Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Land, personal possessions, and self. Not necessarily in that order.
Post Reply
guesstimate
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 6:05 pm

Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Post by guesstimate » Fri Dec 30, 2016 3:12 am

If you have a mortgage, have you gone down to county clerks and recorded an acceptance of the deed? You need to do that or you don't really own it yet and a default will cause the bank to swoop in and overwrite the county file and foreclose the property. They still can but you made it more difficult as they have to deal with you now, can't just slide it through the courts uncontested. Most bank loans are fraudulent and can be contested, they're not lending you their money, but money they raise from the Federal Reserve against (monetizing) your signature, i.e. your money. They might be due closing costs for their work but they arrogate the note, demanding principal & interest to boot (you out if you you don't pay.) Legal contracts require full disclosure. Anyway, owning/claiming the deed is called perfecting the deed.
User avatar
editor
Site Admin
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:24 am
Contact:

Re: Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Post by editor » Fri Dec 30, 2016 9:23 am

Guesstimate,

This is a topic I know quite a bit about, having worked with deeds, and mortgages for more than thirty years.

Whoever told you that recording an "acceptance of deed" has any force and effect in law, for anything other than the most unusual circumstances, is just plain wrong. I have looked at untold thousands of entries in the records of hundreds of county recorders across the nation, and I have never seen an acceptance of deed. Let's look at why this is nonsense...

First of all, a deed does not have to be recorded to be valid. It can be written on a napkin, with no witnesses to the signature, and delivered to the intended recipient of the land (the Grantee), who can then toss it into a desk drawer for years, and it is still a valid instrument. It's the delivery of the deed that is the controlling factor.

For example, let's say Adam (the Grantor) drafts a warranty deed in which Bob is the Grantee. Adam files the deed away in a drawer and never gives it to Bob or even tells him it exists. Adam dies and the executor of Adam's estate finds the deed.

Question: Who will get the land, Bob, or Adam's heirs?
Answer: Adam's heirs. Unless Bob can prove beyond a reasonable doubt Adam intended to give him the deed.

On the other hand, if Adam delivered the deed to Bob, and Bob filed it in a drawer without recording it, then after Adam's death he comes forward with the deed, then Bob will get the land.

But there are some big howevers, which we'll examine.

Most states have a law known as "Race to Record". The law deals with what the courts will recognize, rather than what may be otherwise "right" or "just". In a nutshell the law says this: "Whoever records his deed first wins."

Here's how it works. Let's say Adam gives a warranty deed to Bob. Instead of going down to the courthouse and recording the deed, Bob puts it in a drawer. Sometime later, it could be later that day, the next week, month, year, or decade, Adam gives a warranty deed to Charles for the same land. Charles goes right down and records it. Bob notices that Charles took possession of the land, finds where Charles recorded his deed, and Bob sues Charles for the land.

Question: Who will get the land, Bob or Charles?
Answer: Charles, because he recorded his deed first.

Since it's a warranty deed, Bob may sue Adam for damages, which includes whatever Bob may have paid Adam for the deed, but that's it. If Bob received a quit-claim deed instead of warranty, then even his suit for damages will fail.

When a deed is recorded, the act of recording is considered to be notice to the public. Since a deed, in and of itself is simply written evidence of a verbal transaction, the posting of public notice of the transaction is enough for courts to construe that a deed has been delivered. Most county recorders require that a name and address be provided to whom they will return the deed after it is recorded, and they put that information on the deed before it is copied and filed. Then they send the deed to that person, who is usually the Grantee. If that person is the Grantee, then that is even further evidence of delivery.

Now let's look at how mortgages might affect a transfer.

Adam wants to sell his house, and Bob wants to buy; they've agreed on a price. Problem is, Bob doesn't have enough money, so he goes to a bank.

Now, Guesstimate, I can hear you saying, "The bank doesn't really have any money, they're creating it with Bob's signature." You are technically correct. When you figure out how to translate Bob's signature into something Adam can use right away to buy a new house, boat, or whatever Adam wants, please tell Adam. Because Adam probably already knows he could finance the sale himself, but he doesn't want to. He wants all his money up front, and the bank is the only option they know about.

So the bank says to Bob, "Sign this promissory note, and we'll cut Adam a check for the whole amount. One condition though: You have to also sign this mortgage that gives the bank the right to take the house back if you don't live up to the promise you made to pay us." Bob signs, the bank pays Adam, and Adam delivers a deed to Bob.

Done deal.

