[00:00.000 --> 00:29.560]  Markets for the 11th of April 2018 closed with gold $1,353.22 an ounce.
[00:29.560 --> 00:34.840]  Over $16.68 an ounce. Texas crew $65.51 a barrel.
[00:34.840 --> 00:38.120]  Bitcoins at $6,902.19.
[00:38.120 --> 00:41.000]  Ethereum at $420.80.
[00:41.000 --> 00:43.920]  Bitcoin cash at $652.90.
[00:43.920 --> 00:55.400]  And finally, Litecoins at $114.34 a crypto coin.
[00:55.400 --> 00:58.560]  Today in history, the year 1968.
[00:58.560 --> 01:02.560]  President Lyndon Midjonson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1968,
[01:02.560 --> 01:04.200]  which prohibited private businesses
[01:04.200 --> 01:06.920]  from discriminating based on race, color, religion, sex,
[01:06.920 --> 01:08.480]  or national origin.
[01:08.480 --> 01:10.360]  It also prohibited unequal application
[01:10.360 --> 01:13.200]  of voter registration requirements, racial segregation
[01:13.200 --> 01:15.280]  in public schools, and employment,
[01:15.280 --> 01:18.120]  and public accommodations for places of business.
[01:18.120 --> 01:18.920]  Today in history.
[01:23.800 --> 01:25.720]  In recent news, tensions in Syria
[01:25.720 --> 01:28.040]  seem to have reached new levels after a chemical attack
[01:28.040 --> 01:30.720]  on civilians in the city of Douma, which left 40 dead
[01:30.720 --> 01:32.320]  and many injured, an attack which
[01:32.320 --> 01:34.120]  is being blamed on the democratically elected
[01:34.120 --> 01:36.480]  president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad,
[01:36.480 --> 01:39.200]  by the United States and on Israel by Russia,
[01:39.200 --> 01:41.960]  either accusatory narrative without any verified evidence
[01:41.960 --> 01:43.040]  as of yet.
[01:43.040 --> 01:44.760]  President Trump tweeted today Wednesday
[01:44.760 --> 01:47.800]  that if, quote, Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles
[01:47.800 --> 01:49.880]  fired at Syria, get ready, Russia,
[01:49.880 --> 01:52.720]  because they will be coming in nice and new and smart.
[01:52.720 --> 01:55.040]  Going on to warn Russia that you shouldn't be partners
[01:55.040 --> 01:57.360]  with a gas-killing animal who kills his people
[01:57.360 --> 01:58.440]  and enjoys it.
[01:58.440 --> 02:00.240]  Many in the West, including President Trump,
[02:00.240 --> 02:03.720]  have been quick to conclude that this chemical attack must
[02:03.720 --> 02:06.480]  have been conducted by Assad and his forces.
[02:06.480 --> 02:08.000]  Syria and Russia, on the other hand,
[02:08.000 --> 02:10.120]  have given approval since yesterday
[02:10.120 --> 02:12.920]  for the organization for the prohibition of chemical weapons
[02:12.920 --> 02:15.600]  to investigate the sign of the chemical slaughter.
[02:15.600 --> 02:18.080]  Assad has been successful in maintaining rule and support
[02:18.080 --> 02:20.840]  during Syria's seven-year civil war, a civil war that
[02:20.840 --> 02:22.720]  is being fought by the government of Syria
[02:22.720 --> 02:25.600]  and anti-Assad Syrian rebels that are openly
[02:25.600 --> 02:27.560]  being funded by Western governments,
[02:27.560 --> 02:30.120]  with ISIS being one of the more notorious splinter groups
[02:30.120 --> 02:32.440]  of the American-backed Syrian rebels.
[02:32.440 --> 02:35.720]  No surprise, then, why Russian Foreign Minister Spokeswoman
[02:35.720 --> 02:38.960]  Maria Zakoba posted on Facebook that smart missiles should
[02:38.960 --> 02:42.280]  be fired at terrorists and not at a legitimate government, which
[02:42.280 --> 02:44.280]  has been fighting terrorists.
[02:44.280 --> 02:46.160]  Or is this a trick to destroy all traces
[02:46.160 --> 02:47.640]  with a smart missile strike?
[02:47.640 --> 02:50.280]  And then there will be no evidence for international inspectors
[02:50.280 --> 02:53.280]  to look at.
[02:53.280 --> 02:56.880]  This was Kirk Rody with your lowdown for April 11, 2018.
[04:54.280 --> 04:55.280]  OK.
[04:55.280 --> 04:56.280]  Howdy, howdy.
[04:56.280 --> 04:59.760]  Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, your Rue de la Radio.
[04:59.760 --> 05:10.160]  On this, the 28th day of June, 2018, we're starting out to show
[05:10.160 --> 05:14.000]  we've got a whole, almost a whole board full of callers
[05:14.000 --> 05:20.800]  already, so I'm a little distracted here by my board
[05:20.800 --> 05:24.280]  just crashed.
[05:24.280 --> 05:25.400]  OK, there it is.
[05:25.400 --> 05:28.160]  OK, we've got the caller board up.
[05:28.160 --> 05:31.560]  We've got two, three people already,
[05:31.560 --> 05:37.080]  so we'll start at taking calls here in just a moment.
[05:37.080 --> 05:43.640]  Things are going well on our paralegal front.
[05:43.640 --> 05:45.160]  I've put out some figures.
[05:45.160 --> 05:47.640]  I'm beginning to get responses already
[05:47.640 --> 05:52.600]  on the funding proposal.
[05:52.600 --> 05:53.560]  Very good chance.
[05:53.560 --> 05:59.800]  Another couple weeks here, I can have an agreement on funding
[05:59.800 --> 06:03.680]  for this project, and we'll be off to the races.
[06:03.680 --> 06:06.840]  So I'm kind of excited about that.
[06:06.840 --> 06:10.040]  Things are going well.
[06:10.040 --> 06:14.320]  My system just crashed again, so maybe having some
[06:14.320 --> 06:17.760]  a little bit of technical difficulties today,
[06:17.760 --> 06:20.120]  so it looks like things are not starting out well.
[06:20.120 --> 06:27.080]  So if we have some issues, don't get too excited.
[06:27.080 --> 06:28.600]  There we go.
[06:28.600 --> 06:35.720]  OK, I've got it to come back up, at least it's sort of working.
[06:35.720 --> 06:39.480]  OK, we've already got some callers on the board,
[06:39.480 --> 06:41.680]  so I'm going to start out back away.
[06:41.680 --> 06:44.520]  Some callers on the board, so I'm going to start out back going
[06:44.520 --> 06:48.800]  to Lydia in North Carolina.
[06:48.800 --> 06:52.840]  I don't recognize that name.
[06:52.840 --> 06:53.720]  Hi, Randy.
[06:53.720 --> 06:57.720]  OK, hello, Lydia.
[06:57.720 --> 06:59.280]  You're on the air.
[06:59.280 --> 07:00.600]  Are you a first-time caller?
[07:00.600 --> 07:02.080]  Taking my call.
[07:02.080 --> 07:05.000]  Yes, how are you?
[07:05.000 --> 07:06.040]  I am good.
[07:06.040 --> 07:09.240]  What do you have for us today?
[07:09.240 --> 07:11.160]  Well, I've been listening to your show,
[07:11.160 --> 07:13.360]  and one topic you haven't covered,
[07:13.360 --> 07:17.000]  or I don't believe so, the ones I have listened to,
[07:17.000 --> 07:20.640]  that you have covered the topic on injunctive relief.
[07:20.640 --> 07:22.600]  I have a specific question regarding
[07:22.600 --> 07:25.280]  restricted covenants.
[07:25.280 --> 07:26.800]  Basically, I live in a subdivision
[07:26.800 --> 07:31.280]  where we have covenants, but we don't have an HOA.
[07:31.280 --> 07:36.160]  And a neighborhood is still old, and it's been built in 1996.
[07:36.160 --> 07:38.840]  And we had new neighbors that just moved in,
[07:38.840 --> 07:41.240]  and put a very large fence around the property
[07:41.240 --> 07:45.120]  by one point five acres, made out of chain link.
[07:45.120 --> 07:49.600]  And chain link fencing is specifically not permitted.
[07:49.600 --> 07:53.960]  There's a specific line in the restricted covenants
[07:53.960 --> 07:57.160]  that says that chain link, I don't know why a fencing
[07:57.160 --> 07:59.240]  shall not be permitted.
[07:59.240 --> 08:04.040]  So my question to you is, I can go to an HOA.
[08:04.040 --> 08:05.760]  They're basically our neighbors.
[08:05.760 --> 08:08.360]  And I feel that the chain link fencing is really
[08:08.360 --> 08:10.760]  reduced in the value of our house.
[08:10.760 --> 08:13.240]  It just looks very industrial.
[08:13.240 --> 08:16.840]  Not exactly what people are putting up in our neighborhood.
[08:16.840 --> 08:22.400]  People are putting up aluminum fencing or private fencing.
[08:22.400 --> 08:25.000]  So my question to you is, to do injunctive relief
[08:25.000 --> 08:28.920]  through the court, what would be the high level steps?
[08:28.920 --> 08:29.720]  OK.
[08:29.720 --> 08:36.360]  You have no, if it's an HOA or an HOA-like covenant,
[08:36.360 --> 08:44.360]  do you and I, this would strictly be civil litigation.
[08:44.360 --> 08:47.360]  I'm thinking of how I could bring something
[08:47.360 --> 08:48.840]  like this to court.
[08:54.960 --> 08:56.960]  I don't know how you can sue them for that.
[09:01.960 --> 09:06.320]  OK, if there is no HOA, are these
[09:06.320 --> 09:09.760]  the title restrictions?
[09:09.760 --> 09:10.240]  Correct.
[09:10.240 --> 09:12.080]  Yeah, they're directly titled title.
[09:12.080 --> 09:17.440]  When they pass the Ds, anybody who gets the D to the house,
[09:17.440 --> 09:19.120]  they basically sign it.
[09:19.120 --> 09:23.000]  And one of the items on there is that they basically
[09:23.000 --> 09:26.880]  are agreeing to the covenant for the subdivision.
[09:26.880 --> 09:29.640]  It's kind of the standard warranty D
[09:29.640 --> 09:33.800]  that we have in our calendar always mentions the subdivision
[09:33.800 --> 09:36.760]  covenant in there, so it's standard.
[09:36.760 --> 09:39.160]  It's nothing special to our legal subdivision.
[09:39.160 --> 09:44.120]  It's just that ours is different because we have the covenant
[09:44.120 --> 09:45.880]  and people are, have been following it,
[09:45.880 --> 09:49.040]  except maybe a few exceptions, minor exceptions.
[09:49.040 --> 09:51.120]  But this one was pretty big because he pulled out
[09:51.120 --> 09:53.000]  chain link fencing all around.
[09:53.000 --> 09:53.840]  It looks terrible.
[09:53.840 --> 09:59.520]  So I feel that I can enforce it or go to court myself
[09:59.520 --> 10:01.880]  without having to have an HOA, because the HOA pretty much
[10:01.880 --> 10:05.880]  hires a lawyer does the same thing.
[10:05.880 --> 10:07.800]  You can go to court yourself.
[10:07.800 --> 10:11.160]  You'd have to file a civil suit against him.
[10:11.160 --> 10:17.240]  And injunction is nothing really to enjoin,
[10:17.240 --> 10:22.200]  because an injunction will prevent the party
[10:22.200 --> 10:26.240]  from taking some action.
[10:26.240 --> 10:27.880]  He's already put up the fence.
[10:27.880 --> 10:30.480]  Now, if he didn't have the fence up and was going to put it up,
[10:30.480 --> 10:33.160]  you could go to the court and ask for an injunction
[10:33.160 --> 10:34.880]  to prevent him from putting it up.
[10:34.880 --> 10:37.160]  But if the fence is already up, you
[10:37.160 --> 10:41.320]  can't get an injunction to tell him to take it down.
[10:41.320 --> 10:45.560]  You would have to file a civil action
[10:45.560 --> 10:51.760]  and get a final adjudication that would order him
[10:51.760 --> 10:54.960]  to remove the fence.
[10:54.960 --> 10:58.400]  This is a tough issue.
[10:58.400 --> 11:01.520]  If you have covenants, you really
[11:01.520 --> 11:07.320]  need an HOA to be able to adjudicate those covenants
[11:07.320 --> 11:09.440]  for you.
[11:09.440 --> 11:11.800]  It could cost you quite a bit and a civil action
[11:11.800 --> 11:14.320]  to try to get him to the court to order him
[11:14.320 --> 11:17.840]  to take the fence down.
[11:17.840 --> 11:22.760]  And again, if you're not asking for any money,
[11:22.760 --> 11:28.320]  then you could do most likely a suit and a justice
[11:28.320 --> 11:31.480]  with a peace court, and that wouldn't cost so much.
[11:31.480 --> 11:35.920]  This is relatively specific to North Carolina law.
[11:38.840 --> 11:43.400]  As I'm talking, I'm running through what I know.
[11:43.400 --> 11:46.360]  And I'm imagining, if I'm a judge,
[11:46.360 --> 11:49.640]  where am I going to get authority
[11:49.640 --> 11:58.280]  to tell someone else what to do with his private real property?
[11:58.280 --> 12:00.800]  And the only way you're going to do that
[12:00.800 --> 12:05.720]  is you'll have to adjudicate the standing
[12:05.720 --> 12:07.120]  in authority of the covenants.
[12:10.720 --> 12:12.520]  So how am I going to get this done?
[12:12.520 --> 12:15.600]  I don't know North Carolina law well enough
[12:15.600 --> 12:19.360]  to be able to address whether you can do it or not.
[12:19.360 --> 12:23.440]  You certainly can't get an adjudication relief
[12:23.440 --> 12:28.760]  because there's nothing to enjoin him from.
[12:28.760 --> 12:32.240]  Does that part make sense?
[12:32.240 --> 12:37.280]  In adjunction, the court merely says, don't do this thing.
[12:37.280 --> 12:39.080]  Well, there's nothing to tell him not to do
[12:39.080 --> 12:40.520]  if he's already got the fence up.
[12:43.920 --> 12:46.560]  We can't tell him to have an adjudication relief
[12:46.560 --> 12:48.160]  to take the fence down.
[12:48.160 --> 12:50.320]  And he doesn't take the fence down
[12:50.320 --> 12:53.320]  when he's in charge of the court.
[12:53.320 --> 12:59.800]  But if you feel as though he's lowered your property value,
[12:59.800 --> 13:02.960]  you're first going to have to be able to come to the court
[13:02.960 --> 13:09.000]  with an adjudicatable claim.
[13:09.000 --> 13:14.040]  You'll have to have some way of claiming
[13:14.040 --> 13:17.680]  that you were harmed by the fence.
[13:17.680 --> 13:21.960]  So first thing you have to do is get someone perhaps
[13:21.960 --> 13:27.600]  to offer you less for the property
[13:27.600 --> 13:30.440]  than you believe it's worth because there is a fence there.
[13:34.440 --> 13:36.160]  I'm thinking how to get there.
[13:36.160 --> 13:39.480]  Randy, can I say something here about this?
[13:39.480 --> 13:40.240]  Absolutely.
[13:40.240 --> 13:41.720]  OK, and this is Debra Stevens.
[13:41.720 --> 13:43.560]  Hi, this is Debra Stevens.
[13:43.560 --> 13:45.160]  I'm Randy's co-host and producer.
[13:45.160 --> 13:46.800]  I don't come on very much.
[13:46.800 --> 13:48.400]  I let him take most of the calls.
[13:48.400 --> 13:50.120]  I do know a little bit about this.
[13:50.120 --> 13:52.680]  We're going to have to hold you over till the other side
[13:52.680 --> 13:55.120]  of the break, though we're about to go to break.
[13:55.120 --> 14:00.240]  I know this is not my primary area of legal research,
[14:00.240 --> 14:02.280]  but I do know a little bit about it.
[14:02.280 --> 14:06.160]  And Randy, she's talking about deed restrictions.
[14:06.160 --> 14:13.040]  And this kind of goes beyond an area of contract law
[14:13.040 --> 14:17.320]  where the state is involved because these covenants
[14:17.320 --> 14:18.880]  are on the deed.
[14:18.880 --> 14:25.560]  So it's a contract not necessarily,
[14:25.560 --> 14:28.040]  it's sort of applicable as a contract
[14:28.040 --> 14:30.320]  to surrounding property owners, but it's also
[14:30.320 --> 14:33.240]  a contract with the county and the state
[14:33.240 --> 14:35.240]  because it's on the deed.
[14:35.240 --> 14:41.960]  You basically have made an agreement with the state
[14:41.960 --> 14:46.440]  that you are willingly restricting your property
[14:46.440 --> 14:49.120]  in certain manners.
[14:49.120 --> 14:53.480]  Like in Texas, if you have a large enough acreage,
[14:53.480 --> 14:57.680]  you can get a wildlife deed restriction,
[14:57.680 --> 14:59.640]  wildlife preservation deed restriction, which
[14:59.640 --> 15:02.760]  is something that some of my family members did
[15:02.760 --> 15:05.240]  because it lowers your property taxes.
[15:05.240 --> 15:08.560]  But if you do that, then you're not
[15:08.560 --> 15:10.840]  allowed to do certain things with your property
[15:10.840 --> 15:15.680]  as far as development, or you can't engage in deforestation
[15:15.680 --> 15:19.640]  like if you want to cut down a bunch of timber and sell it,
[15:19.640 --> 15:21.080]  you're not allowed to do that.
[15:21.080 --> 15:26.320]  So you're restricting the use of your own property willingly
[15:26.320 --> 15:29.320]  because you voluntarily entered into this agreement
[15:29.320 --> 15:30.440]  with the state.
[15:30.440 --> 15:35.600]  And if they find out that you're in the wildlife preservation
[15:35.600 --> 15:38.240]  example, if they find out that you hired a logging company
[15:38.240 --> 15:40.200]  to come in and cut down a bunch of trees
[15:40.200 --> 15:42.560]  so that you could have some money, well,
[15:42.560 --> 15:44.280]  they're going to, the state will just,
[15:44.280 --> 15:46.000]  the state will do something about it,
[15:46.000 --> 15:48.520]  even if the surrounding property owners don't,
[15:48.520 --> 15:51.880]  because you've entered into a covenant with the state
[15:51.880 --> 15:54.480]  because it's an actual deed restriction.
[15:54.480 --> 16:00.760]  And so some of my family members went through a situation.
[16:00.760 --> 16:02.680]  Well, I'm just going to wait till the other side,
[16:02.680 --> 16:05.080]  but I'm going to talk about this some more.
[16:05.080 --> 16:11.320]  But you don't necessarily have to go to where, you know,
[16:11.320 --> 16:14.720]  if you tried to sell your property and you got certain offers
[16:14.720 --> 16:18.440]  that were too low because of, you know,
[16:18.440 --> 16:20.280]  what's going on is reducing the property value.
[16:20.280 --> 16:23.560]  I mean, that could be an additional cause of action.
[16:23.560 --> 16:28.360]  Now, depending on what the laws are in your state concerning
[16:28.360 --> 16:31.200]  deed restrictions, you may or may not
[16:31.200 --> 16:32.840]  be able to get the district attorney
[16:32.840 --> 16:35.680]  to do something about it without you having
[16:35.680 --> 16:37.760]  to hire a lawyer directly.
[16:37.760 --> 16:40.000]  But I will speak some more on this issue
[16:40.000 --> 16:41.400]  when we get back.
[16:41.400 --> 16:44.920]  So can you hang on, please?
[16:44.920 --> 16:45.400]  Yes.
[16:45.400 --> 16:45.960]  OK, great.
