Bob Hurt

Benefits of Adverse Possession - Sample Letter to Owner of Realty Abandoned in Foreclosure 20120213

2012-02-13T02:44:00.001-05:00

I have attached and appended below the text for a proposed letter to the owner of record of a home for which you have just filed a notice of adverse possession. I wrote this one for Florida. You can adapt it to your state.

My buddy Storm sent me this excerpt from a treatise on Adverse Possession:

ACTUAL, OPEN AND NOTORIOUS POSSESSION The trespasser must actually be in possession of the property and treat it as if he were an owner. This means there must be a physical presence on the land. It's not enough for someone just to make a claim, orally or in writing, of ownership. The words "open and notorious" simply mean that it must be obvious to anyone, including an owner who investigates, that a trespasser is on the land. Actual (physical) possession is usually open and notorious. Someone out in the field harvesting crops is obvious, as is a person pruning the rose garden that she planted on a strip of the neighbor's back yard. Similarly, a neighbor who just put a fence up slightly on the next-door property is obvious. So is the one who just poured a concrete driveway two feet over the boundary line. The point of this requirement is to let the owner know someone is occupying the land, so something can be done about it. An owner who allows someone to trespass for years without giving permission, complaining or taking action, the theory goes, loses the rights to the land.

Storm insists that an adverse possessor is a trespasser, and I disagree. He knows a lot more about the law than I do, but I still disagree. I maintain that if the owner does not post a "Get off" notice or tell you to get off the land, or tell the sheriff/police to move you off the land, you are not a trespasser. I maintain that only the equitable owner, lessee, agent, or (with written warning from the owner, lessee, or agent) law enforcers have the right to move an adverse possessor off the land.

Storm has told me that the adverse possessor must tell the owner about the adverse possession. I disagree. I believe openly taking adverse possession will be "obvious to … an owner who investigates" and if the owner does not investigate and does not hire someone as agent to remove trespassers in his absence, the owner has thereby waived notice. Don't listen to me, though. I'm not a lawyer (see notice at bottom).

My point here is that you can't even trust people knowledgeable in the law on points like this because they have NEVER LITIGATED A MATTER LIKE THIS and can only guess what the courts will say. That explains why I encourage would-be adverse possessors to find a lawyer and sue the various state officials for declaratory judgments to declare the rights of the adverse possessor and enjoin government officials to leave them alone unless the owner initiates a request without government tampering to remove the adverse possessor from the owner's realty.

I do concede, however, that the equitable owner, of record, whom I shall just call "owner" can become an adverse possessor's MOST POWERFUL ALLY when the owner has abandoned the realty in foreclosure. Such owners usually feel frightened, worn out from moving, intimidated ty the foreclosure process, and fed up. Such "abandoneers" usually hate that house and wish it would burn down so the lender wil only get scorched earth with a bucketful of ashes.

Some, in spite of knowing that they ought to protect the land from vandals, termites, mold, etc,, can't afford it and have lost all hope and motivation to care for the place. They have truly abandoned it with no thought of returning to it to care for it or occupy it.

The adverse possessor can put the owner's mind at ease by sending the below (and attached) letter. It explains many of the benefits of adverse possession to everyone from owner to state government. NOBODY LOSES, provided the adverse possessor behaves like a decent human being and responsible owner of real estate.

A similar letter to the sheriff or chief of police might have a beneficial effect. They might actually start encouraging adverse possession instead of looking for reasons to arrest them.

I suggest a campaign of sending generic flyers to all of the state's legislators, judges, newspapers, radio stations, TV stations, and prosecutors, particularly those in the adverse possessors's county of interest.

For that reason, I encourage adverse possessors to seek one another out, meet and mingle, share experiences in meetings every week, 2 weeks, or month, and work together to inform the press, law enforcers and relevant government officials, and attorneys about the benefits of AP. Most lawyers need a re-education on the subject.

Tell your friends, family, associates, and church members about THIS adverse possession mailing list, and encourage them to join by sending email to

If you received this message from a source other than the adverse possession law advocacy group, click here to subscribe to the group:

Adversepossession+subscribe@googlegroups.com

Or scan this QR code with your Smart Phone and use it to subscribe.

Use one of these applications on your smart phone to scan the above QR code.

· http://tag.microsoft.com,

· http://qrdroid.com/

· http://www.appbrain.com/app/barcode-scanner/com.google.zxing.client.android

Benefits of Adverse Possession –

Proposed Letter to Owner of Realty Abandoned in Foreclosure (20120213)

Date: whenever

From: Adverse Possessor
address

To: Alleged Rightful Owner of Adversely Possessed Realty
address

Subject: Adverse Possession of Residential Real Property (hereinafter "Realty") at address

Dear Alleged Rightful Owner of the Subject Realty:

Background. I have attached a copy of my notice of adverse possession of the Realty. I filed the notice with the County Property Appraiser today. I provide the copy to you as a courtesy formally to alert you of my intention to take adverse possession of your property at the above address because you abandoned it, possibly in response to the foreclosure the bank filed against you.

Purpose. I intend to help you by protecting your property. I write to you now to explain to you the adverse possession's financial benefits for you, your real property, your immediate neighbors, the neighborhood, the town, the County, law enforcers, the home owner association (if any), and the people and State of Florida.

What is Adverse Possession? It is a means of someone taking and holding continuous, open (public), beneficial, possession of realty, paying taxes, government assessments, and any home owner association dues, demarking its boundaries with an enclosure if necessary, and maintaining and improving it, for a certain period of time, all without permission of the owner of record (in this case, you). During this time, the owner of record can regain the realty by simply asking the adverse possessor to abandon it.

Overview of Benefits. Many people consider it bold, audacious, and disrespectful to take adverse possession of real property. They don't realize the ultimate good that always comes of it. I want to explain that good to you. Many benefits accrue to the above entities from adverse possession:

Loving Care. A family who lives in the Realty dwelling treats it like their home, caring for it as they would their own in the hope that someday it will become theirs permanently.
Mold and Mildew. Adverse possessors typically keep the air conditioning system running summer and winter. This prevents dangerous buildup of mold and mildew that excessive humidity would cause if the A/C didn't operate for extended time. As you know, mold constitutes a serious danger to health.
Pestilence. Adverse possessors typically keep the dwelling free of termites, roaches, bedbugs, spiders, centipedes, rodents and other vermin that constitute a health hazard to humans and that actually damage the dwelling, often necessitating costly repairs.
Druggies. Adverse possessors prevent drug dealers, marijuana grower, cocaine/crack/crystal meth addicts and other ne'er-do-wells from partying in and damaging the dwelling from neglect.
Thieves. An unoccupied house often falls prey to thieves who steal appliances, plumbing fixtures, doors, window coverings, copper wiring and plumbing, and flooring. It costs the owner a small fortune to replace these and put the house in condition suitable for selling it. Adverse possessors prevent thieves from stealing those things.
Vandals. Vandals and street thugs often see an unoccupied dwelling as a target of opportunity; they break windows, destroy carpets, urinate or defecate on the floors, break holes in walls, destroy the roof, turn on the water and let water from stopped up sinks flood the floor, jam metal and other objects down into the plumbing, break toilet and sink porcelain, and so on. Cleanup and repair can cost the owner a small fortune. Adverse possessors keep such damage from happening by increasing the vandals' risk of capture.
Freezes and Hurricanes. Adverse possessors typically mind the effect of the weather on plumbing and windows. They install protective coverings to prevent violent storms from breaking windows. They wrap water pipes or let outside faucets drip during freezes to keep them from bursting. An unoccupied house gets no such respectful care, and related repairs can become costly.
Maintenance. Residential realty always need routine maintenance such as lawn-mowing, hedge-trimming, edging, filling in of holes dug by dogs and other creatures, painting, landscaping, fixing broken windows, and so on..An occupant will typically do all this work, but the owner must pay to have others do it if no occupant lives there.
HOA Dues. Adverse possessors must pay Home Owner Association (HOA) dues. The owner must pay them if no adverse possessor lives there.
Taxes. Adverse possessors must pay property taxes. The owner must pay them if no adverse possessor lives there.
Property Management. Managing all the above constitutes a significant enterprise of work and attention to duty for the adverse possessor. The associated management fees would similarly tax the rightful owner. The adverse possessor saves the rightful owner from having to pay that cost.
Property Values. Because of the above realities, vacant residential realty invites wanton damage and undesirable lurkers, makes the neighborhood look deserted and unattractive, and reduces the curb appeal of the community. Therefore, people will not want to live there. That will diminish property values in the community in general.
7-Year Savings. Adverse possessors can pay taxes, homeowner dues, repair and maintenance costs for up to 7 years, and the rightful owner can, just before the statute of limitations expires, have the sheriff remove the adverse possessors removed for trespass. Thus, adverse possession might not pose a risk of any kind to the rightful owner who doesn't sleep on his rights beyond 7 years.
Restored Realty Prices. The adverse possessors can end up leaving the Realty AFTER property values have returned to their normally ridiculously high values because more people have jobs and the ability to buy them.
Litigation Risk. It costs an enormous amount of money to litigate against people with respect to questions of Realty ownership and title. Adverse possessors save the rightful owner much of that cost because they admit that they don't have ownership rights until after seven years. On the other hand, an adverse possessor with profound knowledge of mortgages, lending practices, securitization, and the recent Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report's details about abuse of authority and duty in both government and the lending and securities industries could make for truly messy litigation assisting the prior owner of record in challenging REAL titular interest in the Realty. It could easily cost $100,000 or more in legal fees, and put the alleged rightful owner (and other parties joined to the action) at risk of disgorgement and treble damages, and possibly exorbitant punitive damagesin favor of the prior owner of record.
Everybody Wins. Adverse possessors keep the property in good shape, pay taxes and HOA dues, keep the community safer than otherwise, and help to increase property values. I imagine that rightful owners of common sense will see adverse possessors as a boon, not a bane, to the rightful owner, to the adverse possessor's family, to the municipality, to the neighborhood, to the courts, and to law enforcers.

Check the Numbers. If you have your accountant pull up your maintenance and cost records on residential Real Estate Owned for your review, you will find that adverse possessors can save you an enormous amount of money without putting you at risk losing the property permanently or having to spend substantially on ownership costs.

Permission: NO. I do not ask your permission to possess the property. In fact, I specifically deny having your permission. I have ADVERSE possession of the Realty.

Trespass. At the same time, this letter should have helped you see the wisdom of forbearance in accusing me of trespass. I hope that you will communicate directly with me by telephone or mail if you intend to accuse me of trespass. I believe we can settle the matter amiably and without law enforcement if you give me reasonable notice. 30 days' notice should suffice. To reciprocate your kindness, I shall timely notify you of my intention to abandon the Realty. 30 days' notice should suffice. I shall provide you with an accounting on my expenses and costs associated with the adverse possession.

Adverse Possession - A Fine American Tradition Inherited from Britain. Many people consider adverse possession a "something for nothing" scheme, scam, and con. Some consider it grand theft and fraud. Such thinking constitutes a delusion as you have seen from the foregoing presentation. Adverse Possession actually protects property and puts it to the highest and best use for everyone concerned.

Jurists have recognized this for centuries and the related facts show why the Florida Legislature enshrined adverse possession in Florida Statutes 95.12 through 95.18. It ensures that the property receives reasonably good care, that it enjoys improvement, that the County receives related property taxes, and that the rightful owner has a HUGE window of opportunity to excise the adverse possessor from the land. So it provides society with benefits such as I have explained above. You get someone to look after your property and save you a ton of money, and it does not cost you a penny for 7 years.

True, you could have fixed up the property and rented it out. But you didn't. You abandoned it to God-knows-what-fate. The Legislature tends to favor adverse possession for putting realty to its highest and best use. Therefore the Legislature has enacted the adverse possession laws to refine the statutory and common law of Britain that formed the basis of Florida's original state laws.

No Response Necessary. You do not need to respond to this letter, but I shall appreciate it if you do.

Memorandum of Law. I have attached a memorandum of law for your reference.

Sincerely yours,

(Signature)

Intended Adverse Possessor

Memorandum of Law - Some Florida Laws Related to Adverse Possession

Florida Statutes as of 13 Feb 2012

95.12 Real property actions.—No action to recover real property or its possession shall be maintained unless the person seeking recovery or the person's ancestor, predecessor, or grantor was seized or possessed of the property within 7 years before the commencement of the action.

History.—s. 2, ch. 1869, 1872; RS 1287; GS 1718; RGS 2932; CGL 4652; s. 8, ch. 74-382; s. 521, ch. 95-147.

95.13 Real property actions; possession by legal owner presumed.—In every action to recover real property or its possession, the person establishing legal title to the property shall be presumed to have been possessed of it within the time prescribed by law. The occupation of the property by any other person shall be in subordination to the legal title unless the property was possessed adversely to the legal title for 7 years before the commencement of the action.

History.—s. 4, ch. 1869, 1872; RS 1289; GS 1720; RGS 2934; CGL 4654; s. 9, ch. 74-382.

95.14 Real property actions; limitation upon action founded upon title.—No cause of action or defense to an action founded on the title to real property, or to rents or service from it, shall be maintained unless:

(1) The person prosecuting the action or making the defense, or under whose title the action is prosecuted or the defense is made, or the ancestor, predecessor, or grantor of the person, was seized or possessed of the real property within 7 years before commencement of the action; or

(2) Title to the real property was derived from the United States or the state within 7 years before commencement of the action. The time under this subsection shall not begin to run until the conveyance of the title from the state or the United States.

History.—s. 3, ch. 1869, 1872; RS 1288; GS 1719; RGS 2933; CGL 4653; s. 10, ch. 74-382.

95.16 Real property actions; adverse possession under color of title.—

(1) When the occupant, or those under whom the occupant claims, entered into possession of real property under a claim of title exclusive of any other right, founding the claim on a written instrument as being a conveyance of the property, or on a decree or judgment, and has for 7 years been in continued possession of the property included in the instrument, decree, or judgment, the property is held adversely. If the property is divided into lots, the possession of one lot shall not be deemed a possession of any other lot of the same tract. Adverse possession commencing after December 31, 1945, shall not be deemed adverse possession under color of title until the instrument upon which the claim of title is founded is recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county where the property is located.

(2) For the purpose of this section, property is deemed possessed in any of the following cases:

(a) When it has been usually cultivated or improved.

(b) When it has been protected by a substantial enclosure. All land protected by the enclosure must be included within the description of the property in the written instrument, judgment, or decree. If only a portion of the land protected by the enclosure is included within the description of the property in the written instrument, judgment, or decree, only that portion is deemed possessed.