If Bob fails to pay the bank, nothing Bob may or may not have recorded after the mortgage was recorded will keep the bank from taking the house. Why? Because Bob agreed, in writing, to the deal. In legal terms, he hypothecated the house to the bank, which means he said to them, "If I hypothetically don't pay you, then you will already have the right to take the house."

Something else you said which is not accurate:
a default will cause the bank to swoop in and overwrite the county file
The way county recorders work, is that each new instrument is recorded on top of all prior instruments. Prior documents recorded can never be overwritten. However, new documents can be recorded which may amend, extend, or nullify documents recorded prior.

It's important to keep separate in your mind, on the one hand the fraudulent debt-note money system, and on the other hand the concept of loaning or borrowing. It is a privilege to be able to borrow, when necessary to achieve your goals. To presume a mortgage is fraudulent just because Federal Reserve Notes were exchanged, and blaming your local bank for that, is hogwash. If the bank doesn't lend you the money then you won't have a house to live in, and then where will you be?

If you make a claim against a bank that you entered into the mortgage without full disclosure, the bank's attorney will get you on the stand and most likely destroy you. If you are clever enough to win, and you'll probably have to lie to do it, then plan on never being able to borrow from a bank, or have a credit card again. You'll be completely blackballed-- the equivalent of a negative credit score.

Oh, and "perfecting a deed" is also known as curative. An example would be an "Affidavit of Scrivener's Error", commonly filed when the guy who drafted the deed gets some pertinent detail wrong, like the name of one of the parties, or the legal description of the land.
--
Editor
Lawfulpath.com
guesstimate
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 6:05 pm

Re: Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Post by guesstimate » Sat Dec 31, 2016 6:53 pm

Dear Editor:

Appreciate your comments.

Well the information I was quoting was found in a variety of places all of which I don't remember but summary as follows.

"Perfecting the deed" was quoted in a video from a case in Bouvier's as being necessary. An acceptance is necessary in all commercial transactions. A conveyance can be made but without acceptance, isn't valid. A seller can file a deed in your name with county but unless you claim (by accepting) it, the mortgage company can "swoop" in to overwrite. The language fee-simple means you now own it and now the bank has to sue you, which I admit they can do by terms of the note as you described, BUT not as easy for them, and as I think you know, the bank didn't loan you any of its own money but credit they raised with the Federal Reserve against your signature which they leveraged many times. No money for said "loan" existed until you signed the document, creating a commercial, negotiable instrument the bank could monetize. What they did was illegal for reason of lack of full disclosure, the credit was yours and paid the seller off in full. The most the bank should be due is closing costs which they received. The "loan" is also more often than not, insured, meaning if a missed payment were to happen and foreclosure occur, the insurance would pay off the note, therefore any foreclosure sale would pay the bank twice! My understanding is that at least some people were able to stop foreclosure by making these facts known to "lenders" and/or judges in public court. Also thanks to the MERS system and notes being sold to secondary and third parties, the collecting agent often no longer have the necessary documents to substantiate their claims, apart from the other fraud that took place. And one last thing, there are reports that doing an A4V with IRS/US Treasury doesn't just discharge/settle the note, but Treasury cuts you a check for the full amount of the note, while at same time paying down the national debt for an equivalent amount. The idea is that due to HJR 192 of 1933, declaring the USA in bankruptcy and the banksters taking all gold & silver (lawful money), no real money exists any longer, to fulfill obligations; it's all just paper and your paper is as good as theirs and must be accepted for payment. You have an account with US Treasury based on your birth certificate, the last part I've absolutely confirmed.
User avatar
editor
Site Admin
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 9:24 am
Contact:

Re: Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Post by editor » Mon Jan 02, 2017 8:09 am

A conveyance can be made but without acceptance, isn't valid.
As I stated, in the case of a deed-conveyance of land, delivery of the deed creates the presumption of acceptance.

What if you didn't want the land? Can such a presumption be rebutted? Sure. If someone, without your permission and without your acceptance, drafts a deed naming you as Grantee, to some land which you did not want, and then recorded it with the county recorder, then the act of recording would create the false impression you had accepted ownership of the land.

I can think of two easy remedies, either of which would suffice:
  1. Draft and record a quit claim deed in which you are the Grantor and the party from the prior deed is the Grantee, and record it.
  2. Draft and record an affidavit in which you declare that you never accepted the deed, and disavow any interest in the land.
For purposes of potential liability; if, for example, the land was the site of a chemical spill, or something equally undesireable, then (B) would be the better choice.