[16:45.960 --> 16:46.440]  Bye.
[16:46.440 --> 16:46.960]  Thank you.
[16:46.960 --> 16:47.920]  OK, sure.
[16:47.920 --> 16:49.400]  We're going to break right now.
[16:49.400 --> 16:51.960]  We've got, we're talking with Libya in North Carolina
[16:51.960 --> 16:53.040]  about deed restrictions.
[16:53.040 --> 16:55.600]  We've got Charles, Jeff, and Tina on the line.
[16:55.600 --> 16:56.560]  And we will be right back.
[16:56.560 --> 16:57.560]  This is the Rule of Law.
[17:03.840 --> 17:08.080]  It's the 2018 Logos Radio Network Annual Fundraiser and Gun
[17:08.080 --> 17:11.520]  Giveaway, sponsored by Central Texas Gun Works.
[17:11.520 --> 17:15.200]  Go to logosradionetwork.com and enter to win.
[17:15.200 --> 17:18.760]  Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[17:18.760 --> 17:22.480]  From Central Texas Gun Works, the grand prize up for grabs
[17:22.480 --> 17:25.480]  is a Spikes Tactical AR-15.
[17:25.480 --> 17:28.320]  More prizes and sponsors to be announced.
[17:28.320 --> 17:32.080]  When you purchase Randy Kelton's e-book, Legal 101,
[17:32.080 --> 17:34.160]  you get four chances to win.
[17:34.160 --> 17:36.200]  Purchase Eddie Craig's traffic seminar
[17:36.200 --> 17:38.320]  and get 10 chances to win.
[17:38.320 --> 17:42.880]  And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[17:42.880 --> 17:45.600]  If you've enjoyed the shows on Logos Radio Network,
[17:45.600 --> 17:48.400]  support our fundraiser so we can keep bringing you
[17:48.400 --> 17:51.960]  the best quality programming on talk radio today.
[17:51.960 --> 17:55.160]  We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
[17:55.160 --> 18:00.600]  Go to logosradionetwork.com for details and donate today.
[18:00.600 --> 18:02.720]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors
[18:02.720 --> 18:05.640]  with phone calls, letters, or even losses?
[18:05.640 --> 18:09.400]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Maris Proven Method.
[18:09.400 --> 18:12.680]  Michael Maris has won six cases in federal court against debt
[18:12.680 --> 18:15.000]  collectors, and now you can win two.
[18:15.000 --> 18:16.760]  You'll get step-by-step instructions
[18:16.760 --> 18:20.360]  in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights
[18:20.360 --> 18:23.760]  statutes, what to do when contacted by phones, mail,
[18:23.760 --> 18:26.920]  or court summons, how to answer letters and phone calls,
[18:26.920 --> 18:29.480]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit reports,
[18:29.480 --> 18:31.440]  how to turn the financial tables on them
[18:31.440 --> 18:34.160]  and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.160 --> 18:37.080]  The Michael Maris Proven Method is the solution
[18:37.080 --> 18:39.000]  for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.000 --> 18:41.400]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.400 --> 18:44.800]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[18:44.800 --> 18:47.040]  and click on the blue Michael Maris banner,
[18:47.040 --> 18:49.840]  or email Michael Maris at yahoo.com.
[18:49.840 --> 18:56.480]  That's ruleoflawradio.com, or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s
[18:56.480 --> 19:01.160]  at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors next.
[19:01.160 --> 19:06.160]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network,
[19:06.160 --> 19:08.160]  LogosRadioNetworks.com.
[19:08.160 --> 19:37.160]  Logos Radio Network
[19:37.160 --> 19:41.560]  Okay, this is the rule of law, Randy Kelton and Debra Stevens,
[19:41.560 --> 19:45.960]  and we are here talking with Livia in North Carolina
[19:45.960 --> 19:48.400]  about deed restrictions.
[19:48.400 --> 19:53.960]  And so I wanted to just like mention, okay, like say,
[19:53.960 --> 19:57.200]  for example, when I was discussing the example
[19:57.200 --> 20:00.520]  of a wildlife preservation deed restriction
[20:00.520 --> 20:03.200]  that somebody would put on their own property
[20:03.200 --> 20:06.080]  because they don't intend to do any deforestation
[20:06.080 --> 20:07.800]  or logging or any development,
[20:07.800 --> 20:10.040]  they just want to have a beautiful place
[20:10.040 --> 20:11.880]  that they can live on.
[20:11.880 --> 20:16.480]  And so, hey, why not make it an official wildlife preserve
[20:16.480 --> 20:22.080]  on the covenant restrictions, it reduces your property taxes.
[20:22.080 --> 20:24.640]  So if that person subsequently goes
[20:24.640 --> 20:29.920]  and starts doing deforestation without making filings
[20:29.920 --> 20:34.160]  to remove the covenant, they can get sued by the state
[20:34.160 --> 20:38.120]  because in effect they're trying to pull off property tax scam
[20:38.120 --> 20:40.880]  by not, you know, you get a property tax reduction
[20:40.880 --> 20:43.080]  for doing something like that.
[20:43.080 --> 20:47.080]  So in the case of what you're speaking of,
[20:47.080 --> 20:50.160]  where somebody's putting up a fence, a chain link fence
[20:50.160 --> 20:53.440]  when that's against the covenant restrictions,
[20:53.440 --> 20:57.160]  it not only affects the surrounding property owners,
[20:57.160 --> 20:59.920]  but the state has a vested interest
[20:59.920 --> 21:01.760]  in those covenant restrictions
[21:01.760 --> 21:05.840]  because now that person is reducing their property value
[21:05.840 --> 21:09.120]  and that means that not only that property,
[21:09.120 --> 21:13.080]  but the surrounding properties also are going to be reduced
[21:13.080 --> 21:15.680]  and that means the state or the county,
[21:15.680 --> 21:18.720]  both however it works, the municipality,
[21:18.720 --> 21:21.560]  they lose property tax income, okay,
[21:21.560 --> 21:24.000]  because property values are reduced.
[21:24.000 --> 21:26.800]  So they're going to take it seriously.
[21:26.800 --> 21:30.600]  They're not, the state is not going to just turn a blind eye
[21:30.600 --> 21:35.280]  to this and so whether or not the way
[21:35.280 --> 21:38.520]  covenant restriction enforcement works
[21:38.520 --> 21:42.160]  in North Carolina, I don't know, we're in Texas,
[21:42.160 --> 21:45.840]  it could be that the district attorney
[21:45.840 --> 21:49.480]  or the county attorney, it may be a county issue,
[21:49.480 --> 21:50.960]  the county, either the county attorney
[21:50.960 --> 21:55.960]  or the district attorney may take care of this for you
[21:55.960 --> 21:59.560]  and file a lawsuit for relief and equity,
[21:59.560 --> 22:02.760]  which is what Randy was discussing, was disgusting.
[22:02.760 --> 22:05.120]  It is kind of a disgusting situation.
[22:05.120 --> 22:08.120]  What Randy was discussing earlier,
[22:08.120 --> 22:10.880]  what you're looking for is not exactly an injunction
[22:10.880 --> 22:13.800]  which would prevent somebody from doing something
[22:13.800 --> 22:17.000]  or stop somebody from doing what they're currently doing,
[22:17.000 --> 22:22.000]  but to order them to do something that they're not doing
[22:22.160 --> 22:24.400]  or in this case, you would want relief and equity,
[22:24.400 --> 22:28.480]  which would be a final judgment by a court in a suit
[22:28.480 --> 22:31.600]  where the court would order that person,
[22:31.600 --> 22:35.080]  take down the fence, or else you're in contempt of court
[22:35.080 --> 22:37.440]  and if you don't and you're in contempt,
[22:37.440 --> 22:38.920]  you're going to go to jail.
[22:38.920 --> 22:40.960]  Okay, that's what you're looking for
[22:40.960 --> 22:43.760]  and so that would definitely require a lawsuit
[22:43.760 --> 22:47.480]  and whether the county attorney
[22:47.480 --> 22:50.240]  or the district attorney would do that on your behalf
[22:50.240 --> 22:52.840]  because like I said, these covenant restrictions
[22:52.840 --> 22:57.840]  are technically a contract, a covenant with the state
[22:57.840 --> 23:01.880]  or with the county, but you do have standing
[23:01.880 --> 23:04.240]  to do something about it because it affects you,
[23:04.240 --> 23:06.760]  it affects your property value.
[23:06.760 --> 23:11.600]  Now, like I said, you may have to hire your own attorney
[23:11.600 --> 23:14.000]  to enforce a covenant restriction
[23:14.000 --> 23:16.680]  or learn how to file a lawsuit
[23:16.680 --> 23:20.440]  to enforce a covenant restriction as a pro se
[23:20.440 --> 23:25.080]  or the county or district attorney may handle it for you.
[23:25.080 --> 23:28.040]  In some cases, some of these covenant restrictions
[23:28.040 --> 23:30.080]  can be considered criminal.
[23:30.080 --> 23:31.880]  They actually go to a criminal issue.
[23:31.880 --> 23:35.000]  Now, in your case, it probably doesn't,
[23:35.000 --> 23:38.640]  but I heard about another situation
[23:38.640 --> 23:41.240]  and this was in a rural area where there were
[23:41.240 --> 23:45.560]  covenant restrictions where people were not allowed
[23:45.560 --> 23:49.200]  to have certain types of septic tanks
[23:49.200 --> 23:54.200]  because they would leak too much into the water supply,
[23:54.200 --> 23:56.120]  into the aquifer.
[23:56.120 --> 23:58.360]  They had to have certain very specific types
[23:58.360 --> 24:01.160]  of septic tanks and have regular maintenance.
[24:01.160 --> 24:02.720]  Anyway, all this stuff, I'm not familiar
[24:02.720 --> 24:06.160]  with how all that works, but all I know is that
[24:06.160 --> 24:09.400]  that was a situation as in a rural area
[24:09.400 --> 24:14.000]  where that was determined under deed restrictions,
[24:14.000 --> 24:16.840]  under covenants, it wasn't a homeowner's association.
[24:16.840 --> 24:19.400]  Well, as it turned out, there were some,
[24:19.400 --> 24:22.040]  unfortunately, some poverty stricken people
[24:22.040 --> 24:27.040]  who had some adjacent property to some people I knew
[24:27.040 --> 24:31.080]  and basically they were just like running outhouses.
[24:31.080 --> 24:33.240]  I mean, it was like hardly, you couldn't even hardly
[24:33.240 --> 24:38.240]  qualify as a septic system and so in that situation,
[24:39.120 --> 24:41.400]  it almost turns into a criminal issue
[24:41.400 --> 24:46.120]  because now you are damaging the water supply
[24:46.120 --> 24:50.720]  for other people around and so that situation
[24:50.720 --> 24:54.320]  got real serious real fast and I think this,
[24:54.320 --> 24:56.080]  I'm pretty sure the state and the county
[24:56.080 --> 24:57.560]  got involved in that.
[24:57.560 --> 25:01.040]  Now, this person isn't putting public health at risk
[25:01.040 --> 25:05.240]  but they are potentially reducing the value
[25:05.240 --> 25:09.920]  of their own property which the government has a say about
[25:09.920 --> 25:12.560]  because there's a government restriction there
[25:12.560 --> 25:15.560]  that benefits the county, it benefits the state.
[25:15.560 --> 25:17.280]  The higher the property's worth,
[25:17.280 --> 25:19.760]  the more income they get for property taxes.
[25:19.760 --> 25:21.800]  So anyways, I would just encourage you
[25:21.800 --> 25:25.640]  to basically just do some online research
[25:25.640 --> 25:30.160]  in North Carolina just looking up information
[25:30.160 --> 25:35.160]  on how do you enforce a deed restriction in North Carolina?
[25:35.200 --> 25:37.040]  Is it a county court issue?
[25:37.040 --> 25:38.800]  Is it a district court issue?
[25:38.800 --> 25:43.320]  Can the county or district attorney assist in this matter
[25:43.320 --> 25:45.560]  or is it something that you have to do on your own
[25:45.560 --> 25:47.360]  with your own lawyer?
[25:47.360 --> 25:51.080]  But really enforcing covenant and deed restrictions
[25:51.080 --> 25:54.320]  is a relatively straightforward thing.
[25:54.320 --> 25:57.880]  So this kind of thing comes up quite often
[25:57.880 --> 26:01.200]  of people violating deed restrictions
[26:01.200 --> 26:03.000]  and it has to be dealt with
[26:03.000 --> 26:06.800]  because it affects adjacent property owners.
[26:06.800 --> 26:11.800]  So I guess that's my best advice on the matter
[26:12.800 --> 26:14.600]  because like I said, I know some about it
[26:14.600 --> 26:17.240]  but that's not my primary area of research.
[26:17.240 --> 26:19.920]  Does that help point you in the right direction, Livia?
[26:21.400 --> 26:24.160]  Yeah, but I was hoping you could give me some,
[26:24.160 --> 26:27.640]  that would help me as a pro-state doing myself.
[26:27.640 --> 26:30.160]  Yeah, I will definitely leach off the county industry.
[26:30.160 --> 26:31.920]  I tried to do some online research
[26:31.920 --> 26:35.160]  and I didn't find very much for pro-state taxing.
[26:35.160 --> 26:38.440]  It was more in line of HLA would take it up on
[26:38.440 --> 26:43.440]  and educate it in a court and get the ruling.
[26:43.440 --> 26:46.720]  Well, whether it's a pro-state,
[26:46.720 --> 26:48.720]  whether you do it as a pro-state or have an attorney
[26:48.720 --> 26:50.960]  help you, the procedure and the process
[26:50.960 --> 26:53.280]  is gonna be the same.
[26:53.280 --> 26:56.440]  The main thing is you just need to find out
[26:56.440 --> 27:01.000]  what is the general procedure for enforcing a covenant,
[27:01.000 --> 27:04.360]  enforcing a deed restriction in North Carolina?
[27:04.360 --> 27:08.080]  Yes, in any case, you would stand in the shoes
[27:08.080 --> 27:09.320]  of an HOA.
[27:09.320 --> 27:13.400]  So if you have case law that goes to an HOA,
[27:13.400 --> 27:17.120]  you could stand in the shoes of the HOA as this is.
[27:17.120 --> 27:21.440]  My question, I had a question in that
[27:21.440 --> 27:24.280]  if you were to take an action
[27:25.400 --> 27:29.640]  and based on a lowering of property value,
[27:29.640 --> 27:33.200]  would this suit become a private attorney general suit?
[27:34.480 --> 27:37.360]  Could you sue a private attorney general suit?
[27:37.360 --> 27:39.360]  There's a lot of patriot mythology
[27:39.360 --> 27:41.520]  about private attorney generals.
[27:41.520 --> 27:45.080]  You wouldn't become a private attorney general,
[27:45.080 --> 27:49.800]  but it is what the courts have termed
[27:49.800 --> 27:52.240]  as a special kind of suit.
[27:52.240 --> 27:56.080]  And that's a suit where you sue in your behalf
[27:56.080 --> 27:59.880]  and in the behalf of all those similarly situated.
[28:01.120 --> 28:03.400]  So you could sue in behalf of yourself
[28:03.400 --> 28:06.960]  and all the surrounding neighbors who would be affected,
[28:06.960 --> 28:10.280]  but also, since it goes to property values
[28:10.280 --> 28:12.560]  and property taxes,
[28:12.560 --> 28:15.160]  that's gonna be a suit
[28:16.160 --> 28:20.160]  that would be for the benefit of the state as well.
[28:20.160 --> 28:22.720]  So I had a question,
[28:22.720 --> 28:26.240]  if you filed a suit of this nature
[28:26.240 --> 28:31.240]  and claimed a property tax decrease,
[28:31.360 --> 28:36.360]  would you need to name the county or the state
[28:36.360 --> 28:40.200]  as a necessary party?
[28:42.000 --> 28:45.960]  It's a legal question that we would have to look up.
[28:45.960 --> 28:48.840]  If you were required to name the state
[28:48.840 --> 28:52.720]  as a necessary party and you didn't,
[28:52.720 --> 28:55.440]  they could run you through a whole litigation process
[28:55.440 --> 28:57.800]  and then move to have a dismiss for offenders
[28:57.800 --> 28:59.360]  to name a necessary party.
[28:59.360 --> 29:04.080]  We had someone in a four-year or five-year foreclosure issue
[29:04.080 --> 29:06.240]  have the court throw it out at the last moment
[29:06.240 --> 29:10.040]  because the woman who sued didn't name her husband
[29:10.040 --> 29:12.840]  as a necessary party and the court just chucked it.
[29:14.280 --> 29:17.800]  One of those lawyer tricks that can get you tossed
[29:17.800 --> 29:22.800]  and some state-specific technical issues
[29:23.240 --> 29:24.760]  you would have to address.
[29:25.600 --> 29:27.800]  And I couldn't do that without being asked.
[29:27.800 --> 29:32.800]  I just did a very quick internet search
[29:32.800 --> 29:36.560]  on how to enforce deed restrictions in North Carolina.
[29:36.560 --> 29:38.160]  And I came up with a bunch of hits
[29:38.160 --> 29:43.160]  and one is North Carolina Lawyers Weekly
[29:43.280 --> 29:46.680]  and you just type in a search for restrictive covenants
[29:46.680 --> 29:49.320]  and there's all kinds of case law right off the bat.
[29:50.960 --> 29:52.520]  Let me, I'll say a little bit more
[29:52.520 --> 29:53.360]  when we get back on the inside.
[29:53.360 --> 29:54.440]  We're about to go to break.
[29:54.440 --> 29:55.360]  This is the rule of law,
[29:55.360 --> 29:57.360]  when Halton Debra Stevens will be right back.
[29:57.360 --> 29:58.200]  Great.
[29:58.200 --> 30:01.720]  In Wisconsin, an elderly woman who housed orphans
[30:01.720 --> 30:03.920]  was about to lose her home to foreclosure
[30:03.920 --> 30:07.120]  when her 12-year-old grandson came to the rescue.
[30:07.120 --> 30:08.600]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht,
[30:08.600 --> 30:12.200]  back with the story of Noah the Dreamcatcher after this.
[30:12.200 --> 30:14.320]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:14.320 --> 30:16.200]  When you give up data about yourself,
[30:16.200 --> 30:17.920]  you'll never get it back again.
[30:17.920 --> 30:19.720]  And once your privacy is gone,
[30:19.720 --> 30:22.960]  you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:22.960 --> 30:24.800]  So protect your rights.
[30:24.800 --> 30:28.480]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:28.480 --> 30:30.840]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:30.840 --> 30:34.080]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[30:34.080 --> 30:35.880]  the private search engine alternative
[30:35.880 --> 30:38.000]  to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:38.000 --> 30:40.320]  Start over with StartPage.
[30:41.840 --> 30:45.520]  For years, Janice Sparhawk cared for dozens of orphans.
[30:45.520 --> 30:47.880]  Many dropped on her doorstep after dark,
[30:47.880 --> 30:50.440]  but at 72, she was in trouble.
[30:50.440 --> 30:52.080]  Her health fell to the ground.
[30:52.080 --> 30:54.960]  At 72, she was in trouble.
[30:54.960 --> 30:57.360]  Her health failing, she couldn't pay the mortgage
[30:57.360 --> 31:01.200]  unless she found $10,000 the bank would foreclose.
[31:01.200 --> 31:03.320]  She appealed to her congressman, her governor,
[31:03.320 --> 31:04.560]  and even the president,
[31:04.560 --> 31:07.600]  but it was her grandson, Noah, who saved the day.
