Comments on: Actions of Account

By: adask

adask — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:14:07 +0000

Thank YOU!

After I write many of my articles, I typically wonder if anyone is going to understand or if the info is too complex or too poorly written to be understood. So, it’s always a pleasure to see that somebody “gets it”. More, it’s a pleasure to see that someone (you) not only “gets” what I’m writing about, but also has information (your “Resignation of Compelled SS Trustee) that I expect will teach me a great deal.

That’s why I write this blog. Not simply to teach, but also to learn.

Thanks again.

By: Lee

Lee — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 09:55:31 +0000

Al,

Your point, I believe, is valid that the courts assume one is a fiduciary over some type of fiction account, SS, D/L, etc.

I mailed a 153 page document to an agency, regarding an alleged tax debt, DENYING I was ever a valid fiduciary over a govt SS account. I included a Conditional Offer to Pay. After a 30 day no-reply, I sent a Cease & Desist for failure to respond timely. The agency has been mute now 8 months.

Resignation of Compelled SS Trustee, document at:
http://www.sedm.org, Click on Forms/Pubs, then click on the left section 1.6, Avoiding Govt Franchises, then see ebook #6.002.

Also see section on left #1.2, Affidavits, then ebook #2.004, Affidavit of Corporate Denial, which I also signed and mailed.

I followed other recommended steps to apparently “win” my case to date as outlined here: http://www.sedm.org, Click on Liberty University, read ebook: Path to Freedom.

Tremedous dissertation of yours here, Al, on Actions of Account and denial of fiduciary function/duty. I will be forwarding it to 20 patriots

Thank you!

Lee

By: adask

adask — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 17:57:58 +0000

I’m not sure that I clearly understand your comment. You appear to admit the presence of a “trustee” in the foreclosure process. From what I’ve read, modern “actions of account” are either at law (which process is virtually impossible to implement) or in equity (which process is relatively easy but depends on the presence of a trustee/fiduciary). In most “actions of account,” I suspect that YOU are presumed to be the “fiduciary” that essentially opens the door for your adversary to implement a simple process in equity by means of which you may be quickly defeated. If so, then if you can challenge and defeat the presence of a fiduciary/trustee in the process, the “action of account” in equity could theoretically be squelched and forced to proceed at law–which is reportedly an almost impossible process. Implication: If you’re presumed to act as fiduciary and you defeat that presumption, you might be able to derail an action of account against you.
However, if most mortgage transactions, there is a “deed of trust” or other device by means of which you authorize some third party to act as trustee/fiduciary. Unless you can persuade that 3rd-party fiduciary to abandon that role, it appears to me that a foreclosure based on an “action of account” could proceed smoothly against you in equity.
It strikes me that the presence of the “deed of trust” and therefore “trustee” in most mortgage transactions might be intended to ensure that there’s always a fiduciary in the mortgage transaction and therefore that transaction can be subject to an action of account in equity.
Assuming that speculation were true, it would be hard to prove that the trustee in the deed of trust was there as part of a conspiracy to subject the mortgagee to an action of account in equity and thereby strip the mortgagee of some of his procedural and substantive rights. But if such speculation could be proven, it might create a financial firestorm.
As for referring an attorney, I know of none who might be able to assist in such matters. More, you’re not likely to find many, either. The modern foreclosure process is a very essential part of the “system” which licenses and enriches attorneys and even judges. Any attorney who threatened that “system” in a fundamental way (like showing that the system was largely a “racket”) would probably risk disbarment. I assume there are such attorneys, but they are not easily found and I don’t know of any who deal with foreclosure.
Thanks for your email. Good luck and God bless.

By: Scott American

Scott American — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:55:27 +0000

Adask,
Thank you for that article and your input on its entirety. 344 days of thinking got you out of the pokey. Congrats on that victory!
All have to read again because you signed “at arms length ” on day one. It took you a minute not 344 days, I think?

Anyhow, it seems that “actions of account” with “order to show cause and burden of proof” I would be able to open a finalized Trustee (non-judical) sale to fight for my 200k in equity back.