(c) When, although not enclosed, it has been used for the supply of fuel or fencing timber for husbandry or for the ordinary use of the occupant.

(d) When a known lot or single farm has been partly improved, the part that has not been cleared or enclosed according to the usual custom of the county is to be considered as occupied for the same length of time as the part improved or cultivated.

History.—s. 5, ch. 1869, 1872; RS 1290; GS 1721; RGS 2935; CGL 4655; s. 1, ch. 19253, 1939; s. 1, ch. 22897, 1945; ss. 11, 12, ch. 74-382; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 1, ch. 87-194; s. 522, ch. 95-147.

¹95.18 Real property actions; adverse possession without color of title.—

(1) When the occupant has, or those under whom the occupant claims have, been in actual continued occupation of real property for 7 years under a claim of title exclusive of any other right, but not founded on a written instrument, judgment, or decree, the property actually occupied is held adversely if the person claiming adverse possession made a return, as required under subsection (3), of the property by proper legal description to the property appraiser of the county where it is located within 1 year after entering into possession and has subsequently paid, subject to s. 197.3335, all taxes and matured installments of special improvement liens levied against the property by the state, county, and municipality.

(2) For the purpose of this section, property is deemed to be possessed if the property has been:

(a) Protected by substantial enclosure;

(b) Cultivated or improved in a usual manner; or

(3) A person claiming adverse possession under this section must make a return of the property by providing to the property appraiser a uniform return on a form provided by the Department of Revenue. The return must include all of the following:

(a) The name and address of the person claiming adverse possession.

(b) The date that the person claiming adverse possession entered into possession of the property.

(d) A notarized attestation clause that states:

UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, I DECLARE THAT I HAVE READ THE FOREGOING RETURN AND THAT THE FACTS STATED IN IT ARE TRUE AND CORRECT.

(e) A description of the use of the property by the person claiming adverse possession.

(f) A receipt to be completed by the property appraiser.

The property appraiser shall refuse to accept a return if it does not comply with this subsection. The executive director of the Department of Revenue is authorized, and all conditions are deemed met, to adopt emergency rules under ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54(4) for the purpose of implementing this subsection. The emergency rules shall remain in effect for 6 months after adoption and may be renewed during the pendency of procedures to adopt rules addressing the subject of the emergency rules.

(4) Upon the submission of a return, the property appraiser shall:

(a) Send, via regular mail, a copy of the return to the owner of record of the property that is subject to the adverse possession claim, as identified by the property appraiser's records.

(b) Inform the owner of record that, under s. 197.3335, any tax payment made by the owner of record before April 1 following the year in which the tax is assessed will have priority over any tax payment made by an adverse possessor.

(c) Add a notation at the beginning of the first line of the legal description on the tax roll that an adverse possession claim has been submitted.

(d) Maintain the return in the property appraiser's records.

(5)(a) If a person makes a claim of adverse possession under this section against a portion of a parcel of property identified by a unique parcel identification number in the property appraiser's records:

1. The person claiming adverse possession shall include in the return submitted under subsection (3) a full and complete legal description of the property sufficient to enable the property appraiser to identify the portion of the property subject to the adverse possession claim.

2. The property appraiser may refuse to accept the return if the portion of the property subject to the claim cannot be identified by the legal description provided in the return, and the person claiming adverse possession must obtain a survey of the portion of the property subject to the claim in order to submit the return.

(b) Upon submission of the return, the property appraiser shall follow the procedures under subsection (4), and may not create a unique parcel identification number for the portion of property subject to the claim.

(c) The property appraiser shall assign a fair and just value to the portion of the property, as provided in s. 193.011, and provide this value to the tax collector to facilitate tax payment under s. 197.3335(3).

(6)(a) If a person makes a claim of adverse possession under this section against property to which the property appraiser has not assigned a parcel identification number:

1. The person claiming adverse possession must include in the return submitted under subsection (3) a full and complete legal description of the property which is sufficient to enable the property appraiser to identify the property subject to the adverse possession claim.

2. The property appraiser may refuse to accept a return if the property subject to the claim cannot be identified by the legal description provided in the return, and the person claiming adverse possession must obtain a survey of the property subject to the claim in order to submit the return.

(b) Upon submission of the return, the property appraiser shall:

1. Assign a parcel identification number to the property and assign a fair and just value to the property as provided in s. 193.011;

2. Add a notation at the beginning of the first line of the legal description on the tax roll that an adverse possession claim has been submitted; and

3. Maintain the return in the property appraiser's records.

(7) A property appraiser must remove the notation to the legal description on the tax roll that an adverse possession claim has been submitted and shall remove the return from the property appraiser's records if:

(a) The person claiming adverse possession notifies the property appraiser in writing that the adverse possession claim is withdrawn;

(b) The owner of record provides a certified copy of a court order, entered after the date the return was submitted to the property appraiser, establishing title in the owner of record;

(c) The property appraiser receives a certified copy of a recorded deed, filed after the date of the submission of the return, from the person claiming adverse possession to the owner of record transferring title of property along with a legal description describing the same property subject to the adverse possession claim; or

(d) The owner of record or the tax collector provides to the property appraiser a receipt demonstrating that the owner of record has paid the annual tax assessment for the property subject to the adverse possession claim during the period that the person is claiming adverse possession.

(8) The property appraiser shall include a clear and obvious notation in the legal description of the parcel information of any public searchable property database maintained by the property appraiser that an adverse possession return has been submitted to the property appraiser for a particular parcel.

History.—s. 7, ch. 1869, 1872; s. 6, ch. 4055, 1891; RS 1291; GS 1722; RGS 2936; CGL 4656; s. 1, ch. 19254, 1939; ss. 13, 14, ch. 74-382; s. 1, ch. 77-102; s. 523, ch. 95-147; s. 1, ch. 2011-107.

¹Note.—Section 4, ch. 2011-107, provides that "[t]his act shall take effect July 1, 2011, and applies to adverse possession claims in which the return was submitted on or after that date, except for the procedural provisions governing the property appraiser's administration of adverse possession claims included in s. 95.18(4)(c) and (d) and (7), Florida Statutes, and the provisions governing the payment of taxes included in s. 197.3335, Florida Statutes, as created by this act, which apply to adverse possession claims for which the return was submitted before, on, or after that date."

95.191 Limitations when tax deed holder in possession.—When the holder of a tax deed goes into actual possession of the real property described in the tax deed, no action to recover possession of the property shall be maintained by a former owner or other adverse claimant unless the action commenced is begun within 4 years after the holder of the tax deed has gone into actual possession. When the real property is adversely possessed by any person, no action shall be brought by the tax deed holder unless the action is begun within 4 years from the date of the deed.

History.—s. 64, ch. 4322, 1895; GS 591; s. 61, ch. 5596, 1907; RGS 794; s. 2, ch. 12409, 1927; CGL 1020; ss. 1, 2, ch. 69-55; s. 1, ch. 72-268; s. 28, ch. 73-332; s. 1, ch. 77-174.

Note.—Former ss. 196.06, 197.725, 197.286.

95.192 Limitation upon acting against tax deeds.—

(1) When a tax deed has been issued to any person under s. 197.552 for 4 years, no action shall be brought by the former owner of the property or any claimant under the former owner.

(2) When a tax deed is issued conveying or attempting to convey real property before a patent has been issued thereon by the United States, or before a conveyance by the state, and thereafter a patent by the United States or a conveyance by the state is issued to the person to whom the property was assessed or a claimant under him or her, and the tax deed grantee or a claimant under the tax deed grantee has paid the taxes for 4 successive years at any time after the issuance of the patent or conveyance, the patentee, or grantee, and any claimant under the patentee or grantee shall be presumed to have abandoned the property and any right, title, and interest in it. Upon such abandonment, the tax deed grantee and any claimant under the tax deed grantee is the legal owner of the property described by the tax deed.

(3) This statute applies whether the tax deed grantee or any claimant under the tax deed grantee has been in actual possession of the property described in the tax deed or not. If a tax deed has been issued to property in the actual possession of the legal owner and the legal owner or any claimant under him or her continues in actual possession 1 year after issuance of the tax deed and before an action to eject him or her is begun, subsections (1) and (2) shall not apply.

History.—s. 27, ch. 73-332; s. 201, ch. 85-342; s. 524, ch. 95-147.

95.21 Adverse possession against lands purchased at sales made by executors.—The title of any purchaser, or the purchaser's assigns, who has held possession for 3 years of any real or personal property purchased at a sale made by an executor, administrator, or guardian shall not be questioned because of any irregularity in the conveyance or any insufficiency or irregularity in the court proceedings authorizing the sale, whether jurisdictional or not, nor shall it be questioned because the sale is made without court approval or confirmation or under a will or codicil. The title shall not be questioned at any time by anyone who has received the money to which he or she was entitled from the sale. This section shall not bar an action for fraud or an action against the executor, administrator, or guardian for personal liability to any heir, distributee, or ward.

History.—s. 1, ch. 3134, 1879; RS 1293; GS 1724; RGS 2938; CGL 4658; s. 1, ch. 20954, 1941; s. 3, ch. 22897, 1945; s. 15, ch. 74-382; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 525, ch. 95-147.

***

WARNING: I do NOT function as law practitioner, lawyer, licensed attorney-at-law, or legal advisor. Construe my comments ONLY as speculation or general information, and NOT as legal advice for you or anyone else. Consult a well-qualified attorney (good luck finding one) in all questions of legality or law.

***

*****************************************************************
Bob Hurt - Home Page - +1 (727) 669-5511
2460 Persian Drive #70 - Clearwater, FL 33763
Donate to my Law Studies
Learn to litigate: Buy and Study JURISDICTIONARY
Stay up to date: Subscribe to Lawmen E-letter Now
Visit the Lawmen E-Letter Lawmen E-Letter Archives
*****************************************************************

Confidentiality Notice. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Ch.119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this "Message," including attachments. The originator intended this Message for the specified recipients only; it may contain the originator's confidential and proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies unintended recipients that they have received this Message in error, and strictly proscribes their Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based actions. Recipients-in-error shall notify the originator immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Authorized carriers of this message shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients. See: Quon v. Arch.

Wireless Copyright Notice. Federal and State laws govern copyrights to this Message. You must have the originator's full written consent to alter, copy, or use this Message. Originator acknowledges others' copyrighted content in this Message. Otherwise, Copyright © 2010 by originator Bob Hurt, bob at bobhurt dot com, http://bobhurt.com. All Rights Reserved.

Patriot Computer Security

2012-02-10T04:03:00.001-05:00

“Thugs” and “Mobsters” can come into your home and snatch your computer or copy your hard drive during your absence, undetected. Information on your computer can lead them to other people with whom you communicate. The thugs can read all your private info, and even find your passwords so they can sneak into your accounts and look at your correspondence without your detecting it. If the thugs get your passwords, they can stick viruses in your web sites and emails just to harass you and keep you busy with technical problems. According to rumor, mobsters have suddenly locked numerous adverse possessors out of their houses and caused them to lose access to their computers. Anyone could enter the house and steal the computers.

I recommend setting strict policies to hide your info from prying eyes of thugs and mobsters, especially if you have become a legal or political activist of some kind. Also, if you host a politically sensitive web site, I encourage you to mirror it on an offshore server and register it is someone else’s name in case the thugs and mobsters get a court order for you to shut it down.

DON’T PICK STUPID PASSWORDS. Make them 16 characters of mixed upper case, lower case, punctuation, and digit characters, and don’t spell out personal or family or pet or friend dates, addresses, phone numbers, etc. DO NOT EVER TELL ANYONE YOUR PASSWORDS.

Consider these tools for keeping your data secure.

http://www.comodo.com free browser and antivirus tools with sandbox to try downloaded apps safely

http://www.truecrypt.org/ - encrypt a file or partition; nobody can decrypt it without your password and USB key

· You can install windows on one partition and put all data files on a truecrypt partition, and dismount the truecrypt partition when you leave home or shut down. VERY difficult to find or crack if you do it right.

http://eraser.heidi.ie/ total erase of a file, its name, EVERYTHIng about it

https://lastpass.com/ stores your passwords in the cloud

http://www.gnupg.org/ gnu privacy guard – encrypts emails using public/private keys; free security certificates for document signing

https://www.torproject.org/ anonymous browsing

http://www.carbonite.com/en/ provides total backup of your system in the cloud, annual fee

https://one.ubuntu.com/ another backup option, monthly or annual fee, 5G free.

http://www.ubuntu.com/ - download and burn the desktop version to a disk. Then shutdown your computer and boot from the CD/DVD. The UBUNTU operating system is linux, and it will boot up and let you install (don’t) or run live (DO). This will give you a windows like user interface, very nice and clean and simple. With it you can view all the files on your windows system. NO VIRUSES.NO TROJANS. Disk cannot be messed with,so you boot clean every time. ABSOLUTELY SECURE, but still accesses internet. You can umount your windows drives if you wish, very easily, to make them invisible to the system.

You can install and use the above software very fast with windows or ubuntu. Ubuntu will let you move windows partition aside a little and create a small partition for booting ubuntu so you don’t have to boot from CD. VERY FAST BOOT. Virtually No viruses.

I have used UBUNTU a lot. Stable and full of applications including office software.

If you use carbonite/ or ubuntu one, you can boot the ubuntu disk and back up your whole windows partition to the cloud so if your pc gets stolen, you still have everything in the cloud.

Professional snoopsters can eventually crack any security you set up. Change your main passwords every month. Become a randomly moving target as much as possible. Unless you become a person of serious interest to you, they will probably NOT use a supercomputer to crack your passwords by brute force, so the above tools should work well for you.

My advice to any who want it (if you don’t want it, ignore this):

Keep your nose clean, stay out of harm’s way, don’t commit crimes or do illegal activities. Obey constitutional laws. Become and remain a righteous, noble human being, devoted to the pursuit of truth, beauty, and goodness. Learn the law and become disposed to using it for solving problems that you cannot negotiate away. Associate with good people, not hoodlums, crooks, patriot myth mongers, people trying to skirt the law, ne-er-do-wells. Develop a majestic and well balanced personality. Then, thugs will generally leave you alone.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t • Blogs: 1 2 3 • Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 • 727 669 5511

***

English Law of Texas; eviction of $16 Texas House Squatter - adverse possession

2012-02-07T02:08:00.002-05:00

Associated Press writer Norman Merchant just labored through a fog of confusion. You can see the fog in his article at the below link.

$16 house? Dallas area man evicted after squatting

: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/06/16-house-dallas-area-man-evicted-after-squatting

Merchant wrote about Kenneth Robinson’s dilemma. Robinson recently took a Dallas-area house by adverse possession. The court just evicted Robinson because the equitable owner lost the house in foreclosure, and so the court ordered Robinson out so the trustee could sell the house at foreclosure auction to pay down the debt to the lender.