[31:07.600 --> 31:09.960]  The 12-year-old posted her story on a website
[31:09.960 --> 31:11.800]  he'd created three years earlier,
[31:11.800 --> 31:15.560]  Noah's Dreamcatcher Network, to help hurricane victims.
[31:15.560 --> 31:18.960]  Within days, enough money had poured in to rescue Sparhawk,
[31:18.960 --> 31:22.000]  her foster kids, and their faith in America.
[31:22.000 --> 31:24.320]  Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com,
[31:24.320 --> 31:26.440]  the world's most private search engine.
[31:31.160 --> 31:34.200]  Did you know there are 3 million edible food plants on Earth?
[31:34.200 --> 31:37.120]  And none have the nutritional value of a hemp plant.
[31:37.120 --> 31:40.080]  HempUSA.org offers you hemp protein powder.
[31:40.080 --> 31:42.280]  It does not contain chemicals or THC.
[31:42.280 --> 31:45.560]  It's non-GMO and is 100% gluten-free.
[31:45.560 --> 31:47.200]  Hemp protein powder burns fat,
[31:47.200 --> 31:49.800]  builds muscle, contains 53% protein,
[31:49.800 --> 31:52.200]  and feeds the body the nutrients it needs.
[31:52.200 --> 31:54.960]  Call 888-910-4367
[31:54.960 --> 31:58.120]  and see what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you,
[31:58.120 --> 32:00.880]  only at HempUSA.org.
[32:05.160 --> 32:07.760]  It's the 2018 Logos Radio Network
[32:07.760 --> 32:10.200]  annual fundraiser and gun giveaway,
[32:10.200 --> 32:12.880]  sponsored by Central Texas Gun Works.
[32:12.880 --> 32:16.520]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com and enter to win.
[32:16.520 --> 32:20.080]  Every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[32:20.080 --> 32:21.800]  From Central Texas Gun Works,
[32:21.800 --> 32:26.800]  the grand prize up for grabs is the Spikes Tactical AR-15.
[32:26.800 --> 32:29.640]  More prizes and sponsors to be announced.
[32:29.640 --> 32:33.400]  When you purchase Randy Kelton's e-book, Legal 101,
[32:33.400 --> 32:35.520]  you get four chances to win.
[32:35.520 --> 32:37.520]  Purchase Eddie Craig's traffic seminar
[32:37.520 --> 32:39.600]  and get 10 chances to win.
[32:39.600 --> 32:44.160]  And remember, every $25 donation is a chance to win.
[32:44.160 --> 32:46.880]  If you've enjoyed the shows on Logos Radio Network,
[32:46.880 --> 32:48.320]  support our fundraiser,
[32:48.320 --> 32:49.680]  so we can keep bringing you
[32:49.680 --> 32:53.240]  the best quality programming on Talk Radio today.
[32:53.240 --> 32:56.480]  We also accept Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.
[32:56.480 --> 33:00.480]  Go to LogosRadioNetwork.com for details and donate today.
[33:00.480 --> 33:12.480]  Live, free speech radio, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:24.480 --> 33:26.480]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[33:26.480 --> 33:29.960]  This is rule of law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens here.
[33:29.960 --> 33:35.280]  It is Thursday, June 28th, 2018.
[33:35.280 --> 33:38.920]  And we are speaking with our caller here
[33:38.920 --> 33:43.640]  concerning the deed restrictions in North Carolina.
[33:43.640 --> 33:45.440]  We've got Livia here with us.
[33:45.440 --> 33:49.680]  And, okay, so, Livia, I just did a start page internet search
[33:49.680 --> 33:54.320]  for how to enforce deed restrictions in North Carolina.
[33:54.320 --> 33:55.840]  Okay, just simple search.
[33:55.840 --> 33:58.280]  And I came up with a bunch of hits
[33:58.280 --> 34:03.560]  and the second hit is actually a website
[34:03.560 --> 34:06.480]  or a web publication for attorneys,
[34:06.480 --> 34:09.800]  which is what we want to look at.
[34:09.800 --> 34:10.960]  These are publications,
[34:10.960 --> 34:14.040]  treatises that lawyers write for each other.
[34:14.040 --> 34:19.640]  And so, there's apparently some lawyer website,
[34:19.640 --> 34:23.240]  news website is called NC Lawyers Weekly.
[34:23.240 --> 34:27.680]  North Carolina Lawyers Weekly, NCLawyersWeekly.com.
[34:27.680 --> 34:30.600]  And it's the tag, you know,
[34:30.600 --> 34:33.080]  their tag was a restrictive covenants,
[34:33.080 --> 34:35.680]  but I came across it by just doing a generic search
[34:35.680 --> 34:38.160]  on how to enforce deed restrictions in North Carolina.
[34:38.160 --> 34:41.760]  Okay, so, for example, that was the first thing I went to
[34:41.760 --> 34:43.680]  because it's something written for lawyers.
[34:43.680 --> 34:46.440]  Okay, so, you've got a situation here,
[34:46.440 --> 34:51.440]  and this is just one example, let me bring this up here.
[34:51.440 --> 34:52.240]  Sorry, again.
[34:52.240 --> 34:53.760]  Okay, here's an example.
[34:53.760 --> 34:58.760]  Okay, Matthew V. Miller, and this is just a summary
[34:58.760 --> 35:00.400]  of the case, a summary of the judgment,
[35:00.400 --> 35:03.320]  the judge's final order on the case.
[35:03.320 --> 35:07.120]  The restrictive covenants in the party's neighborhood,
[35:07.120 --> 35:09.920]  so this implies that the two parties in the case
[35:09.920 --> 35:12.280]  were property owners in the neighborhood.
[35:12.280 --> 35:14.800]  The restrictive covenants in the party's neighborhood
[35:14.800 --> 35:17.960]  prohibited commercial activity.
[35:17.960 --> 35:22.680]  The trial court did not abuse its discretion,
[35:22.680 --> 35:25.480]  so this is telling me that this is actually
[35:25.480 --> 35:27.720]  an appellate ruling because they're making,
[35:27.720 --> 35:30.920]  somebody appealed, and so the appellate court is saying,
[35:30.920 --> 35:34.640]  the trial court did not abuse its discretion
[35:34.640 --> 35:38.720]  when it allowed defendants to do their businesses'
[35:38.720 --> 35:42.880]  clerical work inside their home.
[35:42.880 --> 35:45.560]  Okay, so what this is telling me from my experience
[35:45.560 --> 35:49.800]  in legal research and case law research is that
[35:49.800 --> 35:53.440]  in a situation, whenever there's a case,
[35:53.440 --> 35:56.520]  the judge is always going to apply
[35:56.520 --> 35:58.560]  the law to the facts at hand.
[35:58.560 --> 36:02.600]  Okay, and so basically what this tells me
[36:02.600 --> 36:05.360]  is that the trial court and the appellate court
[36:05.360 --> 36:10.360]  and of course the Supreme Court have the authority
[36:10.360 --> 36:15.160]  to not only enforce, but interpret
[36:15.160 --> 36:17.640]  de-restrictions, period.
[36:17.640 --> 36:22.640]  Okay, so you don't even need to try to sue for damages
[36:23.480 --> 36:25.760]  as far as if you tried to sell your property
[36:25.760 --> 36:28.360]  and you get bids and they're lower than they should be
[36:28.360 --> 36:31.000]  because the property value's reduced because of the fencing.
[36:31.000 --> 36:33.080]  I mean, you could do that additionally,
[36:33.080 --> 36:35.680]  but that's not your only remedy.
[36:35.680 --> 36:39.520]  The court system has the authority
[36:39.520 --> 36:44.440]  to enforce covenant restrictions as a matter of law,
[36:44.440 --> 36:48.520]  as if it was a statute and it's rightfully so
[36:48.520 --> 36:53.520]  because a de-restriction is a covenant,
[36:53.920 --> 36:55.840]  a contract with the state.
[36:55.840 --> 36:57.960]  That's why it's a de-restriction, okay?
[36:57.960 --> 37:00.480]  And so they have the authority to enforce that.
[37:00.480 --> 37:03.920]  And so that means that, see in this particular case,
[37:05.480 --> 37:07.920]  when lawyers write up these de-restrictions
[37:07.920 --> 37:10.920]  or when the real estate agents write up these de-restrictions,
[37:10.920 --> 37:15.120]  they can't possibly come up with every single thing
[37:15.120 --> 37:19.640]  that somebody could do that might cross the line
[37:19.640 --> 37:23.280]  into a gray area of violating de-restriction.
[37:23.280 --> 37:24.880]  Okay, they just say simply,
[37:24.880 --> 37:29.440]  you can't have commercial activity on your property.
[37:29.440 --> 37:31.120]  Well, what does that mean?
[37:31.120 --> 37:34.440]  Okay, well, you have to look at it on a case-by-case basis
[37:34.440 --> 37:36.040]  as far as the fact pattern.
[37:36.040 --> 37:38.320]  And basically the courts are saying,
[37:38.320 --> 37:42.120]  commercial activity means you can't run a restaurant
[37:42.120 --> 37:43.920]  out of your house, okay?
[37:43.920 --> 37:48.360]  Because there's gonna be traffic, parking problems,
[37:48.360 --> 37:51.840]  people don't wanna live next to a brick-and-mortar business
[37:51.840 --> 37:53.640]  that is open to the public.
[37:53.640 --> 37:56.040]  That they're basically the court is saying,
[37:56.040 --> 37:59.800]  that's what they're interpreting the de-restriction
[37:59.800 --> 38:03.640]  to mean that type of business as commercial activity.
[38:03.640 --> 38:07.320]  But here we have probably some busybody neighbor
[38:07.320 --> 38:12.200]  who is complaining because their neighbor,
[38:12.200 --> 38:14.280]  you know, maybe has a better life than them
[38:14.280 --> 38:15.960]  because they get to work at home.
[38:15.960 --> 38:19.920]  They get to log in to their business's database
[38:19.920 --> 38:22.480]  or their business network and work at home
[38:22.480 --> 38:24.560]  over the internet on their computer.
[38:24.560 --> 38:27.040]  I'm hypothetical here, okay?
[38:27.040 --> 38:28.360]  And so they're complaining,
[38:28.360 --> 38:30.960]  oh, my neighbor's engaging in commercial activity
[38:30.960 --> 38:33.160]  in her home, she's using her computer
[38:33.160 --> 38:34.880]  on the internet to work.
[38:34.880 --> 38:37.480]  And so the court said, you know what?
[38:37.480 --> 38:41.360]  No, that does not count as commercial activity.
[38:41.360 --> 38:44.800]  You can work on your computer inside your own home
[38:44.800 --> 38:48.600]  over the internet and get your paycheck or whatever.
[38:48.600 --> 38:50.520]  That's not considered commercial activity,
[38:50.520 --> 38:52.560]  it's not a violation of the covenant.
[38:52.560 --> 38:56.240]  So this is just one example of just bringing
[38:56.240 --> 38:58.840]  to the table here that the court system
[38:58.840 --> 39:03.840]  absolutely has authority to enforce the deed restrictions.
[39:03.840 --> 39:07.880]  And if they had ruled in some different manner,
[39:07.880 --> 39:11.320]  they would have issued a relief and equity
[39:11.320 --> 39:15.040]  ordering that person to stop doing whatever they're doing
[39:15.040 --> 39:17.200]  or be held in consumptive court, okay?
[39:17.200 --> 39:22.200]  So the courts, you can go directly to the district courts
[39:23.600 --> 39:28.600]  to petition them to enforce the deed restriction.
[39:28.600 --> 39:33.600]  And in Livia's case here, apparently Livia,
[39:33.600 --> 39:38.600]  the deed restrictions specifically address chain link fences.
[39:40.160 --> 39:41.920]  Yeah, that's real specific.
[39:41.920 --> 39:42.760]  They can't...
[39:42.760 --> 39:44.480]  Sentence, exactly.
[39:44.480 --> 39:46.120]  I mean, you can't get out, you can't...
[39:46.120 --> 39:47.480]  Chain link, right.
[39:47.480 --> 39:51.080]  Yeah, there's not much room for interpretation on that deal.
[39:51.080 --> 39:52.120]  Exactly.
[39:52.120 --> 39:55.240]  And see, here's the other issue also,
[39:55.240 --> 39:59.440]  is that, and Randy was suggesting this on the break,
[39:59.440 --> 40:02.360]  that maybe the first thing you may want to do
[40:02.360 --> 40:05.560]  is go to the county tax assessor's office
[40:05.560 --> 40:09.000]  or the county appraisal district's office,
[40:09.000 --> 40:11.360]  probably the county tax assessor's office,
[40:11.360 --> 40:13.560]  because they have a vested interest in it.
[40:15.640 --> 40:18.240]  The county may or may not get involved
[40:18.240 --> 40:20.560]  at any particular stage of the game,
[40:20.560 --> 40:22.760]  but I know one thing for sure.
[40:22.760 --> 40:25.880]  At the end of the year,
[40:25.880 --> 40:28.200]  when the county appraisal district,
[40:28.200 --> 40:31.680]  which is different from the county tax office,
[40:31.680 --> 40:36.480]  but when the county appraisal district does their appraisal,
[40:36.480 --> 40:39.560]  they're gonna appraise that property at a lower value
[40:39.560 --> 40:41.040]  because the chain link fence,
[40:41.040 --> 40:43.080]  and they're not only gonna appraise there,
[40:43.080 --> 40:45.080]  that person's property that lower,
[40:45.080 --> 40:49.680]  but yours too and other surrounding property owners
[40:49.680 --> 40:51.240]  could get affected.
[40:51.240 --> 40:55.960]  And so that means the property tax bill is gonna be lower.
[40:55.960 --> 40:57.680]  And at that point,
[40:57.680 --> 41:01.480]  the county definitely has standing
[41:01.480 --> 41:05.840]  to at the very least sue that other person,
[41:05.840 --> 41:08.480]  the offender for damages,
[41:08.480 --> 41:10.520]  for violating the deed restriction,
[41:10.520 --> 41:13.320]  because now the county has suffered damages
[41:13.320 --> 41:15.760]  because they're not getting the property tax
[41:15.760 --> 41:18.600]  that they really should be getting
[41:18.600 --> 41:21.480]  because this guy violated the deed restrictions.
[41:21.480 --> 41:23.760]  And so that's why Randy's suggesting
[41:23.760 --> 41:26.240]  go to the county tax assessors office first
[41:26.240 --> 41:28.400]  and say what can be done about this.
[41:28.400 --> 41:30.280]  Now, they're not gonna give you legal advice,
[41:30.280 --> 41:33.240]  but I think it would be a good place to start.
[41:33.240 --> 41:35.760]  And early when we started talking,
[41:35.760 --> 41:38.760]  I was thinking the courts say
[41:38.760 --> 41:42.520]  you cannot invoke our jurisdiction
[41:42.520 --> 41:46.400]  unless you can bring an actual controversy.
[41:46.400 --> 41:49.560]  So anytime I'm addressing an issue
[41:49.560 --> 41:52.040]  I would have bring to the court.
[41:52.040 --> 41:54.160]  Everything I bring up,
[41:54.160 --> 41:58.200]  I respond to my own issue by saying so what?
[41:58.200 --> 41:59.720]  Those dirty rotten scoundrels,
[41:59.720 --> 42:01.000]  they did this, they do that.
[42:01.000 --> 42:02.640]  Okay, so what?
[42:02.640 --> 42:04.680]  And the so what goes to,
[42:04.680 --> 42:08.200]  how were you harmed by what they did?
[42:09.360 --> 42:11.360]  So in this case,
[42:11.360 --> 42:14.840]  especially if you can get the county tax assessor to say,
[42:14.840 --> 42:18.840]  oh, well, we're gonna lower your property value.
[42:19.840 --> 42:22.120]  You're gonna pay less taxes,
[42:22.120 --> 42:23.280]  but at the end of the day,
[42:23.280 --> 42:25.440]  you're harmed because your property
[42:25.440 --> 42:28.640]  is not worth as much as it would have been
[42:28.640 --> 42:30.200]  had that fence not been there.
[42:30.200 --> 42:33.160]  Now you can show direct harm
[42:33.160 --> 42:35.480]  and that gives you actual standing
[42:35.480 --> 42:37.920]  to bring an actual controversy to the court.
[42:37.920 --> 42:40.800]  Well, yes, but even in addition to that, Randy,
[42:40.800 --> 42:45.040]  it looks to me like when it comes to deed restrictions,
[42:46.440 --> 42:49.080]  you wouldn't even need to take it that far
[42:49.080 --> 42:50.600]  even though you've got,
[42:50.600 --> 42:52.160]  what you're saying, Randy,
[42:52.160 --> 42:54.280]  is like back up on top of backup.
[42:54.280 --> 42:57.080]  But it's from my understanding of deed restrictions
[42:57.080 --> 42:59.920]  and enforcement of deed restrictions,
[42:59.920 --> 43:04.160]  the harm is the fact that the deed restrictions
[43:04.160 --> 43:05.320]  are in violation.
[43:05.320 --> 43:06.920]  That is the harm.
[43:06.920 --> 43:11.360]  And that in and of itself invokes the subject matter
[43:11.360 --> 43:12.640]  jurisdiction of the court.
[43:12.640 --> 43:15.400]  They have the authority to address the issue
[43:15.400 --> 43:18.640]  and adjudicate the issue simply because there is
[43:18.640 --> 43:22.560]  an alleged violation of a deed restriction
[43:22.560 --> 43:26.080]  that in and of itself is the harm.
[43:26.080 --> 43:30.760]  And so then what you're doing is showing additional harm
[43:30.760 --> 43:32.640]  or back up upon backup because,
[43:32.640 --> 43:34.880]  I mean, the courts are already,
[43:34.880 --> 43:37.000]  the case law is already there
[43:37.000 --> 43:39.160]  that if there's a deed restriction violation
[43:39.160 --> 43:41.160]  of any type whatsoever,
[43:41.160 --> 43:43.600]  the assumption is already there
[43:43.600 --> 43:47.840]  that the person is being damaged financially.
[43:47.840 --> 43:49.040]  And they have standing.
[43:49.040 --> 43:51.640]  Yes, and the courts have subject matter jurisdiction.
[43:51.640 --> 43:52.680]  Absolutely.
[43:53.760 --> 43:55.680]  So even if she didn't try to sell the property,
[43:55.680 --> 43:58.520]  she still has standing.
[44:02.440 --> 44:04.480]  Hello, my name is Stuart Smith
[44:04.480 --> 44:06.240]  from naturespureorganics.com
[44:06.240 --> 44:08.720]  and I would like to invite you to come by our store
[44:08.720 --> 44:12.360]  at 1904 Guadalupe Street, sweet D here in Austin, Texas
[44:12.360 --> 44:14.200]  find brave new books and chase things
[44:14.200 --> 44:16.360]  to see all that fantastic health and wellness products
[44:16.360 --> 44:18.160]  with your very own eyes.
[44:18.160 --> 44:20.040]  Have a look at our miracle healing clay
[44:20.040 --> 44:22.560]  that started our adventure in alternative medicine.
[44:22.560 --> 44:24.560]  Take a peek at some of our other wonderful products
[44:24.560 --> 44:26.720]  including our Australian emu oil,
[44:26.720 --> 44:28.680]  lotion candles, olive oil soaps,
[44:28.680 --> 44:30.240]  and colloidal silver and gold.
[44:30.240 --> 44:34.080]  Call 512-264-4043
[44:34.080 --> 44:37.440]  or find us online at naturespureorganics.com.
[44:37.440 --> 44:42.440]  That's 512-264-4043, naturespureorganics.com.
[44:43.080 --> 44:44.560]  Don't forget to like us on Facebook
[44:44.560 --> 44:47.200]  for information on events and our products.
