Trusts for Dummies

The nature, history and formation of Trusts.

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:34 am

huntingross wrote:Highspirit, Baldy.

We're all on the same page here, and I appreciate the effort and time in posting on this subject....but I have looked at Gilberts and found it hard going.


It IS hard going Mark, you are not alone! :giggle:

huntingross wrote:I fully expect Trusts for Dummies to be right down the Statutory line....but that is just adhesion.....like family trusts described on the HMRC site.....but when you write the same trust with different adhesion.....you get a different result.....adhesion to common law......or adhesion to the law of Fidach for example.


I would say that it depends on whether a Public (statutory) or Private trust was formed and how that formation is evidenced.

huntingross wrote:As Rev Kenny commented to me in a PM....the Declaration of Independence that I issued to Gordon and Alex is a Trust....so these things are obviously not difficult to construct.


Absloutely the easiest thing in the world to form and where thier hidden danger lies, for we hear tell of secret trusts, where even those in them, operating as one of the recognised positions, are NOT required by law to be AWARE of the trust, or thier position within it!

Now, stick a fancy coat of fresh admiralty colour on it and it looks like a contract...is it? I no longer see contracts, I see implied, resultant or constructive trusts and nuances that creditor/debtor doesn't have. I think any 'con-tract' (con we know...tract = a stretch or lapse of time/piece of land, so conned for a stretch of time/land/property) I may have signed, was in fact a trust. How else can one scribble out and write in terms to any CONtract we supposedly sign? Because it is an INDENTURE and, as GRANTOR, I would have the right to change the indenture any way I chose before signing it.

huntingross wrote:Keeping the faith HR


Good man! - I admit Gliberts is heavy heavy going, so we intersperse with listening to CW and researching, but if people get a little study group together - things DO start to happen. Once you 'get' trusts, then they are less intimidating and become a whole lot of fun. At least in a sleepless, traumatised, completely knackered kind of way :yawn:

Mark, you know where we are m8 - if you need us just pop over, ok

Jayen, I hear the frustration, my friend and I share it. None of us saw this at all until we were exposed to the ideas and theory from CW. Is it right? Well, it certainly feels better than working with and under statutes, as these babies are ruled by equity - a whole different game and rule set. Go to Wiki and see the maxims of equity, then compare to the rogering statutes intend you to get :giggle:

BBD
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby nameless » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:03 am

If it looks like a con-tract, walks like a con-tract, talks like a con-tract, then it's a feckin Trust.

This tickled me pink!

So, is no consideration brought to the Contract the same as no consideration brought to the Trust, in order to bind us into an agreement?



Absolutely the easiest thing in the world to form and where their hidden danger lies, for we hear tell of secret trusts, where even those in them, operating as one of the recognised positions, are NOT required by law to be AWARE of the trust, or their position within it!


Two questions come out of this:

How do we pin anything like this down? To say it's like the proverbial bar of soap in the bath is understatement of the year.

When it comes to 'law' what law are we talking about?
“Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State, Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy."

Lord Denning
nameless
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 4:55 pm

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:52 am

nameless wrote:If it looks like a con-tract, walks like a con-tract, talks like a con-tract, then it's a feckin Trust.

This tickled me pink!

So, is no consideration brought to the Contract the same as no consideration brought to the Trust, in order to bind us into an agreement?


I'd say that we are forming a trust each time we sign anything, but that it is construed to look like, walk like and talk like a contract - we are fooled and then misconstrued as the trustee (who has fiduciary responsiblilty), so WE end up paying THEIR debts, in effect.

nameless wrote:Absolutely the easiest thing in the world to form and where their hidden danger lies, for we hear tell of secret trusts, where even those in them, operating as one of the recognised positions, are NOT required by law to be AWARE of the trust, or their position within it!


Two questions come out of this:

How do we pin anything like this down? To say it's like the proverbial bar of soap in the bath is understatement of the year.


We do not need to pin it down, as whoever EXPRESXSES the trust, either in written or oral form, MUST PROVE the trust and in so doing, prove the POSITIONS held and by whom, in said trust.

nameless wrote:When it comes to 'law' what law are we talking about?


Trusts, unless statutory, will come under Equity. Statutory trusts are those affected by legislation like The Trustees Act 1925, etc. PRIVATE trusts, however, are conducted under equity.

Hope it helped,

BBD
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby nameless » Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:44 pm

Thanks, BaldBeardyDude

We were watching Winston Shrout, Pheonix, last night, disc 4, and some notes we made are as follows on a Mortgage Deed of Trust situation:

1. A Deed of Trust is not a mortgage; it's a short cut to a mortgage foreclosure.

2. A true mortgage takes approximately a year judicially to be foreclosed upon.

3. In a Deed of Trust, we have already confessed judgement, for it turns into a Statute Staple.

4. Trust Law - the creator of the Trust is God. The creator of the Trust has all power over the Trust - i.e. the Trustor.

5. We amend the Trust document that is already there.

6. We are going to fire them for cause - released without consideration for the fraud. We fire the Trustee and we fire the Beneficiary. The lender comes in, we file a 1099a and close escrow on the mortgage.

7. By Order of the Trustor, the present parties have no further responsibilities to the Deed of Trust - no liability - released without consideration.

8. We file APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE /NOTICE OF CORRECTION (as per samples in handout).

9. The Setlor is the one who brings the value into the Trust. The Setlor could be the Grantor, too. Signor of the Note is the Lender.

10. Terminate Trust Indentures - he mentions 'Quiet Title'.

11. Following the firing of present parties, serve Notice to Cease and Desist to the parties fired, and find all parties by doing a search, as some can come out of the woodwork.

WS then gets into bonds, indemnity etc. etc.