Merchant tried to explain adverse possession from the viewpoint of others who had little clue about it. Merchant poorly evaluated the issue, leaving readers confused. His article leaves the impression that adverse possession is something bad, and taking adverse possession of foreclosure-abandoned realty amounts to nothing more than squatting. Look at the title of his article.

Merchant failed to refer to any of the following, which might have clarified the issues for readers:

1. the adverse possession law in Texas Civil Practices & Remedies Code Sec.16.021 et seq. (“CPRC”);

2. an authoritative article on the subject, like the one at http://www.lonestarlandlaw.com/Adverse.html;

3. the English Law of Texas, from which adverse possession rights and duties hail.

In point of fact, the government must enforce the rights of adverse possessors (taking possession of someone else’s property) against everyone but the rightful owner who should exercise possessory dominion. Throughout the USA, people who borrow money to buy a house sign a note and mortgage as unilateral adhesion contracts. The mortgage CONVEYS the estate (realty) to the lender, or other mortgagee like MERS. Black’s Law Dictionary 8^th Edition, page 3198, defines Mortgage as follows:

mortgage (mor-gij), n. 1. A conveyance of title to property that is given as security for the payment of a debt or the performance of a duty and that will become void upon payment or performance according to the stipulated terms. — Also termed (archaically) dead pledge. [Cases: Mortgages 1. C.J.S. Mortgages §§ 2–6.] 2. A lien against property that is granted to secure an obligation (such as a debt) and that is extinguished upon payment or performance according to stipulated terms. [Cases: Mortgages 145.C.J.S. Mortgages §§ 198, 200.] 3. An instrument (such as a deed or contract) specifying the terms of such a transaction. 4. Loosely, the loan on which such a transaction is based. 5. The mortgagee's rights conferred by such a transaction. 6. Loosely, any real-property security transaction, including a deed of trust. — Abbr. M. — mortgage,vb., the estate (the realty)

In the mortgage situation, the lender or nominee becomes mortgagee with right to force a foreclosure sale of the realty to raise money to discharge the associated. The borrower becomes an “equitable” owner with possessory right, but also obligations to maintain and safeguard the property from disintegration of value. In the foreclosure, the owner/borrower loses equitable title to the realty under action of the trustee in a deed of trust (non-judicial foreclosure state like Texas) or of the court in a judicial foreclosure state like Florida.

So, the mortgagee cannot take possession or invade the properly maintained realty, in spite of having legal title because the borrower/owner of record has equitable or beneficial title. Therefore, the lender/mortgagee or its agents like the servicer have no right to dispossess the adverse possessor without a court order, and the court will not give it till after the foreclosure. Generally, the court will issue a writ of possession, and if necessary a writ of unlawful detainer or ejectment to empower the sheriff to remove the owner or adverse possessor from the realty. The court did that in the case of Kenneth Robinson. Black’s Law dictionary defines owners as follows:

owner. One who has the right to possess, use, and convey something; a person in whom one or more interests are vested. • An owner may have complete property in the thing or may have parted with some interests in it (as by granting an easement or making a lease).

beneficial owner. 1. One recognized in equity as the owner of something because use and title belong to that person, even though legal title may belong to someone else; esp., one for whom property is held in trust. — Also termed equitable owner. [Cases: Trusts 139. C.J.S. Trover and Conversion § 251.] 2. A corporate shareholder who has the power to buy or sell the shares, but who is not registered on the corporation's books as the owner. [Cases: Corporations 135. C.J.S. Corporations § 282.] 3.Intellectual property. A person or entity who is entitled to enjoy the rights in a patent, trademark, or copyright even though legal title is vested in someone else. • The beneficial owner has standing to sue for infringement. A corporation is typically a beneficial owner if it has a contractual right to the assignment of the patent but the employee who owns the patent has failed to assign it. Similarly, a patent or copyright owner who has transferred title as collateral to secure a loan would be a beneficial owner entitled to sue for infringement.

equitable owner. See beneficial owner (1).

legal owner. One recognized by law as the owner of something; esp., one who holds legal title to property for the benefit of another. See TRUSTEE(1). [Cases: Trusts 133. C.J.S. Trover and Conversion §§ 245–246.]

Shortly after Texas began its life as a state, it adopted the English Common Law as its basic law.

http://www.texasslaveryproject.org/sources/TTR/display.php?f=TSP0065.xml

An act to adopt the common law of England, to repeal certain Mexican laws, and to regulate the marital rights of parties.

SEC. 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Republic of Texas, in Congress assembled, That the common law of England (so far as it is not inconsistent with the constitution or the acts of Congress now in force) shall, together with such acts be the rule of decision in this republic, and shall continue in full force until altered or repealed by congress.

"Untitled," Telegraph and Texas Register, April 8, 1840

Laws related to adverse possession in Texas have an English law heritage stretching back 600 years. No news reporter, county clerk, or cop, and few if any lawyers or judges in Texas have replete familiarity with those laws. Therefore, they can opine with authority that adverse possession was never intended for use as a method to acquire realty which the owner abandoned in fear of the travail of foreclosure.

Adverse Possession of homes abandoned in foreclosure provides many benefits. You can read some of them here:

http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2011/03/benefits-of-adverse-possession.html

These benefits help the lender, borrower, mortgagee, mortgagor, sheriff, police, courts, tax collectors, community, and the realty. Therefore, it makes good sense for people who will care for a home to take adverse possession of it.

Of course they run the risk of the court or owner forcing them to move. If the owner asks the Sheriff to do so, the Sheriff will issue a trespass warning, and the adverse possessor must move UNLESS the statute of limitations has expired. In Texas that means the adverse possessor might have to possess the realty for 10 years.

I consider that a trivial issue because most people adversely possessing foreclosure abandoned realty know they will lose it within months to a few years and they will have to move. SO what? They can simply move to another abandoned house.

Yes, adverse possessors ought to keep a record of the condition of the realty and any improvements or repairs made, and possibly file a lien so they can recover the expenditures if the owner moves them out. And adverse possessors ought to become good neighbors. Doesn’t that go without saying for anybody taking possession of any property?

Norman Merchant did not address these issues when reporting the ouster of Kenneth Robinson from that Dallas-area house. I imagine Kenneth will take possession of another abandoned house. Why shouldn’t he?

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t •
Blogs: 1 2 3 •
Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •
727 669 5511

***

The Texas Constitution also contemplated wholesale adoption of the common law. “Coongress,” it said, “shall, as early as practicable, introduce, by statute, the common law of England, with such modifications a our circumstances in their judgment may require

Texas law regarding adverse possession

Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CP/htm/CP.16.htm

CIVIL PRACTICE AND REMEDIES CODE

TITLE 2. TRIAL, JUDGMENT, AND APPEAL

SUBTITLE B. TRIAL MATTERS

CHAPTER 16. LIMITATIONS

SUBCHAPTER B. LIMITATIONS OF REAL PROPERTY ACTIONS

Sec. 16.021. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:

(1) "Adverse possession" means an actual and visible appropriation of real property, commenced and continued under a claim of right that is inconsistent with and is hostile to the claim of another person.

(2) "Color of title" means a consecutive chain of transfers to the person in possession that:

(A) is not regular because of a muniment that is not properly recorded or is only in writing or because of a similar defect that does not want of intrinsic fairness or honesty; or

(B) is based on a certificate of headright, land warrant, or land scrip.

(3) "Peaceable possession" means possession of real property that is continuous and is not interrupted by an adverse suit to recover the property.

(4) "Title" means a regular chain of transfers of real property from or under the sovereignty of the soil.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.022. EFFECT OF DISABILITY. (a) For the purposes of this subchapter, a person is under a legal disability if the person is:

(1) younger than 18 years of age, regardless of whether the person is married;

(2) of unsound mind; or

(3) serving in the United States Armed Forces during time of war.

(b) If a person entitled to sue for the recovery of real property or entitled to make a defense based on the title to real property is under a legal disability at the time title to the property vests or adverse possession commences, the time of the disability is not included in a limitations period.

(c) Except as provided by Sections 16.027 and 16.028, after the termination of the legal disability, a person has the same time to present a claim that is allowed to others under this chapter.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 1049, Sec. 57, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.

Sec. 16.023. TACKING OF SUCCESSIVE INTERESTS. To satisfy a limitations period, peaceable and adverse possession does not need to continue in the same person, but there must be privity of estate between each holder and his successor.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.024. ADVERSE POSSESSION: THREE-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD. A person must bring suit to recover real property held by another in peaceable and adverse possession under title or color of title not later than three years after the day the cause of action accrues.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.025. ADVERSE POSSESSION: FIVE-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD. (a) A person must bring suit not later than five years after the day the cause of action accrues to recover real property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who:

(1) cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property;

(2) pays applicable taxes on the property; and

(3) claims the property under a duly registered deed.

(b) This section does not apply to a claim based on a forged deed or a deed executed under a forged power of attorney.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.026. ADVERSE POSSESSION: 10-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD. (a) A person must bring suit not later than 10 years after the day the cause of action accrues to recover real property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property.

(b) Without a title instrument, peaceable and adverse possession is limited in this section to 160 acres, including improvements, unless the number of acres actually enclosed exceeds 160. If the number of enclosed acres exceeds 160 acres, peaceable and adverse possession extends to the real property actually enclosed.

(c) Peaceable possession of real property held under a duly registered deed or other memorandum of title that fixes the boundaries of the possessor's claim extends to the boundaries specified in the instrument.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 764, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1989.

Sec. 16.027. ADVERSE POSSESSION: 25-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD NOTWITHSTANDING DISABILITY. A person, regardless of whether the person is or has been under a legal disability, must bring suit not later than 25 years after the day the cause of action accrues to recover real property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.028. ADVERSE POSSESSION WITH RECORDED INSTRUMENT: 25-YEAR LIMITATIONS PERIOD. (a) A person, regardless of whether the person is or has been under a legal disability, may not maintain an action for the recovery of real property held for 25 years before the commencement of the action in peaceable and adverse possession by another who holds the property in good faith and under a deed or other instrument purporting to convey the property that is recorded in the deed records of the county where any part of the real property is located.

(b) Adverse possession of any part of the real property held under a recorded deed or other recorded instrument that purports to convey the property extends to and includes all of the property described in the instrument, even though the instrument is void on its face or in fact.

(c) A person who holds real property and claims title under this section has a good and marketable title to the property regardless of a disability arising at any time in the adverse claimant or a person claiming under the adverse claimant.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.029. EVIDENCE OF TITLE TO LAND BY LIMITATIONS. (a) In a suit involving title to real property that is not claimed by this state, it is prima facie evidence that the title to the property has passed from the person holding apparent record title to an opposing party if it is shown that:

(1) for one or more years during the 25 years preceding the filing of the suit the person holding apparent record title to the property did not exercise dominion over or pay taxes on the property; and

(2) during that period the opposing parties and those whose estate they own have openly exercised dominion over and have asserted a claim to the land and have paid taxes on it annually before becoming delinquent for as long as 25 years.

(b) This section does not affect a statute of limitations, a right to prove title by circumstantial evidence under the case law of this state, or a suit between a trustee and a beneficiary of the trust.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.030. TITLE THROUGH ADVERSE POSSESSION. (a) If an action for the recovery of real property is barred under this chapter, the person who holds the property in peaceable and adverse possession has full title, precluding all claims.

(b) A person may not acquire through adverse possession any right or title to real property dedicated to public use.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.031. ENCLOSED LAND. (a) A tract of land that is owned by one person and that is entirely surrounded by land owned, claimed, or fenced by another is not considered enclosed by a fence that encloses any part of the surrounding land.

(b) Possession of the interior tract by the owner or claimant of the surrounding land is not peaceable and adverse possession as described by Section 16.026 unless:

(1) the interior tract is separated from the surrounding land by a fence; or

(2) at least one-tenth of the interior tract is cultivated and used for agricultural purposes or is used for manufacturing purposes.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.032. ADJACENT LAND. Possession of land that belongs to another by a person owning or claiming 5,000 or more fenced acres that adjoin the land is not peaceable and adverse as described by Section 16.026 unless:

(1) the land is separated from the adjacent enclosed tract by a substantial fence;

(2) at least one-tenth of the land is cultivated and used for agricultural purposes or used for manufacturing purposes; or

(3) there is actual possession of the land.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Sec. 16.033. TECHNICAL DEFECTS IN INSTRUMENT. (a) A person with a right of action for the recovery of real property or an interest in real property conveyed by an instrument with one of the following defects must bring suit not later than two years after the day the instrument was filed for record with the county clerk of the county where the real property is located:

(1) lack of the signature of a proper corporate officer, partner, or company officer, manager, or member;

(2) lack of a corporate seal;

(3) failure of the record to show the corporate seal used;

(4) failure of the record to show authority of the board of directors or stockholders of a corporation, partners of a partnership, or officers, managers, or members of a company;

(5) execution and delivery of the instrument by a corporation, partnership, or other company that had been dissolved, whose charter had expired, or whose franchise had been canceled, withdrawn, or forfeited;

(6) acknowledgment of the instrument in an individual, rather than a representative or official, capacity;

(7) execution of the instrument by a trustee without record of the authority of the trustee or proof of the facts recited in the instrument;

(8) failure of the record or instrument to show an acknowledgment or jurat that complies with applicable law; or

(9) wording of the stated consideration that may or might create an implied lien in favor of the grantor.

(b) This section does not apply to a forged instrument.

(c) For the purposes of this section, an instrument affecting real property containing a ministerial defect, omission, or informality in the certificate of acknowledgment that has been filed for record for longer than two years in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the property is located is considered to have been lawfully recorded and to be notice of the existence of the instrument on and after the date the instrument is filed.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 291, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1993.

Amended by:

Acts 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., Ch. 819, Sec. 1, eff. June 15, 2007.

Sec. 16.034. ATTORNEY'S FEES. (a) In a suit for the possession of real property between a person claiming under record title to the property and one claiming by adverse possession, if the prevailing party recovers possession of the property from a person unlawfully in actual possession, the court:

(1) shall award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party if the court finds that the person unlawfully in actual possession made a claim of adverse possession that was groundless and made in bad faith; and

(2) may award costs and reasonable attorney's fees to the prevailing party in the absence of a finding described by Subdivision (1).

(b) To recover attorney's fees, the person seeking possession must give the person unlawfully in possession a written demand for that person to vacate the premises. The demand must be given by registered or certified mail at least 10 days before filing the claim for recovery of possession.

