| Author |
 Topic  |
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
 Posted - 01 Sep 2004 : 14:34:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Livefree
quote:
Originally posted by psalm119
Livefree,
Have you ever used the IMF Decoder service??
No, I haven't. I've listened to a few of their conference calls though. You can decode yourself. I've heard it takes 6 hours to decode one year. I don't know why it takes that long, but there are a lot of codes on one IMF. Of course, the only drawback to doing it yourself is that you have no support. The decode service provides the letters to the District Director and IRS agent to back up their report.
Listen to few of their conference calls. Have your questions ready.
Hello Livefree
I have the IMF Decoder. It doesn't take that long to decode one year. To decode, all you do is enter the codes listed on your IMF, IMFS, and TXMODA. The difficulty in doing it is comparable to your first day on a new job. Once you get used to it, by just following the instructions, it's fairly easy. Your support is an impressive looking printout of your entries attached to the document/s you entered the codes from.
Would you object to me contacting you privately for more info regarding what you have said relating to UCC? |
 |
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2004 : 21:47:09
|
"Would you object to me contacting you privately for more info regarding what you have said relating to UCC?"
~~~~~~~~~~~
No, I would not object. 
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 08:56:42
|
Dear Georgelaurie;
I think in plain English the codes you are speaking about defeating is the presumption of the SDR (Special Drawing Rights). The Jamaica-Rambouillet