In any case, something like this happening would be exceedingly rare. It is not necessary to file any instrument declaring acceptance of a deed.
...the mortgage company can "swoop" in to overwrite...
As I've already stated, the mortgage company does not swoop in and overwrite anything, nor would it be possible for them to do so, even if they wanted to. Records in the recorder's offices are never overwritten. The only way to release, cancel, discharge, or nullify any instrument which has been recorded is to record another instrument which affects such an action.

In this way, a complete chain of events is always preserved, and anyone who cares to research the history of every conveyance which has ever happened to a parcel of land, going all the way back to the government patent, need only search back through the records. A document containing such a complete history of conveyances is called an "Abstract of Title". I have prepared many hundreds of them myself, and rendered opinions on hundreds, maybe thousands of others.
The language fee-simple means you now own it and now the bank has to sue you...
For clarification, see link: Fee; Fee Simple

If I were attempting to perfect an allodial claim on a parcel of land, I would definately pay for the land with gold or silver, and not use Federal Reserve Notes. This is a topic completely outside the scope of what we are discussing here.

If you believe that filing an acceptance of deed will somehow make it harder for the bank to foreclose on you if you stop making payments, then I invite you to try it and see. I can assure you the instrument will be given no consideration whatsoever. You used Federal Reserve Notes to pay for the land, and the moment you did that you accepted a privilege, and created a commercial nexus with the Fed. No one, except the bank, cares where you got the FRNs, only that you used them. As for the bank, you signed a promissory note and a mortgage, and are subject to foreclosure if you violate your duties under those instruments.
What they did was illegal for reason of lack of full disclosure, the credit was yours and paid the seller off in full. The most the bank should be due is closing costs which they received.
What the bank did was not illegal. The bank is operating under the commercial statutes of the United States. When you used FRNs to pay the seller, you accepted a privilege, thereby entering into that system. At best, you might be able to claim the transaction is voidable, which takes positive action by one of the parties, or is otherwise considered valid.

Further, the bank performed a service, without which you would not have been allowed to take possession of the land. As I stated before, you might be able to get away with voiding such a transaction once, based on non-disclosure, but you could never do it again. Also, in my opinion, the judge would almost certainly make the equitable decision to give the land to the bank, and charge you rent for the time you had possession. Do you really think you'll be allowed to keep the land for nothing?
The "loan" is also more often than not, insured, meaning if a missed payment were to happen and foreclosure occur, the insurance would pay off the note, therefore any foreclosure sale would pay the bank twice!
Here you may be correct but, as always, carefully read the terms of the policy. Insurance companies are very adept at covering their asses. Take heed though-- if there is a mortgage insurance policy and you default, it may be the insurance company and not the bank with the only legal standing to sue, and they would likely have to go through normal credit channels without the benefit of a mortgage. It all depends on the policy-- read it, and ask for clarification on anything you don't understand.
Also thanks to the MERS system and notes being sold to secondary and third parties, the collecting agent often no longer have the necessary documents to substantiate their claims...
This is also true. Many mortgages have been sold and resold many times with no verifiable chain of conveyance. The full chain of title must be recorded to substantiate the claim, or else you can move for dismissal on the grounds the foreclosing party is not a party-in-interest. I have read of cases in which these conveyances by banks were so sloppy they were unable to ever produce documentation, and had to forfeit their claim.

The rest of your message deals with Commercial Redemption (CR) crap. I've already discussed this issue at length elsewhere on this site, and won't waste my time with it. If you play with this stuff you will go to jail. You have been advised.
--
Editor
Lawfulpath.com
guesstimate
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2016 6:05 pm

Re: Delivery and Acceptance of Deeds

Post by guesstimate » Mon Jan 02, 2017 5:12 pm

Dear Editor:

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

I understand about presumptions but again I was listening to a file quoting Bouvier re: a case, where because a presumption wasn't ESTABLISHED, it didn't stand, and an (otherwise) owner lost title when a lender "swooped in" and laid claim for some breech of contract (a missed payment), for example. I'm sure that's how it happens in 90% of cases because people don't do deed acceptances, because they're lazy, indifferent or uninformed. In any case I will do everything in my power to gum up the banks when it comes to their foreclosing on things that should not be theirs.

The other issue is lack of full disclosure/due consideration re: the banks' services. What they do as far as making loans may be perfectly legal by commercial code but they're not exclusively privy to doing those things and it should still require full disclosure for their contracts to be enforceable. They did perform a service but the money they accessed and "loaned" was not theirs and therefore lacked consideration per their terms, i.e. they put nothing up and took no risk, beyond asserting rights as pigs in due course. Here's what I consider an interesting file that touches on creating instruments with hidden terms. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaihPvKMIXg
Post Reply