(c) The demand must state that if the person unlawfully in possession does not vacate the premises within 10 days and a claim is filed by the person seeking possession, the court may enter a judgment against the person unlawfully in possession for costs and attorney's fees in an amount determined by the court to be reasonable.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985.

Amended by:

Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 901, Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2009.

Sec. 16.035. LIEN ON REAL PROPERTY. (a) A person must bring suit for the recovery of real property under a real property lien or the foreclosure of a real property lien not later than four years after the day the cause of action accrues.

(b) A sale of real property under a power of sale in a mortgage or deed of trust that creates a real property lien must be made not later than four years after the day the cause of action accrues.

(c) The running of the statute of limitations is not suspended against a bona fide purchaser for value, a lienholder, or a lessee who has no notice or knowledge of the suspension of the limitations period and who acquires an interest in the property when a cause of action on an outstanding real property lien has accrued for more than four years, except as provided by:

(1) Section 16.062, providing for suspension in the event of death; or

(2) Section 16.036, providing for recorded extensions of real property liens.

(d) On the expiration of the four-year limitations period, the real property lien and a power of sale to enforce the real property lien become void.

(e) If a series of notes or obligations or a note or obligation payable in installments is secured by a real property lien, the four-year limitations period does not begin to run until the maturity date of the last note, obligation, or installment.

(f) The limitations period under this section is not affected by Section 3.118, Business & Commerce Code.

(g) In this section, "real property lien" means:

(1) a superior title retained by a vendor in a deed of conveyance or a purchase money note; or

(2) a vendor's lien, a mortgage, a deed of trust, a voluntary mechanic's lien, or a voluntary materialman's lien on real estate, securing a note or other written obligation.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 219, Sec. 1, eff. May 23, 1997.

Sec. 16.036. EXTENSION OF REAL PROPERTY LIEN. (a) The party or parties primarily liable for a debt or obligation secured by a real property lien, as that term is defined in Section 16.035, may suspend the running of the four-year limitations period for real property liens through a written extension agreement as provided by this section.

(b) The limitations period is suspended and the lien remains in effect for four years after the extended maturity date of the debt or obligation if the extension agreement is:

(1) signed and acknowledged as provided by law for a deed conveying real property; and

(2) filed for record in the county clerk's office of the county where the real property is located.

(c) The parties may continue to extend the lien by entering, acknowledging, and recording additional extension agreements.

(d) The maturity date stated in the original instrument or in the date of the recorded renewal and extension is conclusive evidence of the maturity date of the debt or obligation.

(e) The limitations period under this section is not affected by Section 3.118, Business & Commerce Code.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 219, Sec. 2, eff. May 23, 1997.

Sec. 16.037. EFFECT OF EXTENSION OF REAL PROPERTY LIEN ON THIRD PARTIES. An extension agreement is void as to a bona fide purchaser for value, a lienholder, or a lessee who deals with real property affected by a real property lien without actual notice of the agreement and before the agreement is acknowledged, filed, and recorded.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 959, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1985. Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 219, Sec. 3, eff. May 23, 1997.

The English Law of Texas

Compiled by Bob Hurt, 7 February 2012

Lawrence M. Friedman A History of American Law: Third Edition (2005), p. 115-116,

http://books.google.com/books?id=JndnEiydTiYC&lpg=PA115&ots=gvUWsPSmTe&dq=1840%20texas%20adopts%20common%20law%20of%20england&pg=PA117#v=onepage&q=1840%20texas%20adopts%20common%20law%20of%20england&f=false

… The Texas government later enacted a form of trial by jury, but not exactly in the American mold. [Edward L. Markham Jr., "The Reception of the Common Law of England in Texas and the Judicial Attitude Toward That Reception, 1840 -1859." 29 Texas L. Rev. 904 ( 1951 ).".] The constitution of the republic of Texas (1836), in its declaration of rights, affirmed the right of an accused "to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury. ... And the right or trial by jury shall remain inviolate."

The Texas Constitution also contemplated wholesale adoption of the common law. "Congress," it said, "shall, as early as practicable, introduce, by statute, the common law of England, with such modifications as our circumstances, in their judgment, may require" (art. IV, sec. 13). But Texas never really ''received "English law in any literal or classical sense. Rather, the republic adopted a Texas subdialect of the American dialect of law. There was thoroughgoing acceptance of trial by jury, "that ever-to-be prized system of jurisprudence," as the supreme court of Texas called it in 1840. [Edward v. Peoples, Dallam 359, 360 (Tex., 1840).] From the very start, however, court organization and procedure merged law and equity. The constitution of 1845 specifically gave to the district courts jurisdiction "of all suits ... without regard to any distinction between law and equity." [Art IV, Sec. 10 – Joseph W. McKnight] In 1840, the civil law was formally abolished; but Texas never fell under the yoke of common-law pleading in all its rigor. Rather, Texas retained "as heretofore" the civil law system of "petition and answer." Procedure was, in short, a kind of hybrid system. Judges and lawyers, in the early years, seemed genuinely ambivalent about which orf the two rival had the edge. On the one hand, civil law was strange and unfamiliar to most lawyers. The law of 1840, since it kept some aspects of civil law pleading, put courts in the position (as one judge said) of searching for "principles and criteria in a language generally unknown to us." This brought about "constant perplexities," which annoyed and delayed the courts "at each step." [Whiting v. Turley, Dallam 453, 455 (Tex., 1842)] Yet another Texas judge condemned common-law pleading as "Bold, crafty, and unscrupulous."[Long v. Anderson, 4 Tex 422, 424 (1849).] Still, a third judge took a middle view:

The object of our statutes on the subject of pleading is to simplify as much as possible that branch of the proceedings in courts, which by the ingenuity and learning of both common and civil law lawyers and judges had become so refined in its subtleties as to substitute in many instances the shadow for the substance.

Hamiton v. Black, Dallam 586, 587 (Tex. . 1844).

In the long run, the common law was bound to win. The civil law tradition was too alien and inaccessible to survive. But the practice in Texas did undermine the idea that strict common law pleading was either natural or desirable. What resulted was a procedure that used common law terms and some common law attitudes, but in a more streamlined and rational way. Peripheral Texas was, in short, free to do what other states could do only by breaking with habit and tradition. But in Texas, divergences from the common law did not look like reform; they looked like civil law survivals. In a sense there were; what survived, however, survived because it suited the needs and wants of Texas jurists.

Chunks of civil law also remained imbedded in the substantive law of Texas as well. Texas recognizes the holographic will-an un-witnessed will in the dead person's handwriting. Texas has also kept the community property system; indeed, Texas gave the system constitutional recognition. [Texas Const., 1845, art. VII, sec. 19.] Texas shares these "survivals" with Louisiana, and with a number of states carved out of Mexican territory, notably California. That these institutions lived on, despite the terrific pressure for common law, indicates either that they were tightly sewn in to the social fabric, or that they fulfilled some unique social function. The holographic will, for example, invited ordinary people to make wills by themselves, without consulting lawyers. The community property system, too, may have suited the facts of family life better than common law rules of marital. In fact, the common law rules were themselves in process of change.

Louisiana was the only solid, durable enclave of civil law. Here America swallowed up a territory with a sizeable population, a population centered in New Orleans, that was used to civil law forms. But Louisiana itself was in a state of great confusion. Its brand of civil law was a far cry from the elegance and system we associate with the civil law in nineteenth century .Europe. At the time of the Louisiana Purchase, Louisiana law was an arcane, bewildering hodgepodge of French and Spanish law, a melange of codes, customs, and doc trines of various ages. The French had settled Louisiana. but rhe Spanish had governed it from 1766 to 1803. Louisiana law was as baffling as the common law at its worst. Its "babel" of legislation, according to Edward Livingston , was only equaled by the "Dissonances" of the Court of Pleas, “where American Shopkeepers, French planters and Spanish clerks sit on the same bench ," listening to "American Attorneys, French procureurs and Castillian Abogados," each speaking his own language. [Quoted in George Dargo, Jefferson’s Louisiana: Politics and the Clash of Legal Traditions (1975), p. 112.]

Texas State Historical Association

The Handbook of Texas Online

Excerpt from article on LAW.. paragraph 3

http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/jzlph

In 1836 the Republic of Texas adopted the Anglo-American common law of crimes with jury trial. Those rules were the basis of the Penal Code of 1856, and criminal law has since been governed by statutes along with the safeguards of the United States and Texas constitutions. The nonstatutory, civil common law of Texas has been developed since the republic adopted "the common law of England as the rule of decision" in 1840. "Common law" was understood to include such matters as obligations arising by agreement (contracts) and those arising by injury (torts), as well as claims to property (lands as well as chattels), the status of citizens (such as marriage, divorce, welfare of children, corporations, and partnerships), and that body of legal doctrine embraced within the English concept of equity. Many of those rules have been put in an authoritative form by act of the legislature, while others have not. If codification has occurred, the legislative rules are interpreted by the courts and amplified by judicial decisions. Principles of law that are not codified are found in judicial decisions and learned writings. Only decisions of appellate courts designated to be published are looked to as sources of common law, and only about 20 percent of appellate decisions are so designated by the appellate courts deciding them.

http://www.texasslaveryproject.org/sources/TTR/display.php?f=TSP0065.xml

"Untitled," Telegraph and Texas Register, April 8, 1840

Summary: Printed the text of a new law passed by the Texas Congress. First, the law stated that English common law would henceforth reign in the territory and most of the laws passed before 1836 were now null and void. The rest of the law dealt with marriage rights. Interestingly, the new law gave women many rights to property both in and out of marriage, although husbands still had control of most of the property within marriage.

An act to adopt the common law of England, to repeal certain Mexican laws, and to regulate the marital rights of parties.

SEC. 2 Be it further enacted, That all laws in force in this republic, prior to the first of September, one thousand eight hundred and thirty six (except the laws of the consultation and provisional government, now in force, and except such laws as relate exclusively to grants and the colonization of lands in the state of Coahuila and Texas, and also such laws as relate to the reservation of islands and lands, and also of salt lakes, licks and salt springs, mines and minerals of every description, made by the general and state governments) be, and the same are hereby repealed.

SEC. 3. Be it further enacted, That neither the lands nor slaves which the wife may own, or to which she may have any right, title or claim at the time of her marriage, nor the lands nor slaves to which she may acquire, during the coverture, any right title or claim, by gift, devise or descent, nor the increase of such slaves in each case, nor the paraphernalia as defined at common law, which the wife may have at the time of the marriage, or which she may acquire during the coverture as aforesaid, shall, by virtue of the marriage, become the property of the husband, but shall remain the separate property of the wife; Provided, however, that during the continuance of the marriage, the husband shall have the sole management of such lands and slaves.

SEC. 4. Be it further enacted, That all property which the husband or wife may bring into the marriage, except land and slaves and the wife's paraphernalia, and all the property acquired during the marriage, except such land or slaves, or their increase as may be acquired by either party, by gift, devise or descent, and except also the wife's paraphernalia, acquired as aforesaid, and during the time aforesaid, shall be the common property of the husband and wife, and during the coverture may be sold or otherwise disposed of by the husband only; it shall be first liable for all the debts contracted by the husband during the marriage, and for debts contracted by the wife for necessaries during the same time; and upon the dissolution of the marriage, by death, after the payment of all such debts, the remainder of such common property shall go to the survivor, if the deceased have no descendant or descendants; but if the deceased have a descendant or descendants, the survivor shall have one half of such common property, and the other half shall pass to the descendant or decendants of the deceased.

SEC. 5 Be it further enacted, That parties intending to enter into the marriage state, may enter into what stipulations they please, provided they be not contrary to good morals, or to some rule of law, and in no case shall they enter into any agreement, or make any renunciation, the object of which would be to alter the legal orders of descent either with respect to themselves in what concerns the inheritance of their children or posterity which either may have by any other person, or in respect to their common children--nor shall they make any valid agreement to impair the legal rights of the husband over the person of the wife, or the persons of their common children.

SEC. 6. Be it further enacted, That every matrimonial agreement must be made by an act before a notary public and two witnesses; the minor capable of contracting matrimony, may give his or her consent to any agreement which this contract is susceptible of; provided, such agreement be made by the written consent of both parents, if both be living; if not, by that of the survivor; if both be dead, then by the written consent of the minor's guardian.

SEC 7. Be it further enacted, That no matrimonial agreement shall be altered after the celebration of the marriage.

SEC. 8. Be it further enacted, That when the wife, by a marriage contract, may reserve to herself any property or rights to property (whether such rights be in esse[sic] or expectancy) for such reservation to be valid as to the subsequent purchasers or creditors of her husband, the said contract must be acknowledged by her husband or proved by at least one witness, and recorded in the clerk's office of the county court of the aounty[sic] in which said married parties may reside.

SEC. 9 Be it further enacted, That the husband may sue either alone or jointly with his wife, for the recovery of any effects of the wife, and in case he fail or neglect so to do, she may, by the authority of the court, sue for such effects in her name.

SEC. 10. Be it further enacted, That should the husband refuse or fail to support his wife, from the proceeds of the lands or slaves she may have, or fail to educate her children as the fortune of the wife would justify, she may in either case complain to the county court, who, upon satisfactory proof shall decree, that so much of such proceeds shall be paid to the wife for the support of herself and for the nurture and education of her children, as the court may deem necessary.

SEC. 11. Be it further enacted, That if, during the coverture, a sale of any of the lands or slaves of the wife be illegally effected, no limitation shall commence to run during the coverture; and should the wife survive the dissolution of the marriage, she may sue for and recover such property; should the wife survive the dissolution, but not the time allowed by the law of limitations, then the running of such law shall cease till all the children of the deceased mother shall have arrived at the age of majority, or those under that age shall have married, and the heirs of the wife shall have the unexpired time allowed by the law of limitations, within which to institute their suit for the recovery of said property; and if the wife shall not survive the dissolution of the marriage, the law of limitations shall not commence running, as to the children of the deceased mother, until all the children shall have arrived at the age of majority, or those under that age shall have married.

SEC. 12. Be it further enacted, That all the effects which both the husband and wife reciprocally possess at the time the marriage may be dissolved, shall be regarded as common effects or gains, unless the contrary be satisfactorily proved.

SEC 13. Be it further enacted, That marriages that may be entered into in this republic after the passage of this law, shall be governed by the provisions of the same. The marital rights of persons married in other countries, who may remove here after the passage of this act, shall, in regard to property acquired in this republic during the marriage, be regulated by the provisions of the same. The marital rights of persons married here before the passage of this act, or of persons married in another country, who removed here before its passage, shall be regulated by the law as it aforetime was

DAVID S. KAUFMAN,

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

DAVID G. BURNET,

President of the Senate.