Is filing appointment of successor trustees/notice of correction expressing the Trust as well as amending?
“Whoever may be guilty of abuse of power, be it Government, State, Employer, Trade Union or whoever, the law must provide a speedy remedy. Otherwise the victims will find their own remedy."

Lord Denning
nameless
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 4:55 pm

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby BaldBeardyDude » Thu Mar 04, 2010 2:07 pm

Well, is it not a shock to the diehard creditor/debtor crowd that Winston knows and USES trust processes?

There is more here and remedy, but it needs more work. CW himself, although excellent at C/D, only realised himself all was trust last November, so we really are in the pregnancy.

The more minds and eyes come into it, the better.

BBD
They must find it hard to take Truth for authority who have so long mistaken Authority for Truth - Gerald Massey
User avatar
BaldBeardyDude
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:42 am
Location: Telford, Shropshire

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby Jayen4 » Thu Mar 04, 2010 10:02 pm

O.K......SO....the general inference here seems to be that what Winston Shrout has been saying re commercial redemption is correct ??

However,presumably any /all action that we would take regarding trusts still has to be actioned through the courts,yes ?? If I'm correct,then what do you do when the 'opposition' completely ignores you AND the judge is in collusion with them AND refusing to enter documents requesting pertinent information into evidence ?? This is what I'm up against (hence my frustration bursting out !) !! The solicitors say they can't (or won't) help.
I want to know how to get these bandits to pay attention !! I KNOW that their acting fraudulently,but I don't know how to go about FORCING them back into court and more importantly ,getting the right outcome (i.e. In my favour).

I haven't looked at CW yet or the maxims,but am I in the right ballpark with my understanding ??

I truly want to ram this back down their throats !
User avatar
Jayen4
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:26 pm
Location: Nr Wakefield. West Yorkshire.

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby Farmer » Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:01 am

After reading about trusts I can see why everything may well be a trust. This is very interesting and would explain a lot.
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby IamallthatIam » Fri Mar 05, 2010 12:10 pm

it certainly makes sense farmer , and 'tis the way to go. Everything we have been concerning ourselves with is an implied trust in equity coloured to look like contracts, what we need to do is claim and prove that trust , only then can we move and merge titles within the trust in order to terminate it.
Keep reading !!! lol
Invito beneficium non datur - A benefit is not conferred upon one against his consent.
I DO NOT offer legal advice
- "I just say what I say because everyone is entitled to my opinion!" -

- Saffi Elder (Aged 7)-
User avatar
IamallthatIam
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:36 am

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby Highspirit » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:38 pm

Nice one guys, good to see some open minds working here :)

Jayen, there is a quote by Winston Shrout - ''When 2 or more people enter into commerce, it's a Trust''

Now, the difficult thing about Winstons work is that all the remedies are more or less in d/c and therefore using Statutory Contracts as their basis of those remedies, ie the frauds and things. However, when you realise that everything is in trust and therefore so are the remedies it just makes so much more sense.

As for court yes, you may have to go to court but all Trusts are settled in a court of Equity not Admiralty. The paperwork we produce for an Equity court is more simple as well but there may be tmes when you have to take your paperwork into 'Chambers' under a protective order becuase of the sensitivity of the informtion if it was made public.

Another amazing thing about Trusts and remedy is that on the surface everythng is just so much more simple. No more GSA forms, 1099's or anything like that, it's all UK based.

Further to that, when you wake up and take charge of your Trust and move or merge titles then the law is very much on your side in that if those you appoint title to don't perform then they are held personally responsible.

It looks like there ar some awesome remedies in Trusts and we will certainly find out over the next few months but you cannot get away from the fact that absolutely everything is a Trust.

It never has been about contracts.

Just look at how they can easily slip you into a Trust without telling you and what responsibilities you have without knowing, it's incredible I know but it's true. Most of all, they or the court will never ever tell you that you are in a trust, and by not telling you they have done nothing wrong. Why? Because we are meant to be grown up and know what we are signing. It is our own fault if we don't know what we are getting in to. Amazing I know and yes there may be repercussions for conveyancing solicitors down the line on this one.

Anyway, great to see more who are opening up to Trusts.

HS :)
Know Thyself
Highspirit
 
Posts: 614
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:38 pm

Re: Trusts for Dummies

Postby Happydancer » Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:25 pm

Well guys, interesting thread.
For me personally, this seems too much time & effort to learn.

Highspirit states that he studied for 14 months and BBD studied
for 9 weeks of 15 hour days. (This I imagine would take me 52 weeks of 8 hour days)
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying your initial efforts on contracts etc. were a
waste because I truely believe any form of learning can only be helpful in the future
for further learning to be made easier on other topics.

What I would like to say is that all this fmotl & lawful rebellion concept must come
from within. Imo.

Surely we all know what is right & wrong. So therfore it's just how we all go about
getting to the same way of living. FREELY!!

I watched an 11 part youtube vid, which part 1 was posted on the tpuc's site.
I'll put it at the end of this post. (Hope you'll all watch)

Schaffer (the speaker) is doing similar work but not from the same group as what
farmer has been following from http://republicbroadcasting.org/

To me this seems the way to go. I maybe wrong but it just feels better with me.

I think our friends over the pond are doing some very important work that hopefully
will benifit us all. At the same time I know we should also be doing our own bit to
further the cause.

I know it can be said "each to our own" well I think we all want to be heading in the same
direction, be it by various methods.

It maybe a case of "lets just wait & see" and then in a couple of years look back to see
how far we've really come.

My thoughts on the topic anyway.
Pete

Sos guys, having probs embeding vid, so just sending the link.
http://www.youtube.com/user/BenjaminFulford#p/u/14/tIfSAA01Rjk
Happydancer
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:14 pm
Location: Manchester

PreviousNext

Return to Trusts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest