taught me. And within the confines of those "rules of engagement," well hell, I can do battle with 'em all day long.

Randy

&

dochand · #3 04-03-2004, 01:54 PM

Hi Randy!

The thing I've noticed was, just as I was about to file my UCC-1, after finding this forum, that people were not having the 'success' with the 'process' that it seemed to be touted as. As many say, and it's true, "THERE ARE NO SILVER BULLETS!"

But, Ice seems to always somehow 'poo-poo' the UCC in favor of other means that 'work better' or with less entanglements. And Todd has introduced me to the Cancellatura process. So far, this appears to be the most rationale, simple and logically sound principle yet.

To take probably the most important thing I've learned from Ice, Jerseee, Montana, Suijuris, and all the un-named other knowledgable forum members I have encountered thus far - it seems that in order to have the highest percentage of success with what we ultimately wish to accomplish - sovereignty - then we simply need to remove ourselves from the 'jurisdiction - take our ball and go home (to freedom under God alone).

If this is certain and true, then I am closer to my personal conclusion that UCC is good when playing in their game - their rules - their ball.

But to play our (the sovereigns) game - by God's rules - and our ball, then cancellatura (without UCC) is the way to proceed. Oui?

Having Fun Yet?

You Bet I Am!!!

Doc

Jerseee · #4 04-03-2004, 03:20 PM

This is my position on the UCC stuff.

It is a business. It is a claim against your business. Now to use that document in another way than that takes some knowledge that I have none of.

My UCC filing is used to define jurisdiction and to give notice that my commercial person is doing business according to their rules. Now it is not my fault that my opponents are not creative enough to take responsibility of their business and protect it. But the code is the code.

So I do not use it as a basis for a TDA or BoE or whatever else is concocted out there. I basically read the rules and apply them to my business. Therefore, there is no argument or debate about the rules since I did not create them. If they have a problem with the rules then they need to take that up with whoever created them.

Let's keep it simple and follow the rules. Just use it to your advantage just as they do.

And sovereignty is not something physical--it is a state of mind and a lifestyle. Just my gospel gentlemen in my view of life.

dochand · #5 04-03-2004, 03:27 PM

Hi Jerseee!

So may I infer that you hold the belief that one should file the UCC-1 to 'capture their strawman' as a protective measure in the game of commerce?

Just sitting on the fence about whether I should file this or not.

Do you hold the opinion that cancellatura might preclude the necessity of the UCC filing?

Just talking, not looking for legal opinion or advice.

Doc

Jerseee · #6 04-03-2004, 03:41 PM

doc,

I am not famliar with the process that Todd speaks of and to be honest I have not even looked into it. therefore a comment on that process from myself will not be valid since I know nothing of the process.

But what is necessity? How do you define it compared to what your needs are?

Some folks think that a UCC is necessary to do all other things in redemption. I belive it is necessary to put enemies on notice of what is public prior to going to war. for example, my CN.

So what is neccesary for you to conduct business in their playground?

Follow the code and play by the rules. Use them for yourself and hold them to it. Accept their dishononr as you would accept their honor. these things are necessary for me to win at this game.

What is necessary for you to win? that is my definintion of necessity.

Understanding the power of acceptance, honor and dishonor is one thing. Harnessing that power is another. That is necessary for me. Making my intentions known by publicly filing a UCC is honorable, legal, and acceptable. As result of this and how I conduct my affairs, the UCC filing is necessary in aspect.

But to access my remedy--I think not.

#7 04-03-2004, 05:23 PM

I have a question in this area as well.

How does one know when their UCC-1 is perfected?

Thanks

HB

wirlwind · #8 04-03-2004, 06:46 PM

Jersee,

Do you feel that you have to file your UCC1 to do your CN?& I'm still not clear with the whole process.& I haven't done it, or done my CN.& The CN I do understand.& I have looked into the cancellatura, and for some reason it isn't sitting well with me.& I guess I'm going to wait and see how that progresses.& Back in 2000 when I first started getting into this stuf the whole thing was the filing the Ucc1 and everybody was getting out of taxes and mortgages, and you name it.& There were companies charging huge bucks to do the process for you.& Then people started going to jail, and their UCC1 filing papers were laughed at by judges in court.& Cancellatura is an all or none process, and at this point, I HAVE to work, and I have a professional license, and the way I understand it anything that keeps you in the system at all would have to be gotten rid of.& I used to think that there would be a process that would be done once, (magic bullet), and then I wouldn't have to worry about it anymore.& I'm taking the attitude that I will act like it is so, when it isn't so, in order for it to be so.& I'm trying to learn as much about the laws as I can, and apply them where I can.& And i guess I don't see where I have to have a UCC1 filed to do that. I"m not ready to go as extreme as cancellatura seems to be.& James has talked about an expatriation process that seems less extreme than cancellatura.& Can you still do a CN w/o filing your UCC1.& For that matter, why can't you do an expatration process in the newspaper as well?& Any ideas?& Why can't we start our own process?& There are a lot of very knowledgeable people that visit Su Juris.