Approved 20th January, 1840,

MIRABEAU B LAMAR.

Source Copy Consulted: "Untitled," Telegraph and Texas Register, April 8, 1840, p. 1

Bob Hurt's Florida Loyalty Oaths interview appears on YouTube

2012-02-04T04:48:00.001-05:00

Check out the interview with Bob Hurt (yes, this one) on YouTube regarding Loyalty Oaths in Florida.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0iObngBqTs&feature=colike

Get the report at

http://bobhurt.com/articles/law%20-%20Loyalty%20Oaths%20in%20Florida.pdf

If you like the interview, share it on facebook, twitter, etc., and share with your mailing lists.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t • Blogs: 1 2 3 • Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 • 727 669 5511

***

Florida Evidence Code requires ORIGINAL negotiabler instrument

2012-01-20T17:45:00.000-05:00

Guess What, Florida foreclosure defense fans?

The Florida evidence code prohibits admission of a COPY of the MORTGAGE NOTE into evidence.

90.952 Requirement of originals.—Except as otherwise provided by statute, an original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove the contents of the writing, recording, or photograph.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379.

90.953 Admissibility of duplicates.—A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original, unless:

(1) The document or writing is a negotiable instrument as defined in s. 673.1041, a security as defined in s. 678.1021, or any other writing that evidences a right to the payment of money, is not itself a security agreement or lease, and is of a type that is transferred by delivery in the ordinary course of business with any necessary endorsement or assignment.

(2) A genuine question is raised about the authenticity of the original or any other document or writing.

(3) It is unfair, under the circumstance, to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.

History.—s. 1, ch. 76-237; s. 1, ch. 77-77; s. 22, ch. 78-361; s. 1, ch. 78-379; s. 57, ch. 92-82; s. 29, ch. 99-2.

Compare this to the corresponding Federal Rules of Evidence:

RULE 1002. REQUIREMENT OF THE ORIGINAL

An original writing, recording, or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a federal statute provides otherwise.

RULE 1003. ADMISSIBILITY OF DUPLICATES

A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate.

This difference appears to give Florida Foreclosure defenders an opportunity to denounce a copy of a note as admissible, even though the borrower made a stream of payments on a note the borrower THOUGHT existed (but which did not in fact exist).

However, in Florida, the Court may reestablish an original under certain circumstances:

71.011 Reestablishment of papers, records, and files.—All papers, written or printed, of any kind whatsoever, and the records and files of any official, court or public office, may be reestablished in the manner hereinafter provided.

(1) WHO MAY reestablish.—Any person interested in the paper, file or record to be reestablished may reestablish it.

(2) VENUE.—If reestablishment is sought of a record or file, venue is in the county where the record or file existed before its loss or destruction. If it is a private paper, venue is in the county where any person affected thereby lives or if such persons are nonresidents of the state, then in any county in which the person seeking the reestablishment desires.

(3) REMEDY CONCURRENT.—Nothing herein shall prevent the reestablishment of lost papers, records and files at common law or in equity in the usual manner.

(4) EFFECT.—

(a) Any paper, record or file reestablished has the effect of the original. A private paper has such effect immediately on recording the judgment reestablishing it, but a reestablished record does not have that effect until recorded and a reestablished paper or file of any official, court or public officer does not have that effect until a certified copy is filed with the official or in the court or public office where the original belonged. A certified copy of any reestablished paper, the original of which is required or authorized by law to be recorded, may be recorded.

(b) When any deed forming a link in a chain of title to land in this state has been placed on the proper record without having been acknowledged or proven for record and has thereafter been lost or destroyed, certified copies of the record of the deed as so recorded may be received as evidence toreestablish the deed if the deed has been so recorded for 20 years.

(5) COMPLAINT.—A person desiring to establish any paper, record or file, except when otherwise provided, shall file a complaint in chancery setting forth that the paper, record or file has been lost or destroyed and is not in the custody or control of the petitioner, the time and manner of loss or destruction, that a copy attached is a substantial copy of that lost or destroyed, that the persons named in the complaint are the only persons known to plaintiff who are interested for or against suchreestablishment.

History.—s. 5, Nov. 21, 1829; s. 12, ch. 1369, 1862; s. 2, ch. 3019, 1877; RS 1523-1527, 1533; s. 1, ch. 5162, 1903; GS 1978-1982, 1997; RGS 3246-3250, 3265; CGL 5054-5058, 5073; s. 7, ch. 22858, 1945; s. 24, ch. 67-254.

Note.—Former ss. 71.01-71.06.

Foreclosure defenders sometimes get hoodwinked by plaintiffs with this effort to enforce a lost note:

673.3091 Enforcement of lost, destroyed, or stolen instrument.—

(1) A person not in possession of an instrument is entitled to enforce the instrument if:

(a) The person seeking to enforce the instrument was entitled to enforce the instrument when loss of possession occurred, or has directly or indirectly acquired ownership of the instrument from a person who was entitled to enforce the instrument when loss of possession occurred;

(b) The loss of possession was not the result of a transfer by the person or a lawful seizure; and

(c) The person cannot reasonably obtain possession of the instrument because the instrument was destroyed, its whereabouts cannot be determined, or it is in the wrongful possession of an unknown person or a person that cannot be found or is not amenable to service of process.

(2) A person seeking enforcement of an instrument under subsection (1) must prove the terms of the instrument and the person's right to enforce the instrument. If that proof is made, s. 673.3081applies to the case as if the person seeking enforcement had produced the instrument. The court may not enter judgment in favor of the person seeking enforcement unless it finds that the person required to pay the instrument is adequately protected against loss that might occur by reason of a claim by another person to enforce the instrument. Adequate protection may be provided by any reasonable means.

History.—s. 2, ch. 92-82; s. 1, ch. 2004-3.

Ask yourself whether you, as judge, would enforce a non-existent note that you could not lawfully admit into evidence.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t •
Blogs: 1 2 3 •
Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •
727 669 5511

***

ACT NOW IF YOU WANT TO DEFEAT U.S. Senate Bill # S.968 "Internet Takeover" Act

2012-01-15T15:44:00.001-05:00

Do you think the government won’t take over the internet?? Congresspersons have NOTHING TO FEAR FROM YOU. You can allow them to get away with murder You will get what you allow. Act NOW to defeat this bill.

U.S. Senate Bill # S.968 -

Protect Intellectual Property Act of 2011 -

“Internet Takeover” Bill

Overview: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-s968/show

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_IP_Act

Read the Act: http://leahy.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/BillText-PROTECTIPAct.pdf

This bill purports to block access to internet web sites that infringe on intellectual property rights, and make it easier for copyright owners to sue infringers. That could include people who give or sell access to users, or users who access, copyrighted items – any unpermitted distribution or use of photos, articles, web pages, letters, messages, movies, books, articles, compilations, designs, ANYTHING ANYONE creates, writes, composes, draws, or produces. Examples include your favorite download sites and content. As a result of this, prices for intellectual property will skyrocket. While this might allow starving artists to get by a little better, it will enrich media moguls and artists with big marketing machines behind them. If you aren’t a Communist, you won’t mind this at all. But if you believe in some balance to Capitalism, you won’t like it.

And of course, this will have zero effect on international pirates. They will get away with distributing unlicensed copyright material, but the US Government will stop you from accessing it.

While this might seem good, consider the other side: the US Government has already used bogus, oppressive laws to shut down anti-IRS and other anti-government web sites. As always, it will expand this anti infringement law to abuse the innocent truth-seeker and purveyor of truth.

Bottom line, we already have sufficiently powerful copyright infringement laws. Anybody can sue, and government can arrest, a copyright infringer, including those who pirate software and music. And Government makes a monumental number of arrests and already captures and destroys millions upon millions of dollars’ worth of pirated products, from Luis Viton bags to Fifty-Cent music CDs to Microsoft Office and Windows. So what need have we of stronger laws?

None, in my opinion. Since government can already shut down web sites under false pretexts, why does it need a more pervasive law? Answer: It doesn’t.

I want you to stop and look at this issue from the analog view point. You buy a sandwich made from an unlicensed copyrighted recipe. A government agent snatches it out of your hand just as you start to take a bite of it. Same difference.

This act will force internet pirates to go deeper underground. Users will start using TOR and ONION to hide their IP address from which they access pirate sites. Users will switch to ever more devious Peer-to-Peer (P2P) sharing mechanisms like the original Napster that has now become commercial and “legal” – just another internet merchant for copyrighted content.

Even worse, I believe the Government will use the act to justify further political oppression. Remember the 60 Minutes report about “Sovereign Citizens” a few months back in which it falsely accused Jerry and Joe Kane of murder and showed concocted video? THAT political oppression portrayed legitimate patriots as violent enemies of America, causing the ignorant general public to distrust all patriots. I believe the Government will use this Act wrongly to further punish and demean political dissenters.

Even worse, this Act will give Government the authority to invade privacy via internet in an effort to ensnare copyright infringers. That could mean it could plant bugs in YOUR computer via viruses, and report on all your upload/download activities.

So, DON’T write to your senators and tell them to defeat this onerous bill, AT YOUR OWN PERIL.

Anyway, a recent blurb Chris Summers sent me says this:

“The final U. S. Senate vote on the internet takeover bill is set for January 24th. As of right now, that bill, which gives U. S. Attorney General Eric Holder the power of an "Internet Czar,” WILL PASS. Please send faxes to every Member of the U.S. Senate, and demand that they filibuster S. 968, the Senate version of the internet takeover bill.

“Unfortunately, the American people are not paying attention to this catastrophe that is unfolding in the U. S. Senate. We only have a few days to stop this unconstitutional power grab. We must bombard the Senate with faxes, RIGHT NOW!

“This bill will give corrupt U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder the power to blacklist or shut down any website or forum that is merely accused of being linked to "online piracy”.

“He will even have the authority to "sanitize” the results of internet searches on Google or Yahoo, so that only government-approved websites and information can be found online.

“If this bill passes, Barack Hussein Obama will have to the ability to ban the campaign websites of his opponents, shut down the online activities of anti-Obama groups like USJF, and harass tea party forums and any other websites that don't support him.

“Please fax the U. S. Senate now. This bill WILL PASS unless the American people overwhelm the Senate with faxes!

“And, while you are at it, please forward this email to everyone ... The FINAL U. S. Senate vote is scheduled for January 24th. We don't have much time!

“If this bill passes, the Obama Administration won't need a court order. There will be no hearings or trials.

“Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., will seize incredible control over the internet, and we will be nearly powerless to stop him.

“Although supporters of the bill say that it is designed to prevent online piracy, this is an internet takeover bill, pure and simple. Just one "complaint” from a liberal activist, or a government agent, that you are indirectly violating an obscure copyright rule, and your website could be fined huge sums, and it could be blacklisted from the internet.

“Just imagine if Google was prohibited from displaying websites that were critical of Barack Obama, that discussed the controversy over where he was born, or that mentioned the damage that his policies are doing to the economy.

“Well, that is exactly what will ultimately happen if S.968 passes, and it is signed into law.

“Many of this bill's provisions are modeled on Communist China's censorship law, called the "Great Firewall of China.” Even the socialists in the European Parliament oppose this new American law. That is how extreme S.968 is!

“S.968 already has 40 co-sponsors in the U.S. Senate. Eleven more votes and it passes!

“Please fax every U. S. Senator NOW.

“Extreme liberals like Chuck Schumer and Al Franken have teamed up with Republicans like John McCain and Lindsey Graham to ram this bill into law.

“They are being helped by millions of dollars in campaign contributions from left-wing mainstream media companies.

“They want the government to shut down all the blogs and political forums, and all of the independent news sites, so that they, once again, will have a monopoly on the news that you and I are allowed to see.

“This threat against free speech is so grave and so imminent that websites like Google and Yahoo are seriously considering staging a last-ditch online protest to try to stop Mr. Obama and his Congressional allies!

“Please, fax every Member of the U. S. Senate NOW, and please forward this email to all of your friends, urging them to do the same.

“This bill WILL PASS unless you take action TODAY. And, while you are at it, please add to the effectiveness of your faxes by personally calling your U.S. Senators' offices at 202-224-3121. Tell him, or her, to STOP S. 968, the internet takeover bill (not that they give a hoot as they already are committing treason )

“The final vote is January 24th. We only have days remaining to save free speech on the internet!

Sincerely,

Gary G. Kreep, Esq.

Executive Director

United States Justice Foundation

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t •
Blogs: 1 2 3 •
Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •
727 669 5511

***

Supertonic for the Winter Seasons

2012-01-14T18:11:00.000-05:00

A Supertonic for the Winter Seasons

By Bob Hurt 14 January 2012

Yesterday I made a jug of supertonic mash and set it aside to cure for a few days. I thought I’d write and explain it for you. You might find it useful.

I found out about the supertonic from reading herbalist Dr. John Christopher’s work, and first tried it out about 10 or 15 years ago at my friend Ron Radstrom’s workshop at Southern Botanicals, 611d South Myrtle, Clearwater, Florida.

Supertonic tastes good, and it’s good for you. It contains vegetables and vinegar. It can keep you healthy by boosting your immune function and alkalizing your body.

I make it myself at home in my Vitamix blender, then use the supertonic and remaining pulp till gone, then I make another batch.

1. Equipment

a. Cutting board

b. Sharp knife

c. Rubbery spatula

d. Quart or half-gallon glass jar. I sometimes use plastic.

e. Pint Jar

f. Pint bottle (okay to use left over vinegar bottle)

g. 2-ounce bottle with eye dropper

h. Fine mesh nylon knit bag or lady’s nylon stocking

i. Vitamix or other high speed blender

j. Quart bowl

2. Ingredients – raw, fresh, organic

a. 1 pint Bragg’s Apple Cider Vinegar

b. 1 medium white (Bermuda) onion

c. 5 fat cloves garlic

d. 3 habanero peppers

e. 4-inch stalk of horseradish root 2” thick

f. 4-inch stalk of ginger root

g. 10-inch stalk of burdock root 1” thick

h. Extra virgin Olive, or other good quality, palatable oil

3. Process

a. Scrub root vegetables to remove all dirt

b. Rinse pepper

c. Peel and cut into chunks: onion and garlic

d. Slice all root vegetables into 1/8” cross sections – you do this to keep from overworking the blender

i. Variation: salt fermentation

ii. Finely chop all solid ingredients by hand, or in blender or food processor

iii. Toss chopped ingredients thoroughly with 1 tsp salt

iv. Put salted dry ingredients into a half gallon jar

v. Screw lid on jar but do not tighten, or cover jar with cheese cloth and rubber band

vi. Allow ingredients to ferment for 7 to 10 days, shaking them or stirring daily

e. Put solid ingredients into blender

f. Pour the vinegar into the blender

g. Puree at high speed for three minutes

h. Pour resulting mash into washed, clean quart or half gallon jar

i. Put lid on jar and store away from sunlight

j. Let sit for one week in cool dark place, shaking it daily

k. Pour mash into nylon bag or stocking

l. Gently work the bag by squeezing the pulp to extract the supertonic juice into the bowl.

m. Pour supertonic juice into the vinegar bottle, and Mark it SUPERTONIC, with the date.

n. From that supertonic bottle, fill the 2-ounce dropper bottle.

o. Store the SUPERTONIC bottles in cool, dark place.

p. Put the pulp in the bowl, add olive oil and salt, and stir into a paste.

q. Put the pulp into a jar and label it KAPOW with the date.

r. Refrigerate the Kapow.