[44:47.200 --> 44:49.160]  naturespureorganics.com.
[44:49.160 --> 44:54.160]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:54.160 --> 44:58.160]  Win your case without an attorney with jurisdictionary.
[44:58.160 --> 45:01.160]  The affordable, easy to understand four-city course
[45:01.160 --> 45:05.160]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[45:05.160 --> 45:07.160]  If you have a lawyer,
[45:07.160 --> 45:09.160]  know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:09.160 --> 45:11.160]  If you have a lawyer,
[45:11.160 --> 45:13.160]  know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:13.160 --> 45:15.160]  If you have a lawyer,
[45:15.160 --> 45:17.160]  know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:17.160 --> 45:19.160]  If you don't have a lawyer,
[45:19.160 --> 45:21.160]  know what you should do for yourself.
[45:21.160 --> 45:24.160]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course,
[45:24.160 --> 45:26.160]  and now you can too.
[45:26.160 --> 45:29.160]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney
[45:29.160 --> 45:32.160]  with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:32.160 --> 45:34.160]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit,
[45:34.160 --> 45:37.160]  you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:37.160 --> 45:39.160]  about the principles and practices
[45:39.160 --> 45:41.160]  that control our American courts.
[45:41.160 --> 45:43.160]  You'll receive our audio classroom,
[45:43.160 --> 45:45.160]  video seminar, tutorial,
[45:45.160 --> 45:47.160]  forms for civil cases,
[45:47.160 --> 45:50.160]  prosay tactics, and much more.
[45:50.160 --> 45:52.160]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[45:52.160 --> 45:54.160]  and click on the banner.
[45:54.160 --> 46:16.160]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:16.160 --> 46:39.160]  Watch in the sparks fly.
[46:39.160 --> 46:43.160]  Okay, we are here with Livia and Livia.
[46:43.160 --> 46:45.160]  I just wanted to mention a couple of other things
[46:45.160 --> 46:48.160]  before we have to start moving on to some of our other callers
[46:48.160 --> 46:51.160]  concerning where this is headed.
[46:51.160 --> 46:55.160]  Okay, Randy had some good points about, you know,
[46:55.160 --> 46:59.160]  how you could show damage, how you could show harm.
[46:59.160 --> 47:02.160]  You could, for example, bring an appraiser out
[47:02.160 --> 47:05.160]  and have them do a full appraisal of your property
[47:05.160 --> 47:07.160]  and maybe show some comparisons
[47:07.160 --> 47:10.160]  as far as how it's worth less
[47:10.160 --> 47:14.160]  or like he was saying solicit for, you know, offers
[47:14.160 --> 47:17.160]  and if you couldn't sell it for as much, you know,
[47:17.160 --> 47:20.160]  show actual damages, things like this.
[47:20.160 --> 47:23.160]  Like I said, I think that that's, you know,
[47:23.160 --> 47:25.160]  you could also do that,
[47:25.160 --> 47:28.160]  but I don't think it's completely necessary
[47:28.160 --> 47:30.160]  because it's already been, listen,
[47:30.160 --> 47:33.160]  deed restrictions in every state,
[47:33.160 --> 47:38.160]  the state takes that seriously
[47:38.160 --> 47:42.160]  because it is a covenant with the state, period,
[47:42.160 --> 47:46.160]  because it's a deed and the deed is, you know,
[47:46.160 --> 47:49.160]  has to do with setting the meets and the bounds
[47:49.160 --> 47:52.160]  and the property, you know, boundaries
[47:52.160 --> 47:54.160]  and all of these things.
[47:54.160 --> 47:56.160]  Okay, so they take it seriously,
[47:56.160 --> 47:58.160]  these covenant restriction violations
[47:58.160 --> 48:00.160]  and every state they're going to take it seriously,
[48:00.160 --> 48:02.160]  whether it has to do with the water supply or not
[48:02.160 --> 48:06.160]  because it has to do with property value ultimately
[48:06.160 --> 48:08.160]  and the state has an interest in that
[48:08.160 --> 48:11.160]  because that's how they get their revenue.
[48:11.160 --> 48:14.160]  So anyways, the point I'm trying to make about this
[48:14.160 --> 48:17.160]  and the showing damages,
[48:17.160 --> 48:20.160]  the violation of the deed restriction
[48:20.160 --> 48:25.160]  or the alleged, I should say the alleged violation
[48:25.160 --> 48:28.160]  of the deed restriction on the part of the plaintiff
[48:28.160 --> 48:32.160]  in and of itself shows damage.
[48:32.160 --> 48:34.160]  Okay, if there's a violation of a deed restriction,
[48:34.160 --> 48:38.160]  there's damage, period, it doesn't matter what it is.
[48:38.160 --> 48:42.160]  Okay, so in this situation, like with the,
[48:42.160 --> 48:44.160]  whoever was working inside their home,
[48:44.160 --> 48:47.160]  logging into their work computer of their business,
[48:47.160 --> 48:49.160]  or who knows, maybe they're running an online business
[48:49.160 --> 48:52.160]  or something, okay?
[48:52.160 --> 48:56.160]  The neighbor really didn't have to show
[48:56.160 --> 48:58.160]  how they were being damaged by that.
[48:58.160 --> 49:00.160]  I mean, they couldn't have.
[49:00.160 --> 49:02.160]  There's no way they could have shown
[49:02.160 --> 49:04.160]  that they were being personally damaged by that
[49:04.160 --> 49:07.160]  because, like I said, it wasn't a restaurant.
[49:07.160 --> 49:11.160]  There weren't 10 cars, 15, 20 cars parked up and down the street
[49:11.160 --> 49:13.160]  in front of their house or blocking their driveway
[49:13.160 --> 49:16.160]  or a bunch of noise or anything like that
[49:16.160 --> 49:19.160]  that was affecting them personally
[49:19.160 --> 49:21.160]  that they could say I'm being damaged here.
[49:21.160 --> 49:24.160]  It's reducing my property value, blah, blah, blah.
[49:24.160 --> 49:28.160]  The fact that in and of itself,
[49:28.160 --> 49:32.160]  that it was an alleged deed restriction violation,
[49:32.160 --> 49:37.160]  that in and of itself gave that person that neighbor
[49:37.160 --> 49:39.160]  standing to file the suit
[49:39.160 --> 49:43.160]  and it gave the court subject matter jurisdiction
[49:43.160 --> 49:45.160]  because if she couldn't have shown,
[49:45.160 --> 49:49.160]  if it only went to personal harm,
[49:49.160 --> 49:52.160]  well, that case would have gotten dismissed out immediately.
[49:52.160 --> 49:54.160]  It would have gotten dismissed out immediately
[49:54.160 --> 49:57.160]  because of lack of subject matter jurisdiction of the court
[49:57.160 --> 50:01.160]  because that plaintiff brought no case in controversy.
[50:01.160 --> 50:06.160]  That shows right there that when it comes to deed restrictions,
[50:06.160 --> 50:11.160]  deed covenants, violations of deed restrictions,
[50:11.160 --> 50:15.160]  you have standing, you have shown harm,
[50:15.160 --> 50:19.160]  that is the harm right there, that is all you need.
[50:19.160 --> 50:23.160]  The fact that it's showing a reduction of property value
[50:23.160 --> 50:26.160]  on top of that just gives you even more ammo.
[50:26.160 --> 50:29.160]  Yes, this goes to harm per se.
[50:29.160 --> 50:32.160]  It's like a due process violation.
[50:32.160 --> 50:34.160]  If you're denied due process,
[50:34.160 --> 50:37.160]  you don't have to show that you were harmed by the denial of due process.
[50:37.160 --> 50:39.160]  It's harm on its face.
[50:39.160 --> 50:41.160]  And so apparently from that case,
[50:41.160 --> 50:45.160]  it indicates that the party with an issue had standing
[50:45.160 --> 50:50.160]  to invoke the jurisdiction of the court
[50:50.160 --> 50:52.160]  without having to show harm.
[50:52.160 --> 50:53.160]  Exactly.
[50:53.160 --> 50:55.160]  And I'm looking at, you know, there's like five,
[50:55.160 --> 50:57.160]  ten other cases that are summarized here
[50:57.160 --> 51:01.160]  just all different kinds of things that really I'm like,
[51:01.160 --> 51:06.160]  really are you really harmed by what you're claiming
[51:06.160 --> 51:08.160]  this other person is doing with their property?
[51:08.160 --> 51:10.160]  I mean, it's like, it doesn't matter.
[51:10.160 --> 51:12.160]  It's a violation of the deed restriction
[51:12.160 --> 51:14.160]  or at least an alleged one.
[51:14.160 --> 51:16.160]  That's all there is to it.
[51:16.160 --> 51:20.160]  It's kind of like, to me, it almost goes to contract law in a way
[51:20.160 --> 51:25.160]  because when it comes to breach of contract,
[51:25.160 --> 51:27.160]  that's all there is to it.
[51:27.160 --> 51:30.160]  It's like, you don't really have to show,
[51:30.160 --> 51:32.160]  if you're in a civil suit with somebody,
[51:32.160 --> 51:34.160]  you have a contract and business contract
[51:34.160 --> 51:38.160]  and that person, you know, is in breach of contract,
[51:38.160 --> 51:43.160]  you don't really even have to show so much damage.
[51:43.160 --> 51:46.160]  The fact that they breach the contract is a breach of contract period
[51:46.160 --> 51:48.160]  and the court can enforce, the court has the authority
[51:48.160 --> 51:49.160]  to enforce the contract.
[51:49.160 --> 51:51.160]  And the court to definitely have the authority
[51:51.160 --> 51:54.160]  to enforce covenant restrictions,
[51:54.160 --> 51:59.160]  they could order somebody to shut down that restaurant ASAP
[51:59.160 --> 52:03.160]  or else you're in a contempt of court if it was a restaurant,
[52:03.160 --> 52:04.160]  something like that.
[52:04.160 --> 52:08.160]  So you have a lot, you have standing is the point.
[52:08.160 --> 52:11.160]  You definitely have standing to do something about it
[52:11.160 --> 52:14.160]  and ultimately the county and the state do also
[52:14.160 --> 52:19.160]  because they're a tertiary, you know, party here
[52:19.160 --> 52:23.160]  that potentially will be damaged
[52:23.160 --> 52:26.160]  because the state is going to have a reduction in income
[52:26.160 --> 52:27.160]  from property taxes.
[52:27.160 --> 52:29.160]  So they've got something to say about it.
[52:29.160 --> 52:31.160]  They have standing to say about it too.
[52:31.160 --> 52:34.160]  But it looks like from these cases that I'm looking at here,
[52:34.160 --> 52:38.160]  it looks like they're primarily civil cases
[52:38.160 --> 52:44.160]  of one neighbor versus another, that sort of thing.
[52:44.160 --> 52:49.160]  But I don't think that you are totally without remedy here.
[52:49.160 --> 52:53.160]  And so, yeah, I think probably the good thing to do
[52:53.160 --> 52:56.160]  is to talk to the tax assessor's office,
[52:56.160 --> 52:58.160]  maybe talk to the appraisal district's office
[52:58.160 --> 53:06.160]  and maybe even look up, try to find some attorneys
[53:06.160 --> 53:10.160]  in North Carolina that deal with lawsuits like this
[53:10.160 --> 53:14.160]  of enforcing covenant restrictions
[53:14.160 --> 53:19.160]  and they may give you like a free initial conference
[53:19.160 --> 53:22.160]  to discuss your situation
[53:22.160 --> 53:24.160]  and if you decide that you can't afford to hire them
[53:24.160 --> 53:26.160]  or don't want to hire them,
[53:26.160 --> 53:29.160]  they may even give you some tips and some pointers
[53:29.160 --> 53:35.160]  on how you could proceed to pursue a case per se
[53:35.160 --> 53:39.160]  and look up how to look for case law
[53:39.160 --> 53:43.160]  that support what you're after.
[53:43.160 --> 53:45.160]  Let me make a quick suggestion,
[53:45.160 --> 53:48.160]  which may be a remedy that will eliminate
[53:48.160 --> 53:50.160]  your having to go through the whole court routine,
[53:50.160 --> 53:54.160]  is a tort letter.
[53:54.160 --> 54:00.160]  Olivia, have you talked to the neighbors about defense?
[54:00.160 --> 54:04.160]  Yes, I have sent an email and I was going to take it down.
[54:04.160 --> 54:08.160]  Instead, they had, again, a 60-day reminder
[54:08.160 --> 54:12.160]  25 days ago and I'm going to give them a 30-day reminder.
[54:12.160 --> 54:15.160]  Basically, by July 31st, I asked them to take it down.
[54:15.160 --> 54:20.160]  Okay, good, you've set it up so you've laid a record.
[54:20.160 --> 54:25.160]  Now you might send them a notice of tort
[54:25.160 --> 54:28.160]  and what a notice of tort is,
[54:28.160 --> 54:32.160]  is before you can take action against someone,
[54:32.160 --> 54:35.160]  the court doesn't want you to use the court
[54:35.160 --> 54:38.160]  as the remedy of first resort.
[54:38.160 --> 54:41.160]  They want you to use the court as a remedy of last resort
[54:41.160 --> 54:47.160]  so they ask you to exercise a remedy
[54:47.160 --> 54:49.160]  before you come to the court.
[54:49.160 --> 54:53.160]  The only remedy they require that you exercise
[54:53.160 --> 54:56.160]  is to give notice and opportunity
[54:56.160 --> 54:59.160]  and it sounds like you've already essentially
[54:59.160 --> 55:01.160]  gave notice and opportunity to cure.
[55:01.160 --> 55:05.160]  Did they respond, Olivia?
[55:05.160 --> 55:08.160]  They did.
[55:08.160 --> 55:12.160]  They wanted to discuss to find a better amicable solution.
[55:12.160 --> 55:14.160]  Okay, there's no amicable solution.
[55:14.160 --> 55:15.160]  It's one way or the other.
[55:15.160 --> 55:17.160]  There is no amicable solution and please tell me
[55:17.160 --> 55:20.160]  what would you like to discuss in writing
[55:20.160 --> 55:21.160]  and then they didn't respond.
[55:21.160 --> 55:23.160]  I would not talk to them.
[55:23.160 --> 55:24.160]  I would not talk to them.
[55:24.160 --> 55:27.160]  I would do everything in writing.
[55:27.160 --> 55:29.160]  Exactly, exactly.
[55:29.160 --> 55:31.160]  I was concerned that they got me something
[55:31.160 --> 55:33.160]  that I agreed to something in conversation.
[55:33.160 --> 55:36.160]  No, don't do anything like this over the phone
[55:36.160 --> 55:38.160]  because they may trap you into saying something
[55:38.160 --> 55:41.160]  that you shouldn't or people's emotions get flying.
[55:41.160 --> 55:43.160]  Always do everything in writing
[55:43.160 --> 55:45.160]  and very carefully think through
[55:45.160 --> 55:47.160]  what you're saying before you.
[55:47.160 --> 55:50.160]  I would not do emails anymore.
[55:50.160 --> 55:52.160]  I would do certified letters.
[55:52.160 --> 55:54.160]  Okay, with tracking numbers,
[55:54.160 --> 55:56.160]  proof of communications.
[55:56.160 --> 55:58.160]  Here's one other question I have for you
[55:58.160 --> 56:02.160]  before we need to wrap this up at the top of the hour here.
[56:02.160 --> 56:04.160]  Is this in a rural area
[56:04.160 --> 56:06.160]  or is this in some kind of a municipality
[56:06.160 --> 56:09.160]  where there are zonings?
[56:09.160 --> 56:11.160]  We have zoning.
[56:11.160 --> 56:13.160]  We have zoning at the residential zone
[56:13.160 --> 56:16.160]  but if you stick this comment,
[56:16.160 --> 56:19.160]  they are more restricted than the zoning ordinance.
[56:19.160 --> 56:21.160]  Okay, are there...
[56:21.160 --> 56:23.160]  Wait a minute, wait a minute.
[56:23.160 --> 56:25.160]  So y'all are in an area
[56:25.160 --> 56:28.160]  where there's a local municipality
[56:28.160 --> 56:33.160]  that has zoning and that has like building code
[56:33.160 --> 56:36.160]  and stuff like that.
[56:36.160 --> 56:37.160]  Well, we...
[56:37.160 --> 56:39.160]  Building codes are, you know,
[56:39.160 --> 56:40.160]  soloed in North Carolina,
[56:40.160 --> 56:41.160]  but we're not in the city.
[56:41.160 --> 56:42.160]  We are in a county.
[56:42.160 --> 56:44.160]  We also have the city limits.
[56:44.160 --> 56:45.160]  So the...
[56:45.160 --> 56:46.160]  But you're still in a zoning
[56:46.160 --> 56:49.160]  like the county does zoning?
[56:49.160 --> 56:50.160]  Yeah, we're in a county.
[56:50.160 --> 56:51.160]  We are zoning at the residential.
[56:51.160 --> 56:54.160]  This area is the residential zone area.
[56:54.160 --> 56:56.160]  Okay, here's my suggestion.
[56:56.160 --> 56:57.160]  Here's my suggestion.
[56:57.160 --> 56:58.160]  That's all we have.
[56:58.160 --> 57:00.160]  Okay, okay, here's my suggestion.
[57:00.160 --> 57:01.160]  Okay, well, normally...
[57:01.160 --> 57:03.160]  Well, I don't know.
[57:03.160 --> 57:04.160]  I haven't seen a situation
[57:04.160 --> 57:07.160]  where counties set zoning.
[57:07.160 --> 57:09.160]  Usually when people live in the county proper,
[57:09.160 --> 57:10.160]  there's no zoning.
[57:10.160 --> 57:12.160]  Usually only municipalities engage in zoning,
[57:12.160 --> 57:13.160]  but in North Carolina,
[57:13.160 --> 57:14.160]  I suppose it's different.
[57:14.160 --> 57:16.160]  It's different everywhere.
[57:16.160 --> 57:17.160]  With the June to 21,
[57:17.160 --> 57:18.160]  there's a lot more of this.
[57:18.160 --> 57:19.160]  Okay, okay.
[57:19.160 --> 57:20.160]  So let...
[57:20.160 --> 57:21.160]  Before we belive that,
[57:21.160 --> 57:22.160]  let me get to my remedy here
[57:22.160 --> 57:24.160]  before we run out of time.
[57:24.160 --> 57:26.160]  I would go to the zoning office.
[57:26.160 --> 57:29.160]  I would go to the zoning office
[57:29.160 --> 57:31.160]  of the county
[57:31.160 --> 57:34.160]  and find out from somebody
[57:34.160 --> 57:39.160]  if a property owner is in violation
[57:39.160 --> 57:41.160]  of a deed restriction,
[57:41.160 --> 57:46.160]  does that count as a zoning violation?
[57:46.160 --> 57:48.160]  Because it's very well made.
[57:48.160 --> 57:49.160]  I would call them.
[57:49.160 --> 57:50.160]  I've already talked to them.
[57:50.160 --> 57:51.160]  I already...
[57:51.160 --> 57:52.160]  There's a different name for them.
[57:52.160 --> 57:55.160]  Board of Zoning Directors.
[57:55.160 --> 57:56.160]  But I already called them
[57:56.160 --> 57:58.160]  three months ago when this happened,
[57:58.160 --> 58:00.160]  and they have absolutely no control over that.
[58:00.160 --> 58:01.160]  Okay, okay.
[58:01.160 --> 58:02.160]  So then they...
[58:02.160 --> 58:04.160]  Okay, so their zoning code is such that
[58:04.160 --> 58:06.160]  if somebody is in a deed restriction,
[58:06.160 --> 58:09.160]  that's not counted as a zoning violation.
