Many assume that consumer law exists independently of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and is governed solely by statutes like the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and its implementing regulation, Regulation Z. However, this is a misconception. The UCC plays a critical role in consumer transactions, particularly in areas such as secured transactions, negotiable instruments, sales of goods, and warranties. While consumer protection laws provide remedies and disclosures, the UCC governs the enforceability, structure, and rights associated with consumer agreements.One of the most significant aspects of this relationship is UCC Article 9, which explicitly recognizes "consumers" as "debtors" in secured transactions, reinforcing the UCC’s authority over consumer transactions.
In a world where everything operates as a contract, understanding the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) can be the difference between being in control or being controlled. The UCC Playbook: How to Use Contract Law to Secure Your Assets, Family, Freedom, and Enforce Your Rights is a roadmap to reclaiming your financial and legal sovereignty.
The right to represent a trust as an attorney-in-fact is well established in federal law, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and legal precedent. Despite common misconceptions, a trust is a contractual entity that can be lawfully represented by an authorized agent, including an attorney-in-fact. This article breaks down the legal foundation supporting this right, key statutory provisions, and how to enforce it against courts and financial institutions that attempt to deny it.
The case of Kevin Walker Estate, et al. v. Jay Promisco, PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al. reveals systemic corruption, legal incompetence, and judicial misconduct. PHH Mortgage, led by attorney Neil J. Cooper, has engaged in fraud, obstruction, and misrepresentation, while the Riverside Federal Court has actively suppressed key filings. Plaintiffs have filed a Verified Demand for criminal enforcement, sanctions, and summary judgment, exposing PHH’s baseless legal tactics. The overturning of the Chevron Doctrine further invalidates PHH’s arguments, proving bad faith litigation. This case is a critical fight against judicial corruption, demanding accountability, due process, and legal sanctions.
PHH Mortgage’s Motion to Dismiss exemplifies judicial overreach, defamation, and procedural misconduct, falsely asserting that a trust cannot be represented by an attorney-in-fact. The motion mischaracterizes legal arguments, obstructs court records, and suppresses due process rights under the color of law. Plaintiffs have challenged this abuse through a writ of mandamus, exposing court manipulation and fraud.
A consumer debtor under UCC § 9-102 is a public entity and debt-transmitting utility vehicle, not a sovereign individual. As an ens legis, the consumer functions as a debtor in a system where all transactions are based on debt, per public law and policy. Since the removal of gold-backed currency (HJR-192, 1933), consumers operate within a commercial framework where assets are collateralized, not owned outright. This distinction separates the legal fiction (U.S. citizen) from the living man or woman, reinforcing the commercial nature of all consumer transactions.
The U.S. legal system presumes every man or woman to be a decedent or minor in commerce until they claim their securities under 31 CFR § 363.6, effectively placing their estate under government control. Title 26 U.S.C. §§ 7603, 6903, and 6036 establish that no public servant can act upon an estate without proper fiduciary authorization. This article breaks down how statutes like 31 U.S.C. § 1321 and 26 U.S.C. § 2203 confirm the necessity of asserting one’s legal standing to prevent unlawful interference with an estate. Understanding these laws is crucial for reclaiming control over one’s financial and legal status
In the world of finance and law, silence equals acquiescence. When you send an affidavit stating the facts surrounding a debt and the other party fails to rebut it, the debt is legally and commercially considered agreed upon as stated. If a full administrative process has been completed—culminating in an Affidavit Certificate of Non-Response in accordance with UCC § 3-505, the debt can be classified as uncollectible. Under IRS Topic No. 453 (Bad Debt Deduction), you can then legally write off the debt and, in some cases, recover the amount as a credit—similar to a 1099-C (Cancellation of Debt).
An Article III court provides essential protections in civil contract disputes involving unrebutted affidavits. It ensures due process, enforces uncontested evidence, and offers both legal and equitable remedies. With exclusive equity jurisdiction, these courts can compel performance, issue injunctions, and affirm binding agreements, safeguarding constitutional rights and justice.
This case law summary highlights key legal principles on jurisdiction, standing, and procedural requirements in financial and mortgage-related cases. Courts consistently void judgments rendered without proper jurisdiction and emphasize the need for plaintiffs to demonstrate legal standing. Fraudulent lending practices, including violations of federal regulations, have led to dismissals with prejudice. Corporate overreach by banks is curtailed through rulings that prohibit lending credit and ultra vires contracts. Evidentiary standards stress the sufficiency of affidavits and the duty to disclose information to prevent fraud. Contract principles underscore the nullification of agreements based on illegal consideration
BMW of Florence and BMW of North America face serious assertions from the Brian Victor Charles Estate, including conspiracy, racketeering, and theft. Central to the case are unrebutted affidavits and the alleged unlawful repossession of a vehicle from BMW Florence’s private property.