4. Usage

a. Supertonic

i. Put 2 dropperfuls under the tongue daily as a tonic.

ii. I suggest two tablespoons a day for general health

iii. Put 1 dropperful under the tongue every hour during colds, flu

iv. Salad dressing – mix 1 ounce supertonic with salt to taste, mix in herbs of choice, then add salad oil of choice

b. Kapow

i. Use as garnish for meat and vegetable dishes

ii. Use on sandwiches as a spread for flavor and nutrition

Note: Supertonic has a reputation of preventing one from getting the black plague. It also acts as a vaso-dilator to bring a person out of shock. And it serves as a tonic for boosting immune function, such as when one has a cold or the flu.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t •
Blogs: 1 2 3 •
Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •
727 669 5511

***

Foreclosure Defenders - Hammer Crooked Lenders with the FCIC Report

2012-01-02T20:27:00.001-05:00

This post was published to Bob Hurt's Blog at 8:01:21 PM 1/2/2012

Foreclosure Defenders – Hammer Crooked Lenders with the FCIC Report

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report Provides Key to Punishing Fraudulent Lenders in Court

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC)

From January 2010 to January 2011 the ten-member Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) subpoenaed and interviewed hundreds of witnesses and experts, including banking officials, to determine what caused the financial crisis of 2007 to 2010 that resulted in massive foreclosures, job loss, and collapse of housing values, and total loss of equity for tens of millions of homeowners.

The FCIC Report

The FCIC concluded with a huge, 662-page FCIC Report that implicated government and lenders in a conspiracy to enrich banks, their officers and shareholders at the expense of the American public, particularly homeowners.

The FCIC Report provides mortgagors with a tool for bashing lenders in court, but so far no successes with that tool have bubbled to the surface of the cauldron of foreclosure litigation. At the very least, mortgagors should use if rigorously if not forcibly to obtain reductions in the loan balance, typically the present value of the realty minus all paid-in equity, or to get their homes free and clear because of lender-government skullduggery.

The Mortgage Scam

Why should courts order this reduction? Simple. The report, as self-authenticating evidence, proves that lenders engaged in predatory practices, making loans they knew would go into default within 3 years, thereby causing a run on insurers of mortgages and derivatives, and a consequent collapse of homeowner equity and jobs. This would allow lenders to foreclose, buy back the house for a pittance at the foreclosure auction, and cause further hardship on government through FDIC and mortgage insurance claims.

The Scam Enablers: Our Terrifyingly Esteemed Courts

The scam indeed seems brilliant. But it only seems so because the courts keep supporting it and refusing to punish it. That makes the court even more criminally culpable than the original perpetrators. Why? Because the judges swore oaths to support the constitutions and to give injured parties (mortgagors as well as mortgagees) redress of injuries.

And Their Foreclosure Defense Attorney Allies

Maybe we could blame mortgagors’ attorneys for failing to use the FCIC Report as a sledge hammer to break the courts’ “slobbering love affair” with mortgagees. Foreclosure defense attorneys seem more keen on delaying the inevitable foreclosure while picking clients’ pockets of monthly mortgage payments for 6 to 24 months, typically. They don’t seem so keen on digging into the fraud, tortious conduct, contract breaches, conspiracy, and other violations underlying the mortgage. They seem almost universally to ignore the widespread tampering of loan applications by mortgage brokers that make an unqualified borrower seem qualified, and to ignore the incessant over-appraising of residential realty from 30% to 50% above actual value, to grease machinery of the residential real estate industry (mortgage brokers, realtors, appraisers, lenders, title companies, and sellers).

The Cheating

Thus, the mortgagor fails to make payments because of job loss or collapse of value below the loan balance. The mortgagor injures the mortgagee by non-payment, but first the mortgagee injured the mortgagor through widespread predatory lending practices that destroyed the value of the mortagor’s home and investment.

Bottom Line – Mortgagors Deserve Redress

Bottom line: the court should not give mortgagees redress to the extent of ignoring the mortgagor’s redress. The big difference: the mortgagor didn’t intend to cheat the mortgagee, but the mortgagee certainly intended to cheat the mortgagor. Lenders devised the mortgage and securitization system specifically for that purpose. They knew what would happen. The courts should hold mortgagees responsible before addressing failure to make mortgage payments.

Litigation Strategy – Defend though Vicious Attack

If you have not read the FCIC report, do it NOW, then supply it to the court as Exhibit One in your effort to obtain justice against the world-wide mortgage scam. If you have a home loan, consult a qualified personal injury attorney about suing your lender for the torts related to the FCIC report, AND for appraisal fraud, loan application fraud, and some of the many other violations, contract breaches, and abuses perpetrated by lenders in pursuit of “easy money.” If you lawyer won’t do it, dump that lawyer and find one who will.

And Declaratory Judgment to Straighten the Record

Mortgagors should seek redress through declaratory judgment, at the very least. Since the Government’s own FCIC Report proves the existence of the crime, then that makes government actors and lenders, operating in the fraudulent, treasonous mayhem of “Public Policy,” culpable for RICO violations - civil and criminal racketeering involving Presidents and financial planners of corporations like the United States government and banks. Even your Representative and Senators share culpability for stewing in ignorance and fiddling with trifles while “Rome burnt” to the ground.

Call to Action

I say foreclosure defense attorneys must pull their heads out of their bottoms and go for the deep pockets, stab with vicious, repeated, staccato litigation at the jugular veins of the scurrilous lenders of America through civil and criminal complaints against culpable lenders and INDIVIDUALS in government and other corporations responsible for the financial crisis that revealed itself through mortgage foreclosures and homeowner equity loss.

References

Here I provide Google’s top seven responses to the search request for the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report:

Get the Report : Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission

fcic.law.stanford.edu/report

To view the report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, you can download the report in full or download a section of the report by clicking on the links ... [PDF]

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission - GPO Access

www.gpoaccess.gov/fcic/fcic.pdf

You +1'd this publicly. Undo

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat
-4-color process CMYK. -gritty matte UV. THE. FINANCIAL. CRISIS. INQUIRYREPORT. THE. FINAN. CIAL. CRISIS. INQ. UIR. YR. EPOR. T. • OFFICIAL ...

You've visited this page 4 times. Last visit: 10/16/11

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crisis_Inquiry_Commission

[edit] Creation and statutory mandate. The Commission was created by section 5 of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-21), ...

What Caused the Financial Crisis? - Wall Street Journal

online.wsj.com/.../SB1000142405274870469800457610450052499...

Jan 27, 2011 – Today, six members of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission—created by the last Congress to investigate the causes of the financial ...

Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission's 10 Major Findings

www.huffingtonpost.com/.../financial-crisis-inquiry-commission-find...

Jan 27, 2011 – In a report released today, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commissionfound that "reckless" Wall Street firms, an abundance of cheap credit and ...

Financial Crisis Was Avoidable, Inquiry Concludes - NYTimes.com

www.nytimes.com/2011/01/26/business/economy/26inquiry.html

Jan 25, 2011 – While the panel, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, accuses several financial institutions of greed, ineptitude or both, some of its gravest ...

Bob Hurt: Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Report

bobhurt.blogspot.com/2011/.../financial-crisis-inquiry-commission.ht...

Mar 8, 2011 – The government issued its Financial Crisis Inquiry Commissionreport and posted it on the web.This report explains the financial crisis in gory ...

You shared this

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704698004576104500524998280.html

In a November 2009 article, Brookings Institution economists Martin Baily and Douglas Elliott describe the three common narratives about the financial crisis.

The first argues that the primary cause was government intervention in the housing market. This intervention, principally through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, inflated a housing bubble that triggered the crisis. This is the view expressed by one of our co-commissioners in a separate dissent.

The second narrative blames Wall Street and its influence in Washington. According to this narrative, greedy bankers knowingly manipulated the financial system and politicians in Washington to take advantage of homeowners and mortgage investors alike, intentionally jeopardizing the financial system while enjoying huge personal gains. That's the view of the six majority commissioners.

We subscribe to a third narrative—a messier story that emphasizes both global economic forces and failures in U.S. policy and supervision. Though our explanation of the crisis doesn't fit conveniently into the political order of Washington, we believe that it is far superior to the other two.

We recognize that the other two narratives have popular appeal: They each blame a clear entity, and thus outline a clear set of reform proposals. Had the government not supported housing subsidies (the first narrative) or had policy makers implemented more restrictive financial regulations (the second) there would have been no calamity.

Both of these views are incomplete and misleading. The existence of housing bubbles in a number of large countries, each with vastly different systems of housing finance, severely undercuts the thesis that the housing bubble was a phenomenon driven solely by the U.S. government. Likewise, the multitude of financial-firm failures, spanning varied organizational forms and differing regulatory regimes across the U.S. and Europe, makes it implausible that the crisis was the product of a small coterie of Wall Street bankers and their Washington bedfellows.

We believe the crisis was the product of 10 factors. Only when taken together can they offer a sufficient explanation of what happened:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/27/financial-crisis-inquiry-commission-findings_n_814935.html

The 662-page report, available online, and as a book, offers 10 main conclusions:

1. "This financial crisis was avoidable."
"Despite the expressed view of many on Wall Street and in Washington that the crisis could not have been foreseen or avoided, there were warning signs," the report reads."The tragedy was that they were ignored or discounted."

2. "Widespread failures in financial regulation and supervision proved devastating to the stability of the nation's financial markets."
"Securities and Exchange Commission could have required more capital and halted risky practices at the big investment banks. It did not," the report reads.
"The Federal Reserve Bank of New York and other regulators could have clamped down on Citigroup's excesses in the run-up to the crisis. They did not. Policy makers and regulators could have stopped the runaway mortgage securitization train. They did not.

3. "Dramatic failures of corporate governance and risk management at many systemically important financial institutions were a key cause of this crisis."
Financial institutions acted recklessly and depended too heavily on short term loans, the inquiry found. "Compensation systems--designed in an environment of cheap money, intense competition, and light regulation--too often rewarded the quick deal, the short-term gain--without proper consideration of long-term consequences," it reads.

4. "A combination of excessive borrowing, risky investments, and lack of transparency put the financial system on a collision course with crisis."
The inquiry found that in the years leading up to the crisis, American households, and institutions, borrowed too much and saved too little.
"When the housing and mortgage markets cratered, the lack of transparency, the extraordinary debt loads, the short-term loans, and the risky assets all came home to roost. What resulted was panic," the report reads. "We had reaped what we had sown."

5. "The government was ill prepared for the crisis, and its inconsistent response added to the uncertainty and panic in the financial markets."
Key government agencies, the Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve Board, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York were behind the curve, the report concluded.
"They were hampered because they did not have a clear grasp of the financial system they were charged with overseeing, particularly as it had evolved in the years leading up to the crisis."

6. "There was a systemic breakdown in accountability and ethics."
Many borrowers lied about being able to pay mortgages, lenders made loans they knew borrowers couldn't afford, the report said.

7. "Countrywide executives recognized that many of the loans they were originating could result in 'catastrophic consequences.' Less than a year later, they noted that certain high-risk loans they were making could result not only in foreclosures but also in 'financial and reputational catastrophe' for the firm. But they did not stop."

8. "Collapsing mortgage-lending standards and the mortgage securitization pipeline lit and spread the flame of contagion and crisis."
The report found irresponsible lending was prevalent, and there were warnings, but "the Federal Reserve neglected its mission," and mortgage lenders passed the risk along.
"From the speculators who flipped houses to the mortgage brokers who scouted the loans, to the lenders who issued the mortgages, to the financial firms that created the mortgage-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations... no one in this pipeline of toxic mortgages had enough skin in the game."

9. "Over-the-counter derivatives contributed significantly to this crisis..."
Speculating on devices like collateralized debt obligations fanned the flames, with everyone from farmers to corporations to investors betting on prices and loan defaults. When the housing bubble popped, these were at the center of the fallout.

10. "The failures of credit rating agencies were essential cogs in the wheel of financial destruction..."
But, the report found, those bets wouldn't have been possible without the seal of approval from ratings agencies.
"This crisis could not have happened without the rating agencies. Their ratings helped the market soar and their down- grades through 2007 and 2008 wreaked havoc across markets and firms," the report reads.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t •
Blogs: 1 2 3 •
Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate Learn
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 •
727 669 5511

***

Ashley Marie Hurt, BA, Summa Cum Laude

2011-12-17T09:43:00.002-05:00

That's right. My precious niece Ashley Marie Hurt (Ashley Hurt) just graduated from the University of Houston's prestigious School of Art, Summa cum Laude. That means she has once again become:

Cream of the Crop,
Top of the Ladder, and
Pick of the Litter

See more of Ashley Hurt at http://AshleyHurt.com. She's:

Smart,
Personable,
Professional,
Talented,
Team Player, and
GORGEOUS:

Ashley Hurt at 2

Ashley Hurt at 10

Ashley Hurt at 15

Ashley Hurt at 22

Norman Hurt at 62 and Ashley Hurt at 23

Ashley Hurt at 24

Ashley Hurt at 25

http://AshleyHurt.com Color Tag

If you need any of the following, contact Ashley Hurt through her web site right away:

Art Director (MA Studio Art, U of Houston, Summa cum Laude)
Studio Artist (High School through Art College)
Hair and Makeup Artist (licensed cosmetologist),
Fashion or Glamour Photographer (10 years freelance)
Costume Designer (10 years of Halloweens)
Restaurant Manager (4 years as server, manager in 2011)

To Steve Harvey: No More Jokes Denigrating Black Women

2011-11-29T15:41:00.000-05:00

I just sent the below message to Black comedian Steve Harvey via his web site:

******** To Steve Harvey *************

Steve, my wife announced to me this morning that she doesn't like you any more (in spite of enjoying you on the Family Feud show) because you make negative jokes about Black women.