I'll shut up.& Just rambling.

Wirlwind

#9 04-03-2004, 08:20 PM

I would submit that we're not really not playing by "their rules" at all, but rather the "conventional wisdom" of their "perception" of the rules.

Here's an example that's driving me nuts simply because it is so damned wrong the way it turned out. Not just "wrong," but clearly in direct opposition to the stated law.

1) Court case (Virginia):

Present: All the Justices

FIRST VIRGINIA BANK v. Record No. 950149

OPINION BY JUSTICE BARBARA MILANO KEENAN

March 1, 1996 FRANCIS X. O'LEARY, ETC., ET AL.

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY

Paul F. Sheridan, Judge

[T]he Department, pursuant to Code 58.1-1804, issued a "notice of tax lien and demand for payment" to the Bank to satisfy unpaid taxes owed by two taxpayers....

In contrast, judicial action is not required for the issuance of a "Notice of Tax Lien and Demand for Payment" under Code 58.1-1804…These tax liens are administrative process issued by authority of the Tax Commissioner....

Me here: See that? This judge said "judicial action is NOT required" for this particular lien. Following is that statute:

§ 58.1-1804. Collection out of estate in hands of or debts due by third party.

The Tax Commissioner may apply in writing to any person indebted to or having in his hands estate of a taxpayer for payment of any taxes assessed under § 58.1-313 or § 58.1-631, or of any taxes more than thirty days delinquent, out of such debt or estate. Payment by such person of such taxes, penalties and interest, either in whole or in part, shall entitle him to a credit against such debt or estate. The taxes, penalties and interest shall constitute a lien on the debt or estate due the taxpayer from the time the application is received. For each application served, the person applied to shall be entitled to a fee of twenty dollars which shall constitute a charge or credit against the debt to or estate of the taxpayer.

The Tax Commissioner shall send a copy of the application to the taxpayer, with a notice informing him of the remedies provided in this chapter.

If the person applied to does not pay so much as ought to be recovered out of such debt or estate, the Tax Commissioner shall procure a summons directing such person to appear before the appropriate court, where the proper payment may be enforced. Any person so summoned shall have the same rights of removal and appeal as are applicable to disputes among individuals.

Me again: Now, y'all are like me. The FIRST thing you see is reference to OTHER statutes.& Trust me, research those and you go to the absolute requirement for judicial orders to effect a lien.

I.E., NONE of these statutes exist in a vacuum. Or:

§ 1-17.1. Severability.

The provisions of statutes in this Code or the application thereof to any person or circumstances which are held invalid shall not affect the validity of other statutes, provisions or applications of this Code which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or applications. The provisions of all statutes are severable unless (i) the statute specifically provides that its provisions are not severable; or (ii) it is apparent that two or more statutes or provisions must operate in accord with one another.

Me again:

Now, what I keep asking myself is why did the lawyers in that case NOT point this out to this judge?& After all, he, the judge, can NOT just say, "Oh, by the way, you forgot this part...."

And he, the judge, has probably never, ever had anyone point this out, so day after day, he "enforces" THAT statute as if it's just standing there, all alone, no references to anything else.

Then WE come along?

No wonder "it" hits the fan.....

Randy

&

&

Jerseee · #10 04-03-2004, 11:38 PM

whirwind,

Your Cn is not dependent on your UCC filing.

My view on expatriation is this (some may know it already), how can you expatriate from something that you were never part of?

The proof of burden lies with the accusor. This is one main reason why they need to establish jurisdiction before proceeding, among others.

So let them prove that you are a US citizen first.

As far as processes are concerned, I believe that randy's last post kind of addressed that in his first sentence.

I am creating a document that will state who I am and i will publish it just as a CN. Basically, it tells the world who I am and what my citizenship status is. I also quote adjudicated case law that supports my notice.

This avoids any argument, this allows me to prove my claim and its constitutional. Now if they were to proceed with any court action dispite this proof--well I guess I'll have to file for damages. But the fight will not end.