The property went back to the Beneficiary who is a private lender from out of state.
If i can find error in the way that they deliver Notices that got me to the Auction date then
I can show iregularity in the conduct of the auction itself.

I am in Orange County, Ca. and in need of a Attorney that persues wrongful foreclosure cases on contingincy.
Today is day 14 after the sale and they are trying to get keys from me.
It is not my primary residence right now but has been in the past and was about to be again.

THANk you again and any Attorney referall will be appreciated.. 831-212-1317 not a local # to the O.C.

By: Felipe Torres

Felipe Torres — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:16:47 +0000

Alfred, if you have a chance, can you please take a listen to these guys:

http://www.creditorsincommerce.com/audio.php

Felipe

By: adask

adask — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:10:10 +0000

First, freedom is something given by men or masters to subjects or slaves. Liberty is given by our Father YHWH Elohiym. Our “Declaration of Independence” declared we had received a number of God-given and therefore “unalienable” Rights: Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That Declaration did not give us “freedom”; it declared that we were each endowed with a RIGHT to Liberty. But the fact of our “Liberty” actually empowers us to choose to live in a kind of bondage–if we so desire and consent. If you would like to work as a servant in the White House, your Liberty entitles you to choose to voluntarily submit to that servitude. Your Liberty also allows you to choose to resign that servitude (consistent with any agreement/contract you entered into). In other words, if you contracted to be a servant for two years, you are not at liberty to break your contract. At the end of the two years, you are at liberty to “re-up” for two more years of servitude or go your way.
Second, as per Genesis 1:26-28 God made “man” in His image and gave “man” dominion over the animals. God did not make “persons” or “citizens” or even “human beings” in His image. Similarly, our “Declaration of Independence” declares “We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights . . . .” There is no declaration of God-given, unalienable Rights for “persons,” “citizens” or “human beings”. If you would claim your unalienable Rights to Life,Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, you must do so in the capacity of a “man” (including “women”). Insofar as you define yourself or allow yourself to be defined by others as a “person,” “citizen” or “human being,” you are presumed to have voluntarily chosen to act in a capacity that has no claim on God-given, unalienable Rights.
Third, we are slaves if we “choose” to be slaves. There is text in the Bible that declares, “Choose this day who you will serve–God or mammon.” I sometimes think that choice may be the only true “Liberty” we have. If you choose to serve God, you can have Liberty. If you choose to serve mammon, you can have bondage punctuated by occasional grants of freedom.
For example, “mammon” will sometimes grant its citizens the “freedom” or “privilege” to drive a car–provided that the citizen has a drivers license, insurance and fastens his seat belt. Other such “freedoms” can be granted by “mammon” to its best subjects.
In any case, whether you like it or not, you will serve one of the other–God or mammon (secular society). This choice is not easy. There is a price that comes with either choice. Today, virtually no one recognizes this choice and therefore don’t consciously “choose”. However, based on the people’s failure to expressly choose and on their conduct (use of legal tender, or taking drivers licenses, etc.), the system “presumes” that most people have silently but voluntarily “choosen” to serve “mammon” (secular society; the “system”, “this state,” etc.). But if you understand your right to choose and you can properly manifest that choice, I believe “mammon” can and will (eventually) honor your choice.
Why? Because the 13th Amendment prohibits slavery and “involuntary servitude” but allows “voluntary servitude”. By your conduct and silence, you are presumed to have voluntarily entered into the “servitude” of being a “person,” “citizen,” “subject,” “consumer” or “human being” of “this state” (mammon).
The Achilles heel of this “system” is that it is appears to be based on the mere presumption that we have voluntarily chosen to enter into and submit to it. If you can learn how to properly manifest your refusal to “consent” to voluntarily enter into this “system,” you can defeat the system’s primary presumption and hold hold the system at bay. It’s not easy and it’s not without some serious costs. But your Liberty is there–if you have sufficient intelligence, knowledge and courage to claim it.

By: James

James — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 03:46:58 +0000

Very interesting read. Thank you! So are we, as human beings capbale of being free under a just rule of law? Or are we slaves to system so to speak?