I looked to see whether you married a white woman and discovered that your wife Marjorie looks, well, mostly white, lovely on top of that. So I guess it’s not a racial issue but one of your less-than-ideal experiences with your wives, girlfriends, and similar stories from friends. In other words, I told my wife, you have good reason to make jokes about your wretched experiences because it’s the only way you can face your past without committing suicide over your errors.

However, maybe you ought to look at the plight of Black women to get a more merciful, empathetic feeling. Why do so many act so angry? Let’s see... A huge percentage of young Black males get themselves killed in drive-by shootings, gang activities, and Rodney-King-style incidents. So, Black women outnumber Black men. Then, governments have incarcerated as many as 10% of eligible Black men at any one time. And then, 6% of eligible Black men choose non-Black mates.

Let us do some arithmetic. Let us estimate that the US contains 45 million Blacks, including 20 million children, leaving 25 million adults, including 14 million women and 11 million men. 660,000 of those men chose non-Black mates, and 1,100,000 sit in jail or prison. That means 14 million Black women must share 9.2 million Black men.

On top of all this, scientists have proven that women of a given racial testosterone group prefer (feel naturally attracted to) men of their group or any higher testosterone group. Racial testosterone groups rank as follows: Most: Black, then White, then Brown (Hispanic), then Yellow (Eastern Orientals). Aside from exceptions that always occur in any generality, that means Yellow women can lust for men of any race, leaving Yellow men to choose mates only from Yellow women (because higher testosterone group women don't feel attracted to them). It also means the opposite in the Black race - Black women don’t generally find appealing as mates of choice any but Black men, whereas women of all races might find Black men appealing. Thus, Black men can and do choose women of other races, but few Black women choose non-Black men as mates.

The generalized upshot of this reality: Black women face a terrible paucity of Black men, AND Black women simply don’t feel attracted to (find appealing) men other than Black men (well, Klingons, maybe, but they don’t live on this world).

Since Black women don’t like sharing their men, ESPECIALLY NOT with women of some other racial group, and since they generally don’t care for non-Black men, 14,000,000 Black women jealously guard their interest in 9,200,000 Black men, and fight among themselves for that precious commodity. When they must, they share.

And that explains why Black men generally consider themselves "itinerant sowers of seed" in the less-refined Black communities of America. It explains why many generally "stay" but don’t "live" somewhere. It explains why many, particularly pimps who have no shortage of charges, refer to their female intimates as "my bitches," and use that appellation to refer to women of any race not just Black women. It shows why even Black women laugh at such references on TV shows like "In Living Color," rather than take it as a personal affront.

But Black women suffer terrible deprivation, most longing for a stable Black man (husband if possible) at home, permanently. Many if not most Black children yearn for a real, live-here, Black Daddy to love and care for them and their mommy. And most Black men have little sense of belonging anywhere, particularly not permanently "living at home" with a Black wife. And Black families have generally become intensely matriarchal.

So, just because Black women can laugh at their terrible predicament does not mean you should cut into them all the way to the bone, hurting them way down deep where they can only scream in lonely silence, by poking fun at them and making them the butt of your jokes on national TV.

Steve, you can remain funny and still say things to ennoble and inspire Black women, indeed ALL women, to higher standards of behavior so more of them will actually deserve the husbands for whom they yearn so hopelessly. You can also inspire Black men, particularly leaders, to find ways to give Black children more permanent or permanent-seeming Black Daddies. You can inspire Black men, particularly youths, to take a more respectful attitude toward woman, and see themselves as protectors and caretakers rather than merely USERS.

Sadly, Steve, your woman-denigrating jokes don’t accomplish that. I encourage you to do a little soul-searching and find joke writers who can prep material for you that accomplishes GOOD while remaining funny. You could lead the way and inspire other Black comedians to follow in your GOOD footsteps.

Why not give it a try? You, a comedic genius and man of goodness, can surely achieve such an ambition, can’t you?

Feel free to answer me personally and confidentially if you wish.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t • Blogs: 1 2 3 • Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 • 727 669 5511

***

Bob Hurt Demands HP Live up to Customer Expectation - NO MORE JUNK

2011-11-25T14:15:00.003-05:00

Today I sent the below message to HP CEO and President Meg Whitman's USELESS Executive Team at http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/execteam/email/ceo/index.html. When one of them called me the other day, I heard background babble that sounded like a Wall Street boiler room. I spoke with three people who sounded African American, and who seemed not the least interested in making good on HP's obligation to live up to standard industry expectation regarding computer product quality, maybe because I sounded Southern and Caucasian, and they've heard the same complaint thousands of times.

HP sold junk computers as good ones, and the junk plagued the customers with heat problems that led to destroyed components that only a component replacement could fix. This meant years of flaky operation, loss of use, and repair costs that far exceeded the value of the system. The Executive Team members only further tarnished HP's flagging reputation by refusing to do anything at all to gratify this one customer. Team members insisted the product was out of warranty. I insisted that had nothing to do with typical customer expectation that the product operate trouble free for 3 to 5 years. They wouldn't budge, particular the one man who could have set things right, Floor Manager Garfield Wilson.

So, I decided to blow the whistle. First I wrote this, then the message below:
http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2011/11/hp-refuses-to-replace-s3120n-junk-they.html.

Meg Whitman:

This week I canceled an order I had placed for an HP I7 desktop computer valued at $1300 and placed an order for an similar Lenovo with more capability and features, valued at $1000. Why? Because I no longer trust HP to live up to customer expectation of quality and durability of HP computers. And I now recommend to everybody who will listen that they buy anybody's computer but HP's. Why? Because HP refuses to apologize for delivering junk to customers and replace that junk with properly functional equipment.

In particular...

I had a dissatisfying experience with our executive team. I explained the problem with HP insistently shipping s3120n computers with a serious design flaw related to heat sensitivity that created myriad disgruntled customers. I demanded a replacement system even though warranty expired on the old one. Your team refused in spite of may warning of consequences when I start blowing the whistle.
In response, I blogged the incident at http://bobhurt.blogspot.com/2011/11/hp-refuses-to-replace-s3120n-junk-they.html and emailed a copy to the Special Agent In Charge at the Tampa FBI office. I have suggested that the FBI lodge criminal charge against HP for Honest Services Fraud under 18 USC 1346. HP Persons should do jail time for the recalcitrant for repeatedly using interstate communications in the racket of defrauding customers by selling them known-defective junk disguised as a pretty PC - the HP s3120n, and then refusing to show any good-faith effort to meet the standard customer expectation. I doubt that in any single case you compensated your customers for lost use of the product and for resources wasted on tech support and warranty repairs.

I don't intend to stop blowing the whistle on HP till some corporate executive makes good regarding my complaint. If you doubt my sincerity, Google bobhurt hp.

https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=bobhurt+hp+

I ask you again to order your executive team to provide a replacement computer at HP expense, NOT an s3120n, but one that works.

Do I expect HP to do the "right" thing? No. Not unless many more people complain at the executive team (web page above) and on blogs as I have. And ONLY if people cancel orders for HP equipment and stop buying from them till they show more responsibility to their customers for valid complaints.

In othr words, HP needs a conviction in the court of public opinion with enough noise to make their stock fall. Then the shareholders will insist that HP fix the problem. Then HP WILL fix it.

If you have bought HP Junk (sold with serious design or parts problems they should have caught and fixed before shipment) and HP refused to replace it with something properly functional, in or out of warranty, you have a valid reason to COMPLAIN AND COMPLAIN LOUDLY, including writing letters to your local FBI office, demanding prosecution for fraud and racketeering.

I have filed complaint # 33656167 with the Federal Trade Commission https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov.

HP Refuses to Replace s3120n Junk They Sold

2011-11-23T23:58:00.001-05:00

In 2007 John Proios of Clearwater, Florida, purchased a new HP Pavilion Slimline s3120n TV PC (refurb value $318 on 23 Nov 2011), a beautiful, compact desktop micro-tower powered by an Athlon dual-core CPU with 2G RAM, 320G 7200 rpm hard drive, DVD burner, built-in television tuner, monitor, keyboard, mouse, and Windows Vista.

John spent over $1000 on the system but he didn’t use it often. Nevertheless, about 3 months later, the computer stopped working properly, taking several hours to boot up and show the Windows desktop. John contacted HP support and sent the product for repair. HP returned it in due course. It still functioned as it had when he sent it to them. It had become useless.

Like so many other computer buyers, John immigrated to the USA from Europe. At the age of five he watched Nazi warplanes lob bombs onto his Greek island home, spent over 2 years in an Israeli refugee camp, returned home with his parents to rebuild, and made his way to seek his fortune in New York City at the age of 17. John worked as a bookbinder and as a furrier, married, learned to play classical guitar, and in time moved to a retirement condominium in Florida. There, knowing nothing about computers, he bought his junk HP Pavilion Slimline s3120n TV PC.

Instead of complaining again at HP after the company’s first failure to repair his s3120n, John set it aside and used an old laptop with a cracked screen. He bought a cheap monitor and used the laptop to play chess and conduct trade on e-Bay. I, a 40-year computer industry veteran, met John because of our common interest in guitars. One day about 6 months ago he asked me to look at his HP s3120n to see what I could find out.

First, I tried to boot it up, but walked away in disappointment when the screen remained blank. Hours later I returned to see a Windows Vista desktop on the screen. I realized that the computer did work, but ran slowly. I put in my live UBUNTU disk and booted it. It took hours to come up, and I installed it on the hard drive. It still took hours to work,. That convinced me that John’s computer had a hardware problem.

I opened the computer and saw not a single fleck of dust. The computer looked brand new. Well, why wouldn’t it? John barely used it and HP repair folks (I hope) repaired it. I reseated the memory module and TV card and powered it up again. As before, it took nearly forever to boot. I concluded it needed a component change. I visited the web to look for repair hints to corroborate my assessment. http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1AVSX_enUS383US383&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=hp+s3120n+problems

What I saw shocked me. There in front of my eyes I saw dozens of reports of heat sensitivity in this model. When the s3120n overheats, motherboard or other components start dying. That means you cannot merely swap a card, chip, module, or drive. Typically, you have to remove the plug-in components and swap the motherboard, a project that typically costs $300 to $500 for a name-brand repair company (like HP) to do. Maintenance professionals well know that if the repair costs less than half the price of a new system, the customer will usually fall for it and buy the repair job.

Some of the writers concluded that the s3120n has a fatal heat sensitivity problem and went on to discuss how to cool the system., This one typifies them:

http://superuser.com/questions/194242/installing-an-additional-fan-in-an-hp-slimline-s3120n

Installing an additional fan in an HP Slimline s3120n

I've read many terrible things about this particular computer model's overheat issues. In addition, all of the dozen or so reviews I've read mention that the motherboard fries with 6-12 months of use. One guy claimed to be on his fifth mobo in less than a year.

Having just refurbished one of these puppies for my brother to use as his office PC, I'm worried, even though there's not much dust in his office and there's plenty of room around the case in all directions. I want to permanently forestall these potential overheat issues. I'm supposing the best way to do this is by installing an additional fan. The main problem so far is...

... the s3120n's case is tiny.

It seems that the only location in which an additional fan could be installed is on the side below the CPU's fan. Even then, no fan larger than 50mm is going to fit, and even a 50mm is going to be a tight squeeze against one (currently empty) card slot. Thus, I'm considering a 40mm fan like the SilenX IXP-13-14 (20mm deep), mounted on the side and pushing into the case and onto the mobo's heat dissipator (or what appears to be the mobo's heat dissipator). This would be perpendicular to the PSU's intake/exhaust fans' flow (front to back) as well as the CPU's single fan (which pulls from the front).

I'm comfortable with computers' "guts", but I've never installed a case fan. I've found no guidance online on how to install a case fan when there's no special fan-mounting location on the case, as with this surreally tiny Slimline. My current trajectory is to get the fan and install/jerry-rig it on the side using the case's many tiny side-vent holes.

Here is an HP article and video that should give an idea of this case, its dimensions, and the relative locations of its internals.

My questions are general ones: Am I on the right track? How might you, my dear saving answerer, go about this? Thank you in advance for simply bearing with my long, detailed explanation.

This Amazon.com complaint pretty well summarizes what disgruntled customers have to say:

http://www.amazon.com/HP-Pavilion-S3120N-Slimline-Processor/product-reviews/B000S6PLVE

6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars HP s3120n runs so hot it will burn out within a year - mine did
Putting an Athlon 64 into a small form factor case is a BAD IDEA. You need laptop chipsets in a small form factor case otherwise the thermal load on the system will lead to premature failure. My s3120n is now a door-stop that will not even POST.

This computer has inadequate cooling and runs really hot. Heat kills computer chips.

Published on August 1, 2008 by App

Cnet.com’s Senior Editor Matt Elliot has written this:

“A typical PC should give you 3 to 5 years of good use before you need to look for a replacement or upgrades. By comparison, though a monitor loses its brightness over time, it certainly won't need to be replaced every 5 years..” http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10166_7-5543710-1.html.

The typical s3120n customer gets less than a year of trouble-free performance, and when it does fail after the 1-year warranty, repair becomes prohibitively costly. Customers have a reasonable expectation that their computers will last well beyond the traditional one-year warranty, up to 5 years. If it does not last that long and repair cost makes repair unfeasible by approaching the cost of a competitive replacement, one can reasonably assume that the manufacturer cheated the customer by delivering a substandard product, substandard according to industry standards.

I concluded the following as a consequence of the foregoing:

1. HP employees poorly designed the s3120n, neglecting an important standard in computer construction – provision of adequate cooling.

2. HP employees discovered its terrible flaws during burn-in and simulated life-testing, but ignored the resulting failures, probably under some senior manager’s time pressure.

3. HP managers responsible for the s3120n ordered shipment of the product in spite of knowing about the heat sensitivity problem.

4. HP managers reasoned that they would pay for repair costs during warranty, but after one year they would ignore the fact that customers worldwide expect to get 5 to 10 years of service out of a computer without a catastrophic motherboard failure.

5. S3120n sysrems began failing widely, but HP senior managers refused to issue a product recall notice, even though they knew that hundreds or thousands of systems would become doorstops because the customers they victimized would simply refuse to pay exorbitant repair costs.

I called HP support to test my theory. The support man spoke kindly to me but resolutely insisted he could do nothing to compensate me for the junk s3120n computer John had bought on good faith. I complained vociferously to him, explaining that I had worked in the Loveland Instrument Division of HO back in the 1970’s and that we would never subject our customers to such a cavalier distribution of known-defective products as HP did with the s3120n. He suggested I write to the HP CEO executive team at http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/execteam/email/ceo/index.html. I sent him this text, alleging I, not John, suffered loss of the computer, to conserve explanation:

I write to take issue with HP's manner of dealing with heat sensitivity of the Pavilion Slimline s3120n TV PC. I believe mine constitutes a case in point. Within the first year of use the computer became so slow that it took several hours to boot. A friend of mine had used it and set it aside for several months to use his laptop. Then he gave it to me to fix. It worked as I mentioned above. I tried reseating components. The system had no dust or debris in it because of its scant use. I googled for others with similar problems and I found several, most notably the vocal customers who wrote about it at Amazon.com, thoroughly condemning it for heat sensitivity and repeated failures after repeated repairs.

A FAQ at hp web site suggested putting a fan in it and maintaining adequate clearance around it for air flow.

I have determined that the s3120n has a serious design flaw. Components overheat because of poor circulation, probably caused by insufficient ground clearance and insufficient fans for the tight space of the ATX form-factor inside that tiny case and the powerful dual core CPU in it. But for this you would have happy customers.

I found no warnings to buyers or recall notices. I asked for some accommodation. The support person refused, politely of course, claiming expired warranty. I have concluded that HP knew of this problem after many customers complained about it, and yet swept it under the rug thankful for expired warranty. As you know everyone expects their computer to last years, not a single year. With this system, HP has cheated customers out of that expectation.

In the mid 1970's I worked for the Loveland Instrument Division in Colorado. We developed and manufactured high reliability test and measurement instruments. Our customers would have condemned us if any equipment ever operated as the s3120n has. This computer therefore constitutes a grave embarrassment to me and to HP. Unfortunately, HP behaves about this item as a bumpkin guest might who just eructed loudly at the dinner table and pretended not to smell the stench or notice the sound emanating from his body. Such behavior goes way beyond the faux pas. The embarrassment would convince all present never to invite that guest.

I know HP has lost a lot of business because of this product, owing to the incessant failure and irreparable damage to customer good will. I for one have made up my mind never to purchase another HP product UNLESS HP provides me with a suitable replacement for the s3120n, GC665AA, SN CNH78023DK, now out of warranty.

I can't fire your engineering manager, but I can fire HP and buy elsewhere while I blow the whistle far and wide about HP's dereliction of duty to its customers. I don't mean these comments as a threat, but rather as a conviction. HP has one way to remedy this aside from full refund: a replacement system with similar or better performance for my friend John Proios who suffered considerable disappointment and inconvenience, even more than I did, from the premature failure of the system.

I look forward to hearing from you. If you react ethically as we both know you should, I'll write a glowing report of your accommodation efforts, subject to your approval.

The next day I received a call from HP Case Manager Douglas, caller ID 650-857-1502, in response to the above complaint. I reiterated my complaint and asked for remedy, such as a replacement computer of some kind. He said because of policy and warranty he couldn’t do anything about the problem. I insisted that he bring a supervisor to the phone. Executive case manager Jody said “there is nothing we can do – the unit is 2 years out of warranty.” I said give me someone who can say yes, not a thousand who can only say no. Finally, HP Escalation Department Floor Manager Garfield Wilson came to the phone, listened to my explanation and appeal, and said emphatically before hanging up on me. “We are not going to replace the unit because it is out of warranty.” I insisted that he put the CEO on the phone. He refused. I alerted him that I intended to make the public aware of HP’s intentional defrauding of s3120n buyers by selling them units with known design flaws that would dramatically increase cost of ownership, and then refusing to give customers remedy outside the one-year warranty period. He told me “Do what you have to do.”

I have decided to follow through on my commitment.

Therefore, I hereby encourage all who feel inclined to purchase or sell Hewlett Packard brand name computers to remember the above story. If it can happen to one model, it can happen over and over and over to innocent buyers and salespersons. If it does, the salesperson will become complicit in a what I consider a fraud – intentional misrepresentation that results in injury and damages to the customer. And, the customer will receive a lemon with a design flaw so bad that every one will exhibit serious performance or reliability problems that will become expensive to repair. Such victims will expend time and money and suffer frustration because the computer will stop working, the customer will have to troubleshoot it, then call support, then do without a computer while sending it for repair. This can happen several times during the first year. In succeeding years, the customer will have3 to payh nearly half the product cost to repair it, then eventually give up and use it for a “boat anchor” or “doorstop”, send it to Florida for use in building an artificial reef, drop it out a 10-story building in frustration just to see it smash and scatter parts on the concrete below, or salvage any possible parts from it and sell it for scrap or trash it.

For all of you, why not tell HP to consider bypassing you and all that trouble, and just scrap it themselves?

I shall NOT KNOWINGLY PURCHASE ANOTHER HP PRODUCT OF ANY KIND, not EVER, unless HP gives me and John remedy for this outrageous dereliction of moral and ethical duty, and for our frustration, expense, and waste of parts of our lives we will never get back, all because HP employees made a business decision to cheat customers rather than conduct business honorably.

I encourage EVERYONE contemplating purchase of an HP computer to look to a competitive product instead. I encourage a general boycott of HP till the CEO makes the RIGHT decision to make up to its customers for selling them junk which HP employees KNEW was junk, and using the warranty period to get out of the good faith obligation to provide computers that live up to market expectations of a 3-to-5-year useful life.

In my thinking, HP deserves to suffer a class-action lawsuit for fraud and racketeering for this kind of shoddy business. I contemplate filing a criminal complaint against HP under 18 USC 1346, Honest Services Fraud. Remember Enron? The DOJ prosecuted CEO Skelling for Honest Services Fraud, and won a conviction. He deceived shareholders about the value of the corporation. HP cheated customers out of millions of dollars by selling systems with known n flaws - the Paviloion Slimline s1320n TV PC, a truly good-looking, but terrible computer and bad investment. I encourage all others affected by the shoddy quality of the s1320n to file a complaint, too, or to fight back through boycott and exposure of the fraud, or both..

Think about this: HP sold the product under a one year limited warranty, but industry consumers expect computers to last 3 to 5 years. Didn’t HP have the legal duty to inform customers that it had a 3 to 6 month Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)? I say yes, they had that duty, and all computer makers have it. If they don’t fulfill that duty, and they sell their known-junk to unsuspecting, trusting consumers, take customer money, full price, as they would for a properly designed computer, and the computer then breaks repeatedly, requiring warranty repair, and keeps breaking likewise after warranty does that not injure the consumer? Does the unnecessary expense not constitute damage? Does the failure to give notice, the sale, and the damage not constitute fraud on the part of the manufacturer? Think about it. Then contact an attorney for remedy.

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t • Blogs: 1 2 3 • Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 • 727 669 5511

***

Morgan and Morgan inquiry ID number is 166500.

Please forward to Meg Whitman, CEO & President, HP

New Adverse Possession Links and Forum

2011-11-17T20:35:00.001-05:00

Click Here for the QR code for adverse possession related links.

I have published AP articles at http://bobhurt.blogspot.com.However I have created new links for Adverse Possession:

· AP at patriotplatz.com – write for info about AP or to pose questions/comments

· http://groups.google.com/group/adversepossession - new google group : subscribe now

· http://aplag.wordpress.com – New blog. I’ll migrate my articles to it.

· http://aplag.info – web site not yet created, but coming soon to register

Adverse possessors and advocates need to engage in political action and litigation to make the Government clarify and respect AP rights. If you want to join in this effort, click here to send email and subscribe to the AP discussion group by sending email to this address:

AdversePossession+subscribe@googlegroups.com

***

Bob Hurt

Contact: Email bh f t • Blogs: 1 2 3 • Law: E-letter Subscribe Donate
2460 Persian Drive #70, Clearwater, Florida 33763 • 727 669 5511

***

Bridge named in honor of educator Bevil Jarrell - Monday, June 20, 2011 - Copyright 2007 Ourtribune.com

2011-11-15T19:21:00.000-05:00

I shall love Bevil Jarrell forever for setting me straight young in life. God has preserved a part of him on this world in the heart and mind of every one of his students throughout his coaching and teaching career at Humble High School.

County Clerks Sue MERS in a Lost Cause

2011-11-13T18:55:00.004-05:00

County Clerks Suing MERS/MERSCORP in a Lost Cause

9 November 2011 by Bob Hurt

The following news stories explain the Florida Duval County Clerk lawsuit against MERS and MERSCORP.

The lawsuit complains:

“MERS has usurped the rights and privileges of the Florida Clerks of Court by establishing, maintaining and inducing lenders to use its private recording system, which unlawfully interferes and competes with the public recording system.”

The clerk alleged that both the note and mortgage must go on the county record. MERS attorney rebutted the complaint, claiming inaccuracy, and said MERS owns the mortgage and no law require the recording of a note.

I agree with MERS, but I also think the squabble could result in a beneficial change in the laws.

I consider this the core problem: Smart people will always seek ways to keep their wealth while taking the wealth of others, particularly the stupid. This case merely punctuates the problem.

Furthermore, Government operatives incessantly try to invade privacy rights of the people, and requiring the recordation of notes would reveal wealth in a way that would definitely invade privacy.

Most importantly, Florida law does not give the Clerk the authority to require recordation of notes. Florida statute 28.222 lists all the instruments the Clerk (County Clerk or Clerk of Courts) must record. Notes do not appear in the list. 28.2222 (3) (h) names “Any other instruments required or authorized by law to be recorded.”

Additionally, one’s possession of the note, or one’s name on the note or an allonge as beneficiary or assignee, proves one’s beneficial interest in the note, such as a stream of repayments. Any law requiring recordation of notes would impose an undue burden on commerce and unduly enrich the Clerk.

Imagine the insanity of filing every issuance of every Federal Reserve Note with a Clerk, and paying associated fees to the clerk. The Clerk has neither a right nor a privilege to record notes, nor a right to receive fees related to registration of the notes with MERS.

Society’s big problem with recordation of notes lies in the mess caused by promissory notes (“Notes), mortgage security instruments (“Mortgages”), securitization, and mortgage foreclosures.

The mortgage loan borrower signs a Mortgage when buying a house. The Mortgage contains language that protects the lender and abuses the borrower through rights-stripping. Borrowers almost never read it. If they did, and they thought about it, they might wonder why they need to convey the realty to the lender as part of the mortgage.

That conveyance makes the lender the legal owner of the realty. It also implies that the “loan” consists of the realty, not the alleged money which the borrower allegedly borrowed and typically never sees. Instead, the closer hands the purchase check directly to the seller. In effect, the lender bought the realty and lent it to the borrower.

This makes the typical closing into a scam that leaves the borrower owning nothing but a debt, equitable interest in the realty, and the obligation to maintain and insure it.

Neither the Note nor the Mortgage contain language requiring the lender or assignee to keep the note and mortgage united as one package of documents, nor to return the Note and Mortgage security instrument to the borrower upon satisfaction of the terms of the Note. The borrower typically relieves the lender of the obligation both to inform the borrower of every assignment of the note, and to comply with the UCC’s notice and demand cycle. Worst of all, no language in the Note actually conveys the Note to the lender, and yet lenders sell and securitize the note as though it constitutes their own chattel, depriving the borrower of all the fruits of such conversion.

Various rumors and facts surround the mystery of what happens to the physical Note after the borrower signs it at closing. These have caused confusion so great that the mishandling of notes confounds judges in the real estate trial courts across America. For decades, lenders or assignees held the notes securely in vaults and never brought them to court or the trustee in foreclosure matters. They merely provided proof of loan payments and a copy of the note to prove its existence.

When challenged for the original, they claimed they had lost or accidentally destroyed the note, and maybe they did. In recent years when the foreclosures began to mount and defendants demanded to see the original note, plaintiffs magically found them. Companies like DOCX specialized in re-creating “original” loan documents, a crime for which no court has yet punished anyone.

Now, amidst all this confusion, county clerks have started suing MERS in an effort to stop MERS from registering note assignments, and to force the assignees to file the assignment along with any changes in the mortgage with the county clerk, and to pay corresponding recordation fees. This would of course bring a windfall of much-needed money into the court coffers.

But, as I have explained, that would constitute malfeasance, invasion of privacy, and a ball and chain on the ankle of commerce.

The assignment-in-blank and bearer instruments like bonds and currency constitute an additional major fly in the ointment of the clerks’ nefarious scheme to record notes. If they get their way, people will, out of logical consistency, have to record every I.O.U., promissory note, bond purchase, and currency transaction, even when it does not relate to a mortgage.

For further consistency, people might also have to record purchases and transfers of chattel, and pay a corresponding fee. This would amount to a tax on all commerce, on top of existing luxury tax, sales tax, and other excise taxes. The clerks would have a monumental, new outrage from the public to deal with, a brand new justification for a Boston Tea Party uprising.

In addition, the clerks don’t seem to grasp the significance of MERS and MERSCORP. The MERS concept started because lenders wanted it and funded it so they could keep track of notes and simplify foreclosures while reducing the cost of assigning notes. All major lenders own shares in MERSCORP for that reason. Thus, MERSCORP operates as their special-purpose alter-egos with perfect legitimacy.

For the foregoing reasons, I predict that the clerks will lose and lose badly in their effort to force note assignees to record the assignment and pay a fee for it. They will fail in their effort to shut down the legitimate operation of MERS.

However, MERS does cause a certain problem. When the holder of the note and the mortgagee sue under separate names to foreclose, they have no standing to force a foreclosure sale of the mortgaged realty. These points explain why.

1. The holder named on the note or allonges has the right to foreclose the note, but because the mortgage bears the servicer’s name (MERS) as mortgagee, and not the holders, the holder has no authority to force a sale UNLESS the holder has made the mortgagee the holder’s agent for that purpose. That almost never happens.

2. The mortgagee (MERS) has no standing to sue to force the foreclosure sale because the borrower’s failure to make timely mortgage payments injured only the holder, not the mortgagee. Only injured parties have the right to sue.

If these sticky issues become salient in the clerk’s lawsuit against MERS, maybe the legislature will take the hint and clarify the issue in statutes that prevent splitting the note from the mortgage. This would force the assignees of the note to file and pay a recording fee. I doubt that will happen, however. The lenders could combine the note and mortgage in a single document, but for a variety of sound reasons chose not to.

Bob Hurt bh Blog 1 2 3 • Email f t

2460 Persian Drive #70 • Clearwater, FL 33763 USA
+1 (727) 669-5511
Donate to my Law Scholarship Fund
Learn civil litigation with Jurisdictionary
Subscribe to Lawmen E-Letter FREE
Visit the Lawmen message Archive FREE

# # #