[58:09.160 --> 58:10.160]  Okay, so never mind on that.
[58:10.160 --> 58:12.160]  Okay, so listen, Libby,
[58:12.160 --> 58:15.160]  I think we've given you a lot of tools so far.
[58:15.160 --> 58:17.160]  I mean, you can just do a search
[58:17.160 --> 58:19.160]  for how to enforce deed restrictions
[58:19.160 --> 58:21.160]  or how to enforce covenant restrictions
[58:21.160 --> 58:22.160]  in North Carolina.
[58:22.160 --> 58:23.160]  You'll get a lot of hits.
[58:23.160 --> 58:26.160]  You can go back and listen to the archive,
[58:26.160 --> 58:31.160]  this NCLawyersWeekly.com with a tag of...
[58:31.160 --> 58:32.160]  I found it.
[58:32.160 --> 58:33.160]  Okay, very good.
[58:33.160 --> 58:35.160]  You may want to contact some lawyers
[58:35.160 --> 58:37.160]  that deal with this,
[58:37.160 --> 58:39.160]  and they may be able to give you some helpful tips
[58:39.160 --> 58:41.160]  without even having to hire them.
[58:41.160 --> 58:44.160]  So talk to the county tax assessor's office as well.
[58:44.160 --> 58:49.160]  I think we've got you with some tasks here.
[58:50.160 --> 58:53.160]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world,
[58:53.160 --> 58:55.160]  yet countless readers are frustrated
[58:55.160 --> 58:57.160]  because they struggle to understand it.
[58:57.160 --> 59:01.160]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:01.160 --> 59:03.160]  but in the process can compromise
[59:03.160 --> 59:06.160]  the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:06.160 --> 59:08.160]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:08.160 --> 59:12.160]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:12.160 --> 59:17.160]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:17.160 --> 59:20.160]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up
[59:20.160 --> 59:23.160]  in a marvelous way, providing an entrance
[59:23.160 --> 59:27.160]  into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:27.160 --> 59:30.160]  Bibles for America would like to give you
[59:30.160 --> 59:33.160]  a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:33.160 --> 59:36.160]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible
[59:36.160 --> 59:43.160]  is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.160 --> 59:47.160]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.160 --> 59:50.160]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:50.160 --> 59:55.160]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network
[59:55.160 --> 59:59.160]  at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:00:02.160 --> 01:00:04.160]  The following use flash is brought to you by
[01:00:04.160 --> 01:00:06.160]  the Lowstar Lowdown,
[01:00:06.160 --> 01:00:09.160]  providing the deli bulletins for the commodity market,
[01:00:09.160 --> 01:00:13.160]  today's history, news updates,
[01:00:13.160 --> 01:00:22.160]  and the inside scoop into the tides of the alternative.
[01:00:22.160 --> 01:00:25.160]  Markets for the 11th of April, 2018,
[01:00:25.160 --> 01:00:29.160]  close with gold $1,353.22 an ounce,
[01:00:29.160 --> 01:00:31.160]  silver $16.68 an ounce,
[01:00:31.160 --> 01:00:34.160]  Texas crude $65.51 a barrel,
[01:00:34.160 --> 01:00:37.160]  bitcoins at $6,902.19,
[01:00:37.160 --> 01:00:40.160]  ethereums at $420.80,
[01:00:40.160 --> 01:00:43.160]  bitcoin cash at $652.90,
[01:00:43.160 --> 01:00:47.160]  and finally light coins at $114.34,
[01:00:47.160 --> 01:00:49.160]  a crypto coin.
[01:00:55.160 --> 01:00:58.160]  Today in history, the year 1968,
[01:00:58.160 --> 01:01:00.160]  President Lyndon M. Johnson signed
[01:01:00.160 --> 01:01:02.160]  the Civil Rights Act of 1968,
[01:01:02.160 --> 01:01:04.160]  which prohibited private businesses from discriminating
[01:01:04.160 --> 01:01:08.160]  based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
[01:01:08.160 --> 01:01:10.160]  It also prohibited unequal application
[01:01:10.160 --> 01:01:12.160]  of voter registration requirements,
[01:01:12.160 --> 01:01:14.160]  racial segregation in public schools,
[01:01:14.160 --> 01:01:16.160]  in employment, and public accommodations
[01:01:16.160 --> 01:01:19.160]  for places of business, today in history.
[01:01:23.160 --> 01:01:26.160]  In recent news, tensions in Syria seem to have
[01:01:26.160 --> 01:01:28.160]  reached new levels after a chemical attack
[01:01:28.160 --> 01:01:30.160]  on civilians in the city of Douma,
[01:01:30.160 --> 01:01:32.160]  which left 40 dead and many injured,
[01:01:32.160 --> 01:01:34.160]  an attack which is being blamed on the
[01:01:34.160 --> 01:01:36.160]  democratically elected president of Syria, Bashar al-Assad,
[01:01:36.160 --> 01:01:39.160]  by the United States and on Israel by Russia,
[01:01:39.160 --> 01:01:41.160]  either a cutatory narrative without any
[01:01:41.160 --> 01:01:43.160]  verified evidence as of yet.
[01:01:43.160 --> 01:01:45.160]  President Trump tweeted today, Wednesday,
[01:01:45.160 --> 01:01:47.160]  that if, quote, Russia vows to shoot down
[01:01:47.160 --> 01:01:49.160]  any and all missiles fired at Syria,
[01:01:49.160 --> 01:01:51.160]  get ready, Russia, because they will be coming
[01:01:51.160 --> 01:01:54.160]  in nice and new and smart, going on to warn Russia
[01:01:54.160 --> 01:01:56.160]  that you shouldn't be partners with a gas-killing animal
[01:01:56.160 --> 01:01:58.160]  who kills his people and enjoys it.
[01:01:58.160 --> 01:02:00.160]  Many in the West, including President Trump,
[01:02:00.160 --> 01:02:03.160]  have been quick to conclude that this chemical attack
[01:02:03.160 --> 01:02:06.160]  must have been conducted by Assad and his forces.
[01:02:06.160 --> 01:02:08.160]  Syria and Russia, on the other hand, have given
[01:02:08.160 --> 01:02:11.160]  approval since yesterday for the organization
[01:02:11.160 --> 01:02:13.160]  for the prohibition of chemical weapons
[01:02:13.160 --> 01:02:15.160]  to investigate the sign of the chemical slaughter.
[01:02:15.160 --> 01:02:17.160]  Assad has been successful in maintaining
[01:02:17.160 --> 01:02:20.160]  rule and support during Syria's seven-year civil war,
[01:02:20.160 --> 01:02:22.160]  a civil war that is being fought by the
[01:02:22.160 --> 01:02:24.160]  government of Syria and anti-Assad Syrian rebels
[01:02:24.160 --> 01:02:27.160]  that are openly being funded by western governments,
[01:02:27.160 --> 01:02:29.160]  with ISIS being one of the more notorious
[01:02:29.160 --> 01:02:32.160]  winner groups of the American-backed Syrian rebels.
[01:02:32.160 --> 01:02:34.160]  Now, surprise then why Russian Foreign Minister
[01:02:34.160 --> 01:02:37.160]  Spokeswoman Maria Zakoba posted on Facebook
[01:02:37.160 --> 01:02:40.160]  that smart missiles should be fired at terrorists
[01:02:40.160 --> 01:02:42.160]  and not at a legitimate government,
[01:02:42.160 --> 01:02:44.160]  which has been fighting terrorists.
[01:02:44.160 --> 01:02:46.160]  Or is this a trick to destroy all traces
[01:02:46.160 --> 01:02:48.160]  with a smart missile strike, and then there will be
[01:02:48.160 --> 01:02:51.160]  no evidence for international inspectors to look at?
[01:02:51.160 --> 01:03:01.160]  This was Rick Rody with your lowdown for April 11, 2018.
[01:03:21.160 --> 01:03:31.160]  This is Rick Rody with your lowdown for April 11, 2018.
[01:03:51.160 --> 01:04:01.160]  This is Rick Rody with your lowdown for April 11, 2018.
[01:04:21.160 --> 01:04:41.160]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens,
[01:04:41.160 --> 01:04:46.160]  root of La Radio on this, the 28th day of June, 2018.
[01:04:46.160 --> 01:04:52.160]  And Olivia, first-time caller, stumped the chump.
[01:04:52.160 --> 01:04:55.160]  So every once in a while, it's good for me.
[01:04:55.160 --> 01:04:57.160]  I like to get stumped on the air.
[01:04:57.160 --> 01:05:00.160]  It reminds me that I have a lot to learn.
[01:05:00.160 --> 01:05:03.160]  Okay, we have a board full of callers.
[01:05:03.160 --> 01:05:06.160]  We're going to start with Charles from Georgia.
[01:05:06.160 --> 01:05:08.160]  Hello, Charles. It's been a while.
[01:05:08.160 --> 01:05:10.160]  How's it going today, Reddy?
[01:05:10.160 --> 01:05:12.160]  Going pretty good.
[01:05:12.160 --> 01:05:15.160]  What do you have for us today?
[01:05:15.160 --> 01:05:19.160]  Well, I contacted you a couple of years ago
[01:05:19.160 --> 01:05:25.160]  about a Charles Support dilemma.
[01:05:25.160 --> 01:05:34.160]  Let me see, after, I guess after six years, I think it was,
[01:05:34.160 --> 01:05:43.160]  I received a letter in the mail of a paternity contest.
[01:05:43.160 --> 01:05:47.160]  And to make it short, that the child was mine.
[01:05:47.160 --> 01:05:52.160]  So this was up to me until I got the papers in the mail.
[01:05:52.160 --> 01:05:55.160]  Once I got the papers in the mail, found out,
[01:05:55.160 --> 01:06:01.160]  took the test that the child was mine.
[01:06:01.160 --> 01:06:07.160]  I gave you a call to see what options I could wear.
[01:06:07.160 --> 01:06:15.160]  And shortly after that, they sent me some papers to sign about 15 pages worth,
[01:06:15.160 --> 01:06:21.160]  in which I probably just, you know, basically crossed the entirety of the page,
[01:06:21.160 --> 01:06:24.160]  the 15 papers, except for one sentence.
[01:06:24.160 --> 01:06:28.160]  And I think that one sentence said that the parents shall have discretion
[01:06:28.160 --> 01:06:35.160]  over parenting time with the child, everything else I just crossed out.
[01:06:35.160 --> 01:06:42.160]  By each paragraph, I put my initials by it and signed the model of it,
[01:06:42.160 --> 01:06:50.160]  took it to a notary, sent it to the judge and the prosecutor, certified mail.
[01:06:50.160 --> 01:06:57.160]  Well, after that, I never got a response from the court.
[01:06:57.160 --> 01:07:06.160]  But before that, they were threatening to default my judgment, but they, you know, they didn't.
[01:07:06.160 --> 01:07:10.160]  So I'm going to fast forward two years later.
[01:07:10.160 --> 01:07:16.160]  So last week, I started a new job, or two weeks ago, I started a new job,
[01:07:16.160 --> 01:07:22.160]  and I get a letter from my job a week ago,
[01:07:22.160 --> 01:07:33.160]  and it stated that the child support enforcement agency is going to take a certain amount out of my check every week.
[01:07:33.160 --> 01:07:37.160]  Okay.
[01:07:37.160 --> 01:07:44.160]  So it appears as though the case was adjudicated in absentee.
[01:07:44.160 --> 01:07:47.160]  Okay. You can explain what absentee is.
[01:07:47.160 --> 01:07:49.160]  When you were absent.
[01:07:49.160 --> 01:07:51.160]  Yes. Okay. Yes.
[01:07:51.160 --> 01:07:56.160]  Do you have a final order for, were you given notice of a final order from the court?
[01:07:56.160 --> 01:07:58.160]  No.
[01:07:58.160 --> 01:08:01.160]  Then you have option.
[01:08:01.160 --> 01:08:13.160]  You can file an opposition with the court claiming that you were, were not given the opportunity to adjudicate the issue.
[01:08:13.160 --> 01:08:25.160]  So there had to be a hearing where the court entered an order declaring a judgment against you.
[01:08:25.160 --> 01:08:31.160]  And you had a right to represent you or be represented at that hearing.
[01:08:31.160 --> 01:08:32.160]  You apparently were not.
[01:08:32.160 --> 01:08:34.160]  You weren't given notice.
[01:08:34.160 --> 01:08:43.160]  So you can move the, was this a county court or district court that entered this ruling?
[01:08:43.160 --> 01:08:45.160]  It's a county court.
[01:08:45.160 --> 01:08:47.160]  Okay. Okay.
[01:08:47.160 --> 01:08:49.160]  I don't know why I asked that question and thinking about it.
[01:08:49.160 --> 01:08:51.160]  It probably doesn't matter.
[01:08:51.160 --> 01:09:14.160]  You could go to the court of appeals and petition for a writ of mandamus ordering the county court to cease collection of the, cease collection based on the collection order and order the court to hold a proper hearing.
[01:09:14.160 --> 01:09:17.160]  Give you notice so you have opportunity.
[01:09:17.160 --> 01:09:19.160]  Okay.
[01:09:19.160 --> 01:09:21.160]  I didn't know I was going to file a mandamus.
[01:09:21.160 --> 01:09:25.160]  I thought I was going to file an injunction, but that's not logical.
[01:09:25.160 --> 01:09:26.160]  No, an injunction.
[01:09:26.160 --> 01:09:32.160]  An injunction would only be effective if the court had plenty of jurisdiction.
[01:09:32.160 --> 01:09:48.160]  But if the court entered a final order, even if they entered it without your knowledge, 30 days after they enter the final order or whatever the time limitation on appeal is for that state.
[01:09:48.160 --> 01:09:58.160]  When the, when the time for filing a notice of appeal ran, then the court would lose plenary jurisdiction.
[01:09:58.160 --> 01:10:00.160]  They no longer have jurisdiction in the case.
[01:10:00.160 --> 01:10:03.160]  So you can't ask court to do anything at this point.
[01:10:03.160 --> 01:10:08.160]  You would have to ask the higher court to reopen the case.
[01:10:08.160 --> 01:10:12.160]  And you do that with a petition for mandamus.
[01:10:12.160 --> 01:10:14.160]  Okay.
[01:10:14.160 --> 01:10:18.160]  You go to the court of appeals and say, you know, they adjudicated this case.
[01:10:18.160 --> 01:10:21.160]  So I had no knowledge of the hearing.
[01:10:21.160 --> 01:10:22.160]  I wasn't noticed.
[01:10:22.160 --> 01:10:24.160]  I wasn't given opportunity to appear.
[01:10:24.160 --> 01:10:30.160]  And therefore the, the determination is avoid.
[01:10:30.160 --> 01:10:36.160]  Ask the appellate court to rule that the determination was void.
[01:10:36.160 --> 01:10:52.160]  And that the, so that avoid final determination returns jurisdiction to the trial court and then order the court to reconvene the hearing with proper notice.
[01:10:52.160 --> 01:10:53.160]  All right.
[01:10:53.160 --> 01:10:55.160]  So there was no denotage.
[01:10:55.160 --> 01:10:57.160]  Amen.
[01:10:57.160 --> 01:10:59.160]  Absolutely.
[01:10:59.160 --> 01:11:06.160]  So this is before I should go ahead and sue the prosecutor and judge.
[01:11:06.160 --> 01:11:08.160]  Wait, wait, wait, hold on.
[01:11:08.160 --> 01:11:10.160]  Let me, let me, I'm sorry.
[01:11:10.160 --> 01:11:12.160]  Let me ask a question real quick.
[01:11:12.160 --> 01:11:16.160]  I missed a little bit at the beginning because I had to screen a couple of calls.
[01:11:16.160 --> 01:11:28.160]  Charles, was there ever a hearing that you attended where you were asked to produce like paycheck stubs?
[01:11:28.160 --> 01:11:38.160]  Or anything like that to, in order for a court to determine how much per month your child support was supposed to be?
[01:11:38.160 --> 01:11:43.160]  Was there ever a hearing like that that you attended that you were involved with?
[01:11:43.160 --> 01:11:46.160]  I'm living in Georgia.
[01:11:46.160 --> 01:11:49.160]  They emailed me something asking for that.
[01:11:49.160 --> 01:11:57.160]  But before they asked for it, they had already determined the amount was going to be a certain amount.
[01:11:57.160 --> 01:12:02.160]  And then they asked for a proof of income.
[01:12:02.160 --> 01:12:19.160]  And I went to the Georgia Workforce Commission and it got the previous five-year history of my income and mailed it to them, you know, which was beyond poverty at the time.
[01:12:19.160 --> 01:12:25.160]  And who is them, the child support enforcement bureaucracy?
[01:12:25.160 --> 01:12:28.160]  The prosecutor.
[01:12:28.160 --> 01:12:30.160]  The prosecutor.
[01:12:30.160 --> 01:12:36.160]  The prosecutor of, you know, the county in Michigan.
[01:12:36.160 --> 01:12:38.160]  Okay, okay.
[01:12:38.160 --> 01:12:44.160]  And so you sent that in and so then what, they made a decision without you there?
[01:12:44.160 --> 01:12:46.160]  Yes, yes.
[01:12:46.160 --> 01:12:54.160]  They never gave me notice of a hearing so I could attend.
[01:12:54.160 --> 01:13:01.160]  This wasn't like a divorce case where custody, this was like, okay, okay.
[01:13:01.160 --> 01:13:03.160]  No, no, no, no, no.
[01:13:03.160 --> 01:13:05.160]  Now, we were, I was never married.
[01:13:05.160 --> 01:13:07.160]  You said you missed the first part.
[01:13:07.160 --> 01:13:20.160]  This was something that was sprung on me, undenostingly five years or six years later, I'm getting a letter in the mail stating paternity, paternity.
[01:13:20.160 --> 01:13:27.160]  And now they're garnishing your wages based on whatever amount that they determined already?
[01:13:27.160 --> 01:13:28.160]  Yes.
[01:13:28.160 --> 01:13:30.160]  Okay, okay.
[01:13:30.160 --> 01:13:34.160]  And like I said, I just started this job.
[01:13:34.160 --> 01:13:49.160]  They hadn't been, they have, the last correspondence I had was the, I think it was like nine or ten pages that they sent me and asked me to sign a court order.
[01:13:49.160 --> 01:14:02.160]  I crossed everything out and everything, when I say crossed everything out, I mean I crossed every, every line and every sentence, except for one sentence in the nine pages.
[01:14:02.160 --> 01:14:13.160]  And that line said the parent shall have discretion over parenting time, everything else I crossed out.
[01:14:13.160 --> 01:14:22.160]  And I initialed it by the side and I had a notary notarizer sent it back to the prosecutor and the judge certified.
[01:14:22.160 --> 01:14:25.160]  And I have all of this documentation.
[01:14:25.160 --> 01:14:40.160]  And I was waiting for a response, whether to show it to court or whether that this was insufficient or, you know, something or you defaulted, but they never sent me anything more after March the 30th of 2016.
[01:14:40.160 --> 01:14:50.160]  That's the last correspondence that we had until now that I'm getting a letter in the mail from my new employer telling me that they're going to garnish a certain amount of...
[01:14:50.160 --> 01:14:59.160]  Do you know what the specific code says regarding child support enforcement and procedure in the state of Georgia?
[01:14:59.160 --> 01:15:02.160]  No, no, he's not in, the child's not in Georgia.
[01:15:02.160 --> 01:15:03.160]  What state is the child in?
[01:15:03.160 --> 01:15:05.160]  Oh, yeah, what state is this?
[01:15:05.160 --> 01:15:07.160]  The child is in Michigan.
[01:15:07.160 --> 01:15:11.160]  So who's going after you, Michigan?
[01:15:11.160 --> 01:15:12.160]  Michigan is.
[01:15:12.160 --> 01:15:14.160]  Okay, well...
[01:15:14.160 --> 01:15:19.160]  The county of the state of Michigan is going after me.
[01:15:19.160 --> 01:15:31.160]  Okay, so do you know what the specific procedures and code are in the state of Michigan regarding this issue?
[01:15:31.160 --> 01:15:39.160]  I've looked at it briefly two years ago, but like I say, this has kind of been sprung on me again.
[01:15:39.160 --> 01:15:40.160]  Okay.
[01:15:40.160 --> 01:15:42.160]  And so I've kind of lost the, you know...
[01:15:42.160 --> 01:15:43.160]  Okay, sure, sure.
[01:15:43.160 --> 01:15:44.160]  The procedures.
[01:15:44.160 --> 01:15:47.160]  Sure, sure, okay, okay, all right.
[01:15:47.160 --> 01:15:52.160]  Well, I have one comment, you know, and this may require a little research.
[01:15:52.160 --> 01:15:59.160]  I agree with everything that Randy's talking about, you know, potentially this is all violation of due process and such.
[01:15:59.160 --> 01:16:06.160]  But some states are very, the statute is pretty unforgiving about child support.
[01:16:06.160 --> 01:16:20.160]  And if it's not a custody case, basically what the actual legislation says is that based on the parent's income and what their expenses are,
[01:16:20.160 --> 01:16:28.160]  as far as their rent or their mortgage or their car payment or whatever, you just submit to them a paycheck stub and what your basic expenses are,
[01:16:28.160 --> 01:16:36.160]  and they go by a chart and they say, well, standard is 15% or 20% of what's left over after that,
[01:16:36.160 --> 01:16:43.160]  and that's what you pay, and that's just what the statute says and what the case law says, and there's really no hearing for it.
[01:16:43.160 --> 01:16:45.160]  That's just the way it is.
[01:16:45.160 --> 01:16:50.160]  So you may or may not get to fight these due process issues.
[01:16:50.160 --> 01:16:57.160]  It may depend on what the laws are in the state of Michigan, but I'll let Randy address that when we get back on the other side.
[01:16:57.160 --> 01:17:26.160]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:27.160 --> 01:17:52.160]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:58.160 --> 01:18:01.160]  I love logos.
[01:18:01.160 --> 01:18:05.160]  Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:05.160 --> 01:18:08.160]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:18:08.160 --> 01:18:09.160]  I need my truth fit.
[01:18:09.160 --> 01:18:13.160]  I'd be lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:13.160 --> 01:18:20.160]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a lullite and I really don't have any money to give because I spend it all on supplements.
[01:18:20.160 --> 01:18:22.160]  How can I help logos?
[01:18:22.160 --> 01:18:24.160]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[01:18:24.160 --> 01:18:29.160]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos with ordering your supplies or holiday gifts.
[01:18:29.160 --> 01:18:31.160]  First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.160 --> 01:18:34.160]  Now go to LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:18:34.160 --> 01:18:37.160]  Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:37.160 --> 01:18:43.160]  Now when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and Logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:43.160 --> 01:18:44.160]  Do I pay extra?
[01:18:44.160 --> 01:18:45.160]  No.
[01:18:45.160 --> 01:18:47.160]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:47.160 --> 01:18:48.160]  No.
[01:18:48.160 --> 01:18:49.160]  Can I use my Amazon pride?
[01:18:49.160 --> 01:18:50.160]  No.
[01:18:50.160 --> 01:18:51.160]  I mean yes.
[01:18:51.160 --> 01:18:55.160]  Wow, giving without doing anything or spending any money.
[01:18:55.160 --> 01:18:56.160]  This is perfect.
[01:18:56.160 --> 01:18:57.160]  Thank you so much.
[01:18:57.160 --> 01:18:58.160]  We are logos.
[01:18:58.160 --> 01:19:00.160]  Happy holidays, logos.
[01:19:00.160 --> 01:19:11.160]  This is the Logos Logos RadioNetwork.com.
[01:19:11.160 --> 01:19:41.120]  Okay, we are back, this is the world of law, Randy
[01:19:41.120 --> 01:19:47.800]  Kelton and Deborah Stevens, and wow, Randy, this is fun, I'm getting to participate tonight.
[01:19:47.800 --> 01:19:52.880]  There's some topics here that I happen to know enough about that I can pitch in here.
[01:19:52.880 --> 01:20:00.760]  Charles, okay, just quickly, because I don't know the statutes and the case law in Michigan,
[01:20:00.760 --> 01:20:07.960]  all right, but I do know some, not a lot, but I know a little bit about the way things
[01:20:07.960 --> 01:20:16.680]  work in Texas, and I also know in general, this goes to the canon of law that child
[01:20:16.680 --> 01:20:23.680]  support falls under, okay, there's different, what's called canons of law or principles
[01:20:23.680 --> 01:20:30.400]  of law of jurisprudence that the court looks at when they're dealing with different types
[01:20:30.400 --> 01:20:37.800]  of cases, okay, different types of civil cases, does something go to a breach of contract
[01:20:37.800 --> 01:20:43.960]  law, does, like example, what we were talking about with the previous caller, the covenant
[01:20:43.960 --> 01:20:49.440]  restrictions, it goes to a breach of contract, does something go to a criminal issue, does
[01:20:49.440 --> 01:20:55.680]  something go to tort, a damage, you know, there's different canons of law, there's
[01:20:55.680 --> 01:21:00.920]  tort law, there's breach of contract law, contract law, there's, here's one of the most important
[01:21:00.920 --> 01:21:09.640]  ones, fiduciary, trust law, okay, and so the reason that a lot, now what Randy's saying
[01:21:09.640 --> 01:21:14.680]  could be true, there could be definitely some due process violations here, because we know
[01:21:14.680 --> 01:21:20.600]  that the system is, for the most part, corrupt, and they are violating people's rights and
[01:21:20.600 --> 01:21:24.800]  due process left and right, I'm not saying that Randy's wrong, it definitely, all those
[01:21:24.800 --> 01:21:33.160]  issues could come into play, but it's possible that they don't, and here's why, because in
[01:21:33.160 --> 01:21:41.520]  a lot of states there is a specific set of code, legislation that lays out like a chart
[01:21:41.520 --> 01:21:48.920]  almost, according to people's income brackets, and you know, it's in the statute, it's in
[01:21:48.920 --> 01:21:54.240]  the case law, they look at the person's income, they look at what the car payment is, what
[01:21:54.240 --> 01:22:00.080]  their home house payment is, or rent, food, you know, some basic expenses, and then they
[01:22:00.080 --> 01:22:06.400]  say okay, you got to pay 20% after that, or 15, or 30, depending if you're on a super
[01:22:06.400 --> 01:22:14.400]  high bracket, and there's no administrative hearing, there's no trial, there's no procedure
[01:22:14.400 --> 01:22:22.560]  in place where you get to try to negotiate that unless it's a custody case, unless it's
[01:22:22.560 --> 01:22:27.760]  either a divorce case or a custody case for two people that maybe didn't marry, but they're
[01:22:27.760 --> 01:22:31.680]  fighting for custody of their child anyway, and then something gets worked out in the
[01:22:31.680 --> 01:22:38.000]  family court of an agreement of, you know, visitation and what the child support's going
[01:22:38.000 --> 01:22:43.320]  to be, and this sort of thing, okay, but if that doesn't come into play, it could strictly
[01:22:43.320 --> 01:22:51.880]  trigger going into this other enforcement procedure, because if it's undisputed that
[01:22:51.880 --> 01:22:57.320]  you're the father, okay, then that doesn't come into play, it just goes straight into
[01:22:57.320 --> 01:22:59.040]  an enforcement issue.
[01:22:59.040 --> 01:23:01.800]  Don't explain fiduciary to me.
[01:23:01.800 --> 01:23:05.800]  That's where I was about to, that's exactly where I was getting to of why it goes straight
[01:23:05.800 --> 01:23:11.320]  into an enforcement issue, okay, but first, before I get there, I wanted to tell Charles
[01:23:11.320 --> 01:23:17.840]  that this doesn't necessarily mean that you're not going to have an opportunity to renegotiate
[01:23:17.840 --> 01:23:25.080]  the amount that they want to take out, okay, there certainly will be some type of procedure
[01:23:25.080 --> 01:23:33.680]  where in place where you could contest that or, you know, something like that where you
[01:23:33.680 --> 01:23:39.920]  could renegotiate the amount, you know, challenge it some kind of way, that there's going to
[01:23:39.920 --> 01:23:45.840]  be something for that, but the reason that I'm talking about why it's fair and proper
[01:23:45.840 --> 01:23:51.360]  that there wouldn't be some kind of hearing or something like that is because the canon
[01:23:51.360 --> 01:24:00.360]  of law that child support goes to is trust law, fiduciary duty law, okay, the way the
[01:24:00.360 --> 01:24:05.600]  court looks at it and properly so, and even in the state of Texas, they call the parent
[01:24:05.600 --> 01:24:12.240]  the fiduciary, this isn't like reading between the lines sort of thing, you are fiduciary.
[01:24:12.240 --> 01:24:18.280]  Now what that means is that there's basically a trust in place even if it's an implied one,
[01:24:18.280 --> 01:24:24.400]  the child is a beneficiary, you're the fiduciary, okay, and what that means, okay, so where
[01:24:24.400 --> 01:24:30.560]  this goes to, I'm sorry, but I really just almost have no patience, and you're not one
[01:24:30.560 --> 01:24:35.480]  of these people Charles, but I almost have no patience at all for people that ball out
[01:24:35.480 --> 01:24:41.640]  debtor's prison when it comes to child support, and here's why, they don't understand why
[01:24:41.640 --> 01:24:48.800]  things are the way it is and why this goes to the canon of law of fiduciary duty, okay,
[01:24:48.800 --> 01:24:56.120]  a fiduciary of a trust means you have a responsibility, basically you are managing funds that already
[01:24:56.120 --> 01:25:02.640]  belong to someone else, okay, you've got fiduciaries in the business world, in the financial sector
[01:25:02.640 --> 01:25:08.720]  world, in the banking system, you've got fiduciaries in private contracts and businesses and things
[01:25:08.720 --> 01:25:15.560]  like this where a trustee, it doesn't belong to him, the funds and the assets that the trustee
[01:25:15.560 --> 01:25:22.720]  is managing belongs to the trust and they are managing it for the sake of the beneficiary,
[01:25:22.720 --> 01:25:27.600]  that's why they're called a beneficiary, it doesn't belong to them.
[01:25:27.600 --> 01:25:33.360]  When someone, fathers or mothers or child, you are the fiduciary, the child is the beneficiary,
[01:25:33.360 --> 01:25:38.080]  you immediately have a responsibility to take care of that child because you're the parent
[01:25:38.080 --> 01:25:42.800]  and that's all there is to it and that's why they call it a fiduciary duty and so if somebody
[01:25:42.800 --> 01:25:49.120]  is not paying child support and they end up in jail over it, it's not a debtors prison,
[01:25:49.120 --> 01:25:55.080]  it's not a debt, child support is not a debt, I mean you didn't say it was a debt child
[01:25:55.080 --> 01:25:59.960]  but I really have zero patience for people that call it a debt, it is not a debt, that
[01:25:59.960 --> 01:26:05.560]  money already belongs to the child, it already belongs to the child, you're the fiduciary,
[01:26:05.560 --> 01:26:10.640]  you're managing those finances on behalf of the child for the benefit of the child and
[01:26:10.640 --> 01:26:18.720]  if you're not paying, then it goes to larceny is what it goes to, it goes to breach of fiduciary
[01:26:18.720 --> 01:26:25.760]  duty, it goes to theft and theft is a crime, larceny is a crime and that's why breach of
[01:26:25.760 --> 01:26:31.440]  fiduciary is a crime, okay, it's in the business sector, it's a white collar crime, people
[01:26:31.440 --> 01:26:37.000]  in the financial sector, in the banking sector, they don't only get sued for breach of fiduciary
[01:26:37.000 --> 01:26:41.480]  duty, they go to jail for a long time for breach of fiduciary duty, so it is the canon
[01:26:41.480 --> 01:26:46.960]  of law of fiduciary duty and that's why there are statutes in place in most states where
[01:26:46.960 --> 01:26:52.120]  it's just simply a procedure where they look at your paycheck, they look at your expenses,
[01:26:52.120 --> 01:26:57.920]  there's a chart, it's already been predetermined that your fiduciary duty is 20% of blah blah
[01:26:57.920 --> 01:27:02.880]  blah blah and then that's just it, you don't get a hearing, that's the determination.
[01:27:02.880 --> 01:27:09.360]  Now if you want to challenge that later down, if you want to challenge that after the fact,
[01:27:09.360 --> 01:27:16.960]  there certainly will be procedures in place where you can go in to, in Texas, there's
[01:27:16.960 --> 01:27:22.120]  a specific bureaucratic office for it, it's a subset of the attorney general's office
[01:27:22.120 --> 01:27:28.680]  where you can work with a case worker and try to get the amount modified, okay?
[01:27:28.680 --> 01:27:35.440]  But if it wasn't part of a divorce decree, it wouldn't necessarily go into a court hearing,
[01:27:35.440 --> 01:27:39.160]  it would be an administrative hearing, that's just the way it works in Texas.
[01:27:39.160 --> 01:27:43.840]  So anyways, I just want to lay that out for you that what's happening to you is not necessarily
[01:27:43.840 --> 01:27:48.920]  unfair or a violation of due process even though it could be, but I have a feeling it's
[01:27:48.920 --> 01:27:55.560]  probably not and so the fact that your employer gets his garnishment notice, he's required
[01:27:55.560 --> 01:27:58.360]  or he is required to abide by it.
[01:27:58.360 --> 01:28:05.080]  If they don't, then they can get in a lot of trouble too and so I would suggest getting
[01:28:05.080 --> 01:28:10.080]  a little bit more familiar with the Michigan law and procedure and seeing what your remedy
[01:28:10.080 --> 01:28:14.960]  is under that code as far as it's probably going to be some type of administrative procedure
[01:28:14.960 --> 01:28:21.320]  you would have to engage in to try to get a case worker and renegotiate the amount that
[01:28:21.320 --> 01:28:22.320]  they want to take out.
[01:28:22.320 --> 01:28:23.560]  Does that make sense, Charles?
[01:28:23.560 --> 01:28:26.840]  That makes all the sense in the world.
[01:28:26.840 --> 01:28:28.200]  I had a couple of questions.
[01:28:28.200 --> 01:28:29.800]  Sure, go ahead, fire off.
[01:28:29.800 --> 01:28:31.520]  I got one first.
[01:28:31.520 --> 01:28:36.160]  Did that sound as scary to you as it did to me?
[01:28:36.160 --> 01:28:38.880]  Not scary, it sounds awful.
[01:28:38.880 --> 01:28:39.880]  Why is it awful?
[01:28:39.880 --> 01:28:42.400]  What do you mean by scary, Randy?
[01:28:42.400 --> 01:28:43.400]  Okay.
[01:28:43.400 --> 01:28:50.680]  Well, my brother and I worked at a machine shop here in Texas and he worked with a fellow
[01:28:50.680 --> 01:28:56.280]  that they went to Alabama, Texas went to Alabama, picked him up and brought him to Texas.
[01:28:56.280 --> 01:29:02.560]  He'd never been in Texas in his life and he apparently had a child that he didn't know
[01:29:02.560 --> 01:29:09.200]  about and they assessed Charles' support and they couldn't find him, they finally located
[01:29:09.200 --> 01:29:14.440]  him, said he owed all this Charles' support, brought him to Texas and said, you either
[01:29:14.440 --> 01:29:18.720]  get a job here in Texas and work till you pay this off and you're going to jail.
[01:29:18.720 --> 01:29:20.880]  Well, that sounds a little extreme to me.
[01:29:20.880 --> 01:29:25.520]  If he's already got a job somewhere else, all they have to do is garnish his wages.
[01:29:25.520 --> 01:29:29.520]  I mean, that sounds like somebody was overstepping their authority.
[01:29:29.520 --> 01:29:34.480]  Yeah, he didn't tell all the facts, but...
[01:29:34.480 --> 01:29:38.400]  Yeah, that sounds like a bureaucrat overstepping authority there.
[01:29:38.400 --> 01:29:39.400]  And they brought him to another state.
[01:29:39.400 --> 01:29:40.400]  That's why it's kind of scary.
[01:29:40.400 --> 01:29:41.400]  Hang on.
[01:29:41.400 --> 01:29:42.400]  We're about to go to break.
[01:29:42.400 --> 01:29:43.400]  Yeah.
[01:29:43.400 --> 01:29:44.400]  That doesn't sound quite right.
[01:29:44.400 --> 01:29:45.400]  Okay.
[01:29:45.400 --> 01:29:46.400]  Yeah.
[01:29:46.400 --> 01:29:49.400]  We're going to break here.
[01:29:49.400 --> 01:29:50.400]  Yeah.
[01:29:50.400 --> 01:29:52.920]  There are cases where they're going to definitely overstep their authority.
[01:29:52.920 --> 01:29:55.120]  All they want to make sure is that they're going to get the money.
[01:29:55.120 --> 01:29:56.120]  Okay.
[01:29:56.120 --> 01:30:22.120]  And we'll be right back.
[01:30:22.120 --> 01:30:26.080]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:26.080 --> 01:30:32.080]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.080 --> 01:30:33.080]  Privacy.
[01:30:33.080 --> 01:30:34.800]  It's worth hanging onto.
[01:30:34.800 --> 01:30:40.360]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:30:40.360 --> 01:30:42.120]  Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:30:42.120 --> 01:30:46.080]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:46.080 --> 01:30:50.800]  Privacy-invading technologies are coming online faster than you can screen Big Brother, and
[01:30:50.800 --> 01:30:55.160]  one California company called Face First tops my spooky list.
[01:30:55.160 --> 01:31:00.120]  Face First has developed scanners that can sweep a crowd from 100 feet away to record
[01:31:00.120 --> 01:31:03.760]  every face and feed those images into a database.
[01:31:03.760 --> 01:31:06.960]  People are identified in under a second.
[01:31:06.960 --> 01:31:12.160]  Already deployed in Panama, Face First is now being tested on San Diego streets.
[01:31:12.160 --> 01:31:18.240]  Imagine the feds, drones, marketers, and stalkers all scanning our faces and identifying us
[01:31:18.240 --> 01:31:20.040]  as we walk down the street.
[01:31:20.040 --> 01:31:21.040]  Yikes.
[01:31:21.040 --> 01:31:23.160]  I'm buying a floppy hat and some sunglasses.
[01:31:23.160 --> 01:31:31.440]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:31.440 --> 01:31:36.840]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[01:31:36.840 --> 01:31:39.160]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:39.160 --> 01:31:43.880]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:43.880 --> 01:31:47.880]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives, and thousands of my fellow
[01:31:47.880 --> 01:31:49.320]  force respond to this attack.
[01:31:49.320 --> 01:31:50.760]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.760 --> 01:31:51.760]  I'm a structural engineer.
[01:31:51.760 --> 01:31:53.240]  I'm a New York City correctional.
[01:31:53.240 --> 01:31:54.240]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:54.240 --> 01:31:55.800]  I'm the father who lost his son.
[01:31:55.800 --> 01:31:58.440]  We were Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.440 --> 01:32:01.040]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:01.040 --> 01:32:04.000]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[01:32:04.000 --> 01:32:06.960]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[01:32:06.960 --> 01:32:10.640]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting
[01:32:10.640 --> 01:32:11.640]  them to pay for it.
[01:32:11.640 --> 01:32:15.240]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[01:32:15.240 --> 01:32:19.040]  That's why you have insurance, and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for
[01:32:19.040 --> 01:32:24.280]  you with little to no out-of-pocket expense, and we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year A-plus
[01:32:24.280 --> 01:32:27.400]  member of the Better Business Bureau with zero complaints.
[01:32:27.400 --> 01:32:31.760]  You can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right the
[01:32:31.760 --> 01:32:32.760]  first time.
[01:32:32.760 --> 01:32:41.480]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com, mention the crypto show, and get $100 off,
[01:32:41.480 --> 01:32:46.120]  and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio Network to help continue this programming.
[01:32:46.120 --> 01:32:51.240]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in.
[01:32:51.240 --> 01:32:57.280]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[01:32:57.280 --> 01:32:59.240]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[01:32:59.240 --> 01:33:01.240]  I mean, I actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[01:33:01.240 --> 01:33:06.240]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network.
[01:33:06.240 --> 01:33:07.240]  LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:07.240 --> 01:33:37.080]  Okay, folks, we are back, this is the rule of law, Randy Kelton, Debra Steele, and
[01:33:37.080 --> 01:33:38.080]  Stephen's.
[01:33:38.080 --> 01:33:43.400]  It is June 28, 2018, and we are wrapping up here with Charles and Georgia.
[01:33:43.400 --> 01:33:47.520]  I think, you know, the story that Randy told just before the break, that sounds a little
[01:33:47.520 --> 01:33:55.000]  extreme, and as Randy mentioned on the break, the person he was talking to that was relating
[01:33:55.000 --> 01:33:57.000]  the story probably isn't telling everything.
[01:33:57.000 --> 01:34:02.480]  He's probably not saying everything, but also it's a high likelihood that there may
[01:34:02.480 --> 01:34:06.120]  have been some overstepping of the boundaries or some empty threats on the part of some
[01:34:06.120 --> 01:34:07.120]  bureaucrats.
[01:34:07.120 --> 01:34:14.640]  I mean, if somebody has a job and their wages can be garnished, that's all they care about
[01:34:14.640 --> 01:34:15.640]  is getting their money.
[01:34:15.640 --> 01:34:19.760]  So, anyways, Charles, you had a question, so fire away.
[01:34:19.760 --> 01:34:24.240]  You mentioned the judiciary and the beneficiary.
[01:34:24.240 --> 01:34:25.240]  Yes.
[01:34:25.240 --> 01:34:32.600]  My whole argument with this, and the whole reason why I call it Randy, see, I'm raising
[01:34:32.600 --> 01:34:38.920]  the issue of proprietor in this scenario.
[01:34:38.920 --> 01:34:42.720]  What does that mean, proprietor?
[01:34:42.720 --> 01:34:49.080]  That I am the owner of property in this venture.
[01:34:49.080 --> 01:34:53.080]  They're talking about the property being the Federal Reserve notes.
[01:34:53.080 --> 01:34:54.080]  No, no, no.
[01:34:54.080 --> 01:35:01.560]  I'm not talking about the baby, the child, the eight-year-old now.
[01:35:01.560 --> 01:35:03.080]  Probably not.
[01:35:03.080 --> 01:35:04.080]  Child is not property.
[01:35:04.080 --> 01:35:05.080]  No.
[01:35:05.080 --> 01:35:11.400]  The child is a citizen of a republic and has rights in her own capacity.
[01:35:11.400 --> 01:35:13.400]  No, no.
[01:35:13.400 --> 01:35:16.120]  The court system will never go along with that.
[01:35:16.120 --> 01:35:26.160]  This well-established case law that the child is a beneficiary and the parent is the fiduciary
[01:35:26.160 --> 01:35:34.280]  because the child is a minor and has no way to care for themselves, especially if it's
[01:35:34.280 --> 01:35:39.280]  like a toddler or something, and the parent brought the child into the world as a human
[01:35:39.280 --> 01:35:40.280]  being.
[01:35:40.280 --> 01:35:46.280]  They do have a certain degree of rights as a human being, and you've established the
[01:35:46.280 --> 01:35:52.360]  trust as yourself being the fiduciary and the child being the beneficiary when you brought
[01:35:52.360 --> 01:35:54.600]  the child into the world.
[01:35:54.600 --> 01:36:00.240]  When you have that fiduciary duty and the Federal Reserve notes that have been determined
[01:36:00.240 --> 01:36:07.080]  by the case law and the statute, I don't even want to use the phrase, owed to the child.
[01:36:07.080 --> 01:36:10.120]  It's not money that is owed to the child.
[01:36:10.120 --> 01:36:13.360]  The child already owns the money.
[01:36:13.360 --> 01:36:19.920]  It belongs to the child already, and you as a fiduciary are managing those funds for
[01:36:19.920 --> 01:36:21.560]  the sake of the beneficiary.
[01:36:21.560 --> 01:36:29.080]  If you don't pay to care for the child, then you're in breach of fiduciary duty, and that's
[01:36:29.080 --> 01:36:32.960]  why it's a crime and that's why they put people in jail because it's not a debt.
[01:36:32.960 --> 01:36:37.000]  No, you can't claim that you're a proprietor and that this is property.
[01:36:37.000 --> 01:36:41.880]  That's not going to fly, not for an instance.
[01:36:41.880 --> 01:36:52.720]  If the same thing can apply to an invalid, if somebody becomes a fiduciary in a voluntary
[01:36:52.720 --> 01:37:00.200]  situation, for example, of an invalid as a fiduciary to say somebody had their own money
[01:37:00.200 --> 01:37:05.200]  and then they became an invalid from a car accident or something, and then you become
[01:37:05.200 --> 01:37:13.400]  the fiduciary and you're the one that's responsible for organizing like home nurses to come and
[01:37:13.400 --> 01:37:19.800]  care and to have their mortgage paid and make sure they have food and water and electricity
[01:37:19.800 --> 01:37:27.160]  and all these things, okay, you're the fiduciary and that adult invalid is the beneficiary.
[01:37:27.160 --> 01:37:33.240]  You're managing that other person's funds that already belongs to them for their benefit
[01:37:33.240 --> 01:37:39.120]  and if you're caught embezzling the funds or using them for your own purposes or something
[01:37:39.120 --> 01:37:43.760]  like that that goes to larceny, it goes to theft, that's breach of fiduciary duty, it's
[01:37:43.760 --> 01:37:44.760]  a crime.
[01:37:44.760 --> 01:37:46.840]  Okay, so it's the same thing with the child.
[01:37:46.840 --> 01:37:48.680]  The child already owns the money.
[01:37:48.680 --> 01:37:49.680]  Okay, no problem.
[01:37:49.680 --> 01:37:51.680]  So here's what we got.
[01:37:51.680 --> 01:37:56.520]  So I have a child that I didn't know anything about until five years ago.
[01:37:56.520 --> 01:38:05.120]  Wasn't it the mother's responsibility as a fiduciary to alert me the other fiduciary
[01:38:05.120 --> 01:38:08.920]  of the beneficiary?
[01:38:08.920 --> 01:38:18.520]  That is an issue, but whether or not that would negate your fiduciary duty is questionable.
[01:38:18.520 --> 01:38:23.600]  So it sounds like they're not going after you for back child support.
[01:38:23.600 --> 01:38:36.720]  They can though, they can and that's why I don't want to say advise, but I would caution
[01:38:36.720 --> 01:38:44.240]  people that if they, I mean, well, you didn't know anything about it, okay, that's what
[01:38:44.240 --> 01:38:45.240]  you're saying.
[01:38:45.240 --> 01:38:51.840]  You don't know anything about it, but in a situation where a father, parents, a child
[01:38:51.840 --> 01:38:57.880]  and say, for example, they stay on amicable terms with, you know, who I call, you know,
[01:38:57.880 --> 01:39:01.680]  in sign, the baby mama, all right, they stay on, let's say they stay on friendly terms
[01:39:01.680 --> 01:39:07.280]  with the mother, okay, but not necessarily in this romantic relationship and the father
[01:39:07.280 --> 01:39:15.120]  is still maybe contributing money or buys gifts or buys clothes and helps with the expenses
[01:39:15.120 --> 01:39:19.960]  of the child, for example, or maybe not even and they just, and the mom says don't worry
[01:39:19.960 --> 01:39:20.960]  about it.
[01:39:20.960 --> 01:39:27.600]  But especially if somebody is contributing, whether it's, you know, physical, you know,
[01:39:27.600 --> 01:39:31.520]  material things like giving them clothes or buying groceries for them or whatever, I tell
[01:39:31.520 --> 01:39:36.720]  people you keep all those receipts, you keep all those receipts, you keep every record
[01:39:36.720 --> 01:39:44.680]  of every toy you ever buy, every ice cream cone you ever buy for that child, the clothes,
[01:39:44.680 --> 01:39:50.640]  the gifts, the everything, you keep all immaculate records of all of those things because if she's
[01:39:50.640 --> 01:39:54.400]  going along saying, oh yeah, I'm not going to go to the attorney general's office, I'm
[01:39:54.400 --> 01:39:58.640]  not going to go to the child support office, hey, you never know when that person is going
[01:39:58.640 --> 01:40:02.880]  to turn and say, or if you get in a dispute and say, well, you know what, you should be
[01:40:02.880 --> 01:40:08.040]  contributing more, I'm going back to the child support office, you can come forward with
[01:40:08.040 --> 01:40:12.080]  all those receipts and all those records to show how you were contributing and supporting
[01:40:12.080 --> 01:40:17.920]  the whole time and then they'll, they will deduct that amount of that, you know, that
[01:40:17.920 --> 01:40:23.360]  you prove them up with all the receipts from what they would require you to pay in back
[01:40:23.360 --> 01:40:25.600]  child support, so.
[01:40:25.600 --> 01:40:31.080]  So if they're not going for back child support, I would tip you toe around this.
[01:40:31.080 --> 01:40:36.400]  Yeah, if they're not going for back child support, if they're just going for what, from
[01:40:36.400 --> 01:40:44.240]  now forward, then you're actually, you know, you're getting in a pretty, a much better
[01:40:44.240 --> 01:40:46.240]  position here.
[01:40:46.240 --> 01:40:48.960]  Right, okay, so.
[01:40:48.960 --> 01:40:49.960]  Because they can.
[01:40:49.960 --> 01:40:57.080]  Yeah, yeah, they can do pretty much, well, and here's the reason that they can.
[01:40:57.080 --> 01:40:58.080]  And here's the problem.
[01:40:58.080 --> 01:41:02.840]  It's not unfair because here's what happens, here's the reason that they can, ultimately
[01:41:02.840 --> 01:41:08.800]  you're the fiduciary responsible, even if you didn't even know it, you still are, it's
[01:41:08.800 --> 01:41:12.480]  kind of like there's a, there's a song, an old song that says, you know, don't do the
[01:41:12.480 --> 01:41:17.080]  breeding if you can't do the feeding, I mean, if you're going to engage in the act, I mean,
[01:41:17.080 --> 01:41:20.200]  and then you never see that woman again, I mean, don't be surprised if something like
[01:41:20.200 --> 01:41:21.200]  this happens.
[01:41:21.200 --> 01:41:27.800]  Okay, but anyway, the point being, but here's, here's the point that I was trying to make.
[01:41:27.800 --> 01:41:33.400]  All right, if, if the woman, if they can't find you or they didn't want to find you or
[01:41:33.400 --> 01:41:40.400]  whatever, she didn't try to find you, most likely she's filing for some type of benefits
[01:41:40.400 --> 01:41:46.960]  with the state, okay, as a single mom to get food stamps or some type of welfare or some
[01:41:46.960 --> 01:41:49.320]  type of benefits from the state.
[01:41:49.320 --> 01:41:53.360]  And so then the state is having to flip the bill in the meantime.
[01:41:53.360 --> 01:41:58.760]  And so then they're most, you know, most of the time they will go after the other parent
[01:41:58.760 --> 01:42:02.760]  for that child support because the state needs to get reimbursed for the benefits that they
[01:42:02.760 --> 01:42:05.320]  had to pay to cover this in the meantime.
[01:42:05.320 --> 01:42:12.000]  Right, and so that means that if that's the case, they're claiming jurisdiction over me
[01:42:12.000 --> 01:42:14.720]  in this matter, is that correct?
[01:42:14.720 --> 01:42:20.760]  And they can because she, it's, it's in, it's in the venue where she lives.
[01:42:20.760 --> 01:42:24.640]  And it's been proven that you're the parent.
[01:42:24.640 --> 01:42:25.640]  Yes.
[01:42:25.640 --> 01:42:32.360]  So if you're on the fiduciary side, then that's all they need, okay.
[01:42:32.360 --> 01:42:37.520]  And I'm sure that most states are all interconnected with computer systems on this matter.
[01:42:37.520 --> 01:42:41.600]  And so they don't need to go into federal court system.
[01:42:41.600 --> 01:42:46.600]  They can just garnish your wages remotely in a different state.
[01:42:46.600 --> 01:42:47.600]  Okay.
[01:42:47.600 --> 01:42:57.600]  And what I was going to say is I'm the fiduciary here and they are claiming jurisdiction over
[01:42:57.600 --> 01:42:58.600]  me.
[01:42:58.600 --> 01:43:00.960]  Aren't they the fiduciary over me?
[01:43:00.960 --> 01:43:01.960]  No.
[01:43:01.960 --> 01:43:02.960]  No.
[01:43:02.960 --> 01:43:03.960]  No.
[01:43:03.960 --> 01:43:04.960]  No.
[01:43:04.960 --> 01:43:14.160]  The fiduciary relationship is, is a, it's, it's an activity that falls within the, within
[01:43:14.160 --> 01:43:15.160]  the jurisdiction.
[01:43:15.160 --> 01:43:17.600]  They're not a fiduciary over you.
[01:43:17.600 --> 01:43:18.600]  No.
[01:43:18.600 --> 01:43:19.600]  Okay.
[01:43:19.600 --> 01:43:21.280]  No, the state is never a fiduciary.
[01:43:21.280 --> 01:43:28.240]  People, people get it backwards a lot of the times in, in some of their, well, not you,
[01:43:28.240 --> 01:43:33.320]  but what I call people that have, get into this legal patriot mythology where they say
[01:43:33.320 --> 01:43:38.840]  the state is the fiduciary and with a bit, no, no, no, no, that's not the way it works.
[01:43:38.840 --> 01:43:41.440]  The, the state is a bit of fishery.
[01:43:41.440 --> 01:43:47.240]  We're, we're actually the fiduciaries in most like as far as tax law, the way it really
[01:43:47.240 --> 01:43:48.240]  works.
[01:43:48.240 --> 01:43:50.240]  That's why you don't pay your taxes, you go to jail.
[01:43:50.240 --> 01:43:51.240]  Okay.
[01:43:51.240 --> 01:43:55.240]  But anyways, do you have any other questions, Charles, because we're about to the end of
[01:43:55.240 --> 01:43:56.240]  the segment.
[01:43:56.240 --> 01:43:57.240]  Yes, please.
[01:43:57.240 --> 01:43:58.240]  Okay.
[01:43:58.240 --> 01:44:02.240]  Nutritious food is real body armor.
[01:44:02.240 --> 01:44:08.240]  It builds muscle, burns fat, improves digestion and feeds the entire body the nutrients it
[01:44:08.240 --> 01:44:09.240]  needs.
[01:44:09.240 --> 01:44:12.960]  Did you know the U.S. government banned the hemp plant from growing in the United States
[01:44:12.960 --> 01:44:17.240]  and classified it as a schedule one drug to hide it behind the marijuana plant?
[01:44:17.240 --> 01:44:21.640]  People have been confused about this plan for over 80 years and many still don't know
[01:44:21.640 --> 01:44:22.640]  what hemp is.
[01:44:22.640 --> 01:44:27.400]  So now you know hemp is not marijuana and marijuana is not hemp.
[01:44:27.400 --> 01:44:30.040]  They are different varieties of the same species.
[01:44:30.040 --> 01:44:35.040]  Hempusa.org wants the world to know these basic facts and to help people understand that
[01:44:35.040 --> 01:44:39.240]  hemp protein powder is the best kept health secret you need to know about.
[01:44:39.240 --> 01:44:45.640]  Remember, hemp protein powder contains 53% protein, is gluten free, anti-inflammatory,
[01:44:45.640 --> 01:44:54.640]  non-GMO and is loaded with nutrients, call 888-910-4367, 888-910-4367 and see what our
[01:44:54.640 --> 01:44:59.640]  powder seeds and oil can do for you only at hempusa.org.
[01:44:59.640 --> 01:45:04.640]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.640 --> 01:45:07.640]  Win your case without an attorney with jurisdictionary.
[01:45:07.640 --> 01:45:14.640]  The affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[01:45:14.640 --> 01:45:15.640]  you can have five steps.
[01:45:15.640 --> 01:45:19.640]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:19.640 --> 01:45:23.640]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.640 --> 01:45:28.640]  Thousands have won with our step by step course and now you can too.
[01:45:28.640 --> 01:45:34.640]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.640 --> 01:45:39.640]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[01:45:39.640 --> 01:45:43.640]  the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.640 --> 01:45:49.640]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.640 --> 01:45:52.640]  pro se tactics and much more.
[01:45:52.640 --> 01:45:56.640]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:56.640 --> 01:46:01.640]  Or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:08.640 --> 01:46:10.640]  Okay folks, we are back.
[01:46:10.640 --> 01:46:12.640]  This is the rule of law Randy Kelton has ever seen.
[01:46:12.640 --> 01:46:17.640]  All right, listen, Charles, we've got to move on because we've got three other crawlers
[01:46:17.640 --> 01:46:18.640]  on the board.
[01:46:18.640 --> 01:46:19.640]  This is the last segment.
[01:46:19.640 --> 01:46:25.640]  So, very last question and we'll answer as quickly as possible and then we've got to go.
[01:46:25.640 --> 01:46:37.640]  With the document that I sent back, okay, and that I did not agree to, basically what
[01:46:37.640 --> 01:46:44.640]  you're telling me is it's okay if I didn't agree or did agree because due process may
[01:46:44.640 --> 01:46:52.640]  or may not be viable in this case because of the avenue that the court's taken on civil
[01:46:52.640 --> 01:46:57.640]  procedure as me being a fiduciary to the child.
[01:46:57.640 --> 01:47:02.640]  Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying that you probably will not be able to raise due
[01:47:02.640 --> 01:47:09.640]  process issues as far as something that you didn't agree to because you already agreed
[01:47:09.640 --> 01:47:11.640]  to be a fiduciary when you fathered the child.
[01:47:11.640 --> 01:47:13.640]  That's just all there is to it.
[01:47:13.640 --> 01:47:18.640]  And you can't claim I didn't know I did it or I didn't know that it was mine or I didn't
[01:47:18.640 --> 01:47:26.640]  know until years later because if you engage with conduct with a woman, these things can
[01:47:26.640 --> 01:47:27.640]  happen.
[01:47:27.640 --> 01:47:31.640]  And so if you don't want to get, people don't want to get themselves in this situation.
[01:47:31.640 --> 01:47:34.640]  Like I said, the song, the old song, don't do the breed if you can't do the feed.
[01:47:34.640 --> 01:47:41.640]  And I mean, no, I didn't agree to this document is not going to come into play because you
[01:47:41.640 --> 01:47:43.640]  already agreed when you became the fiduciary.
[01:47:43.640 --> 01:47:45.640]  That's just all there is to it.
[01:47:45.640 --> 01:47:46.640]  Okay.
[01:47:46.640 --> 01:47:51.640]  So they likely have jurisdiction over you because you're the fiduciary.
[01:47:51.640 --> 01:47:53.640]  That's just all there is to it.
[01:47:53.640 --> 01:47:54.640]  Okay.
[01:47:54.640 --> 01:47:58.640]  So they sent me this paper and this paper was really worthless.
[01:47:58.640 --> 01:48:02.640]  Whether they sent it or not, they were going to do whatever they did, whether I signed
[01:48:02.640 --> 01:48:03.640]  this paper or not.
[01:48:03.640 --> 01:48:08.640]  Well, what, I mean, the paper signing, I mean, what, asking you about your...
[01:48:08.640 --> 01:48:10.640]  It's a court order.
[01:48:10.640 --> 01:48:14.640]  It was a nine-page court order with...
[01:48:14.640 --> 01:48:20.640]  I kind of sent it to Randy, but it was a court order telling me what I am and that I'm not
[01:48:20.640 --> 01:48:21.640]  going to do.
[01:48:21.640 --> 01:48:22.640]  It had stuff about the Hague Treaty.
[01:48:22.640 --> 01:48:26.640]  It had stuff about my employment and things of that nature.
[01:48:26.640 --> 01:48:27.640]  And...
[01:48:27.640 --> 01:48:32.640]  Did you sign, I mean, did you sign for receipt of service or something?
[01:48:32.640 --> 01:48:33.640]  No.
[01:48:33.640 --> 01:48:34.640]  No, no.
[01:48:34.640 --> 01:48:35.640]  This was a court order.
[01:48:35.640 --> 01:48:36.640]  They wanted me to...
[01:48:36.640 --> 01:48:40.640]  It was a court order of nine pages.
[01:48:40.640 --> 01:48:41.640]  Okay.
[01:48:41.640 --> 01:48:43.640]  What was the point of you...
[01:48:43.640 --> 01:48:44.640]  Okay.
[01:48:44.640 --> 01:48:48.640]  The court wasn't asking you to agree to anything.
[01:48:48.640 --> 01:48:49.640]  Were they?
[01:48:49.640 --> 01:48:50.640]  They were just...
[01:48:50.640 --> 01:48:52.640]  This was an order telling you how it was.
[01:48:52.640 --> 01:48:53.640]  Yes.
[01:48:53.640 --> 01:48:54.640]  You wanted to give...
[01:48:54.640 --> 01:48:55.640]  There was no agreement.
[01:48:55.640 --> 01:48:56.640]  It doesn't come into play.
[01:48:56.640 --> 01:48:57.640]  It's just an order.
[01:48:57.640 --> 01:48:58.640]  Yeah.
[01:48:58.640 --> 01:49:01.640]  You're going to uniform commercial code and it does not apply.
[01:49:01.640 --> 01:49:02.640]  No.
[01:49:02.640 --> 01:49:07.640]  There's a court order in place and whatever you sign regarding that probably just had
[01:49:07.640 --> 01:49:11.640]  to do with acknowledging that you were in receipt of the order.
[01:49:11.640 --> 01:49:13.640]  That doesn't mean you agree to it.
[01:49:13.640 --> 01:49:16.640]  I mean, it doesn't mean that you agree or disagree or anything.
[01:49:16.640 --> 01:49:17.640]  It's just...
[01:49:17.640 --> 01:49:19.640]  I'm sure it just had something to do with service.
[01:49:19.640 --> 01:49:25.640]  It goes to some of this Patriot mythology out there that says that all of this is by agreement.
[01:49:25.640 --> 01:49:30.640]  And the agreement is often a implied agreement.
[01:49:30.640 --> 01:49:32.640]  Well, hold on.
[01:49:32.640 --> 01:49:40.640]  Everything is by agreement, Randy, but the key here is the Patriot mythologists don't
[01:49:40.640 --> 01:49:43.640]  have the discernment to see where the agreement was made.
[01:49:43.640 --> 01:49:44.640]  Okay.
[01:49:44.640 --> 01:49:50.640]  So when Charles signed the document that he received, however the signature came out with,
[01:49:50.640 --> 01:49:53.640]  I suspect it mainly had to do with receipt of service.
[01:49:53.640 --> 01:49:54.640]  Okay.
[01:49:54.640 --> 01:50:00.640]  The agreement was made not when Charles signed the document that he received.
[01:50:00.640 --> 01:50:04.640]  The agreement was made when he fathered a child.
[01:50:04.640 --> 01:50:06.640]  That's when he agreed to become the fiduciary.
[01:50:06.640 --> 01:50:12.640]  Everything does go to agreement, but people 99% of the time don't understand where the
[01:50:12.640 --> 01:50:13.640]  agreement is made.
[01:50:13.640 --> 01:50:14.640]  Okay.
[01:50:14.640 --> 01:50:15.640]  So I want to clarify that.
[01:50:15.640 --> 01:50:19.640]  But listen, Charles, maybe if you want to discuss this further, you can call back tomorrow
[01:50:19.640 --> 01:50:20.640]  at night.
[01:50:20.640 --> 01:50:21.640]  We've got eight minutes left.
[01:50:21.640 --> 01:50:24.640]  We'll get to the rest of these calls we've been holding, okay?
[01:50:24.640 --> 01:50:25.640]  All right.
[01:50:25.640 --> 01:50:26.640]  Okay.
[01:50:26.640 --> 01:50:27.640]  Thanks, Charles.
[01:50:27.640 --> 01:50:28.640]  I'll call you back.
[01:50:28.640 --> 01:50:29.640]  Okay.
[01:50:29.640 --> 01:50:30.640]  All right.
[01:50:30.640 --> 01:50:31.640]  Thank you.
[01:50:31.640 --> 01:50:32.640]  Thank you so much for calling, Charles.
[01:50:32.640 --> 01:50:33.640]  Thank you.
[01:50:33.640 --> 01:50:34.640]  Bye-bye.
[01:50:34.640 --> 01:50:35.640]  Okay.
[01:50:35.640 --> 01:50:38.640]  So, listen, Randy, we have Jeff, Tina, and Jermaine.
[01:50:38.640 --> 01:50:41.640]  Which one of these callers have you not spoken to recently?
[01:50:41.640 --> 01:50:42.640]  Tina?
[01:50:42.640 --> 01:50:43.640]  Jermaine.
[01:50:43.640 --> 01:50:44.640]  You want to talk to Jermaine?
[01:50:44.640 --> 01:50:45.640]  Okay.
[01:50:45.640 --> 01:50:47.640]  And then if there's time, let's go to Tina and then Jeff.
[01:50:47.640 --> 01:50:48.640]  I'm sorry, Jeff.
[01:50:48.640 --> 01:50:50.640]  You call in a lot, but we need to take these other calls.
[01:50:50.640 --> 01:50:51.640]  Jermaine and Alabama.
[01:50:51.640 --> 01:50:52.640]  Okay.
[01:50:52.640 --> 01:50:57.640]  What's on your mind and can we try to make this as succinct as possible?
[01:50:57.640 --> 01:50:58.640]  Okay.
[01:50:58.640 --> 01:50:59.640]  Hello.
[01:50:59.640 --> 01:51:00.640]  Yes.
[01:51:00.640 --> 01:51:01.640]  Go ahead, Jermaine.
[01:51:01.640 --> 01:51:02.640]  Yeah.
[01:51:02.640 --> 01:51:03.640]  Yeah.
[01:51:03.640 --> 01:51:04.640]  Yeah.
[01:51:04.640 --> 01:51:05.640]  I was going to tell you who gave that guy my information.
[01:51:05.640 --> 01:51:06.640]  I kind of have a minority situation.
[01:51:06.640 --> 01:51:15.640]  But the situation I have is that last time I talked to Randy, we had talked about the people
[01:51:15.640 --> 01:51:20.640]  at the, what was it, the Pete, the...
[01:51:20.640 --> 01:51:23.640]  Is this about your brother that's in jail?
[01:51:23.640 --> 01:51:24.640]  No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
[01:51:24.640 --> 01:51:26.640]  They got my license situation.
[01:51:26.640 --> 01:51:27.640]  I got a little...
[01:51:27.640 --> 01:51:28.640]  Oh, okay.
[01:51:28.640 --> 01:51:29.640]  I told you about the letter I got.
[01:51:29.640 --> 01:51:32.640]  And you said, make sure that I meet that deadline.
[01:51:32.640 --> 01:51:38.640]  You have to put the Department of Homeland Security, financial responsibility, the area.
[01:51:38.640 --> 01:51:42.640]  They told me that they were going to spend my license due to a pending situation.
[01:51:42.640 --> 01:51:44.640]  So, you said, make sure I meet the deadline.
[01:51:44.640 --> 01:51:45.640]  Yes.
[01:51:45.640 --> 01:51:52.140]  So, I wrote them back certified mails, sending them a letter saying that their letter was
[01:51:52.140 --> 01:51:59.640]  premature because the situation was still pending, plus that they was using a Fudo title.
[01:51:59.640 --> 01:52:06.640]  And I wasn't sure what I was speaking with, to please send back a letter with an agent
[01:52:06.640 --> 01:52:12.640]  name or ID number, plus, and if they are in receipt of a judgment from Kentucky, from
[01:52:12.640 --> 01:52:17.640]  Kentucky, to please forward that to me so I can properly respond to the letter.
[01:52:17.640 --> 01:52:18.640]  Well, I sent it in.
[01:52:18.640 --> 01:52:19.640]  They never responded.
[01:52:19.640 --> 01:52:23.640]  But they went on to assist my license anyway.
[01:52:23.640 --> 01:52:26.640]  Well, you have recourse.
[01:52:26.640 --> 01:52:31.640]  You can file an action in court to get your license reinstated.
[01:52:31.640 --> 01:52:32.640]  Okay.
[01:52:32.640 --> 01:52:33.640]  So, okay.
[01:52:33.640 --> 01:52:35.640]  So, where was I?
[01:52:35.640 --> 01:52:36.640]  What, like...
[01:52:36.640 --> 01:52:41.640]  Okay, too complex for one segment.
[01:52:41.640 --> 01:52:46.640]  If you will call in tomorrow night, I will bump you to the top of the list.
[01:52:46.640 --> 01:52:51.640]  But first, we have to go through all of the details to see how you got to this point for
[01:52:51.640 --> 01:52:57.640]  me to know how to address any remedy that you may have.
[01:52:57.640 --> 01:52:59.640]  It's just a little too complex.
[01:52:59.640 --> 01:53:00.640]  I'm sorry, Jermaine.
[01:53:00.640 --> 01:53:05.640]  We didn't mean to take so long with the other callers, but we kind of needed to iron out
[01:53:05.640 --> 01:53:11.640]  some of these legal issues that I think a lot of people are dealing with.
[01:53:11.640 --> 01:53:12.640]  Can you call in tomorrow night?
[01:53:12.640 --> 01:53:16.640]  We do a four-hour show, and I'll bump you up to the top.
[01:53:16.640 --> 01:53:18.640]  Okay, I definitely call in tomorrow.
[01:53:18.640 --> 01:53:19.640]  Yeah, definitely call in.
[01:53:19.640 --> 01:53:23.640]  He will be on the air from eight to midnight, central time.
[01:53:23.640 --> 01:53:26.640]  And I think Alabama is also central time, and so there'll be plenty of time.
[01:53:26.640 --> 01:53:27.640]  He can discuss everything.
[01:53:27.640 --> 01:53:30.640]  He'll take you right at the top.
[01:53:30.640 --> 01:53:32.640]  Alabama's on hillbilly time.
[01:53:32.640 --> 01:53:33.640]  Hillbilly time.
[01:53:33.640 --> 01:53:34.640]  Okay.
[01:53:34.640 --> 01:53:35.640]  I know I'm in Tennessee.
[01:53:35.640 --> 01:53:37.640]  I'm on hillbilly time.
[01:53:37.640 --> 01:53:39.640]  Okay, thank you, Jermaine.
[01:53:39.640 --> 01:53:40.640]  Thanks, Jermaine.
[01:53:40.640 --> 01:53:42.640]  Thanks for being so understanding and patient.
[01:53:42.640 --> 01:53:43.640]  Okay, thank you.
[01:53:43.640 --> 01:53:46.640]  Okay, we're going to go to Tina in California next.
[01:53:46.640 --> 01:53:47.640]  Tina, we've got like five minutes.
[01:53:47.640 --> 01:53:50.640]  I hope we can help you within that time frame.
[01:53:50.640 --> 01:53:51.640]  What's on your mind?
[01:53:51.640 --> 01:53:52.640]  What's going on?
[01:53:52.640 --> 01:53:56.640]  Well, you know, you can't help with everything.
[01:53:56.640 --> 01:53:57.640]  Hold on, Tina.
[01:53:57.640 --> 01:54:00.640]  Can you move the mouthpiece down by your chin?
[01:54:00.640 --> 01:54:02.640]  You're kind of distorting the mic.
[01:54:02.640 --> 01:54:03.640]  Is that better?
[01:54:03.640 --> 01:54:04.640]  Yes, yes.
[01:54:04.640 --> 01:54:05.640]  Go ahead quickly.
[01:54:05.640 --> 01:54:06.640]  What's the subject?
[01:54:06.640 --> 01:54:07.640]  Wonderful.
[01:54:07.640 --> 01:54:08.640]  Two real quick things.
[01:54:08.640 --> 01:54:15.640]  I had sent you upon your request my note and some payment history, because you said
[01:54:15.640 --> 01:54:22.640]  you would be able to tell me if the bank overcharged or undercharged, and we could go for some kind
[01:54:22.640 --> 01:54:24.640]  of lawsuit on that.
[01:54:24.640 --> 01:54:29.640]  I did send it to you last week, so hopefully you'll get a chance to take a look at it.
[01:54:29.640 --> 01:54:34.640]  I saw your email, but I didn't get time to compile all of it, and it takes me two or
[01:54:34.640 --> 01:54:38.640]  three hours to get everything in place, and I didn't get to it yet.
[01:54:38.640 --> 01:54:44.640]  But since you've called me, you reminded me, I'll try to get that done in the morning.
[01:54:44.640 --> 01:54:49.640]  So, if you call back tomorrow, I should have all of that ready for you.
[01:54:49.640 --> 01:54:56.640]  This is a spreadsheet that I spent about six months building, and it will run all of the
[01:54:56.640 --> 01:55:02.640]  numbers, and I'll get a very accurate picture of what you should owe.
[01:55:02.640 --> 01:55:09.640]  And this brings great advantage, because whoever is taking an action against you, they're almost
[01:55:09.640 --> 01:55:16.640]  certainly the servicer, and they will only have records on your mortgage for as long as
[01:55:16.640 --> 01:55:18.640]  they have been the servicer.
[01:55:18.640 --> 01:55:24.640]  Why do the servicers don't transfer their financial records from one servicer to another?
[01:55:24.640 --> 01:55:26.640]  I have no idea.
[01:55:26.640 --> 01:55:32.640]  But once they change servicers, all the financial records before that are gone.
[01:55:32.640 --> 01:55:39.640]  So, if you come in and make this claim, they have no way of disputing it.
[01:55:39.640 --> 01:55:43.640]  So, yes, and I apologize for not giving to it.
[01:55:43.640 --> 01:55:45.640]  Okay.
[01:55:45.640 --> 01:55:46.640]  Go ahead.
[01:55:46.640 --> 01:55:51.640]  Interesting stuff that you might bring up tomorrow, and it might help other people when
[01:55:51.640 --> 01:55:57.640]  you get that information, and you'd given me a case to look up, but I couldn't find it,
[01:55:57.640 --> 01:56:00.640]  so I wanted to ask you for the correct spelling.
[01:56:00.640 --> 01:56:11.640]  I think it's a key or something, the New York case you said that was about excessive billing.
[01:56:11.640 --> 01:56:12.640]  Oh, that is a case.
[01:56:12.640 --> 01:56:17.640]  That was Rosseky and Rosseky.
[01:56:17.640 --> 01:56:20.640]  It's a law firm out of New York.
[01:56:20.640 --> 01:56:27.640]  It's the primary foreclosure meal in New York, and the attorney general went after them.
[01:56:27.640 --> 01:56:30.640]  I think it's R-O-S-E-K-I.
[01:56:30.640 --> 01:56:35.640]  The attorney general of New York, it's not exactly, it's not case law.
[01:56:35.640 --> 01:56:41.640]  It's an ongoing case, so you can do a search for New York, Rosseky, Rosseky, attorney general,
[01:56:41.640 --> 01:56:44.640]  and you're likely to get a hit right on it.
[01:56:44.640 --> 01:56:50.640]  And Shane from New York, he calls in pretty regular.
[01:56:50.640 --> 01:56:56.640]  His parents' house was in foreclosure, and Rosseky and Rosseky was the one that was doing
[01:56:56.640 --> 01:57:03.640]  the foreclosure, and what they got zapped for by the attorney general was for overcharging
[01:57:03.640 --> 01:57:08.640]  for their services, and they were grossly overcharging.
[01:57:08.640 --> 01:57:11.640]  Oh, perfect.
[01:57:11.640 --> 01:57:19.640]  It'll be a good case if we get their research and their legal arguments.
[01:57:19.640 --> 01:57:26.640]  They're going to be New York legal arguments, but we can bounce off the New York case law
[01:57:26.640 --> 01:57:31.640]  and find California or any other state's case law on the same subject,
[01:57:31.640 --> 01:57:36.640]  but it will give you basically the elements and the legal arguments that they bring.
[01:57:36.640 --> 01:57:41.640]  And it will be very immediate.
[01:57:41.640 --> 01:57:48.640]  If you go after the lawyers in this foreclosure case for what Rosseky and Rosseky are being
[01:57:48.640 --> 01:57:53.640]  raked over the calls for, these lawyers are going to get really excited.
[01:57:53.640 --> 01:57:57.640]  Hey, Randy, I just wanted to mention quickly before we run out of time
[01:57:57.640 --> 01:58:03.640]  why the state of Michigan has jurisdiction over that caller,
[01:58:03.640 --> 01:58:08.640]  because that's where the fiduciary relationship actually is,
[01:58:08.640 --> 01:58:12.640]  because the beneficiary is in the state of Michigan,
[01:58:12.640 --> 01:58:16.640]  and so that's why they have jurisdiction over him to enforce that,
[01:58:16.640 --> 01:58:20.640]  because the state is there to look after the welfare of the child,
[01:58:20.640 --> 01:58:24.640]  as well as the trust law is invoked in that state, because that's where beneficiary is.
[01:58:24.640 --> 01:58:26.640]  Yes, good.
[01:58:26.640 --> 01:58:33.640]  Tina, if you'll call back tomorrow night, I will have run the numbers on this on your case,
[01:58:33.640 --> 01:58:36.640]  and this is good information. Everybody should hear it,
[01:58:36.640 --> 01:58:38.640]  because it's a great way to go after these guys.
[01:58:38.640 --> 01:58:41.640]  Thank you all for listening. We are out of time.
[01:58:41.640 --> 01:58:45.640]  We'll be back tomorrow night. This is Randy Kelton,
[01:58:45.640 --> 01:58:49.640]  Denver Seasons, rule of our radio. Good night.
[01:58:49.640 --> 01:58:57.640]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.640 --> 01:59:04.640]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says, verse by verse,
[01:59:04.640 --> 01:59:08.640]  helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.640 --> 01:59:11.640]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.640 --> 01:59:20.640]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102, or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.640 --> 01:59:25.640]  This translation is highly accurate, and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:25.640 --> 01:59:29.640]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:29.640 --> 01:59:32.640]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.640 --> 01:59:35.640]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version,
[01:59:35.640 --> 01:59:40.640]  call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:40.640 --> 01:59:49.640]  That's 888-551-0102, or visit us online at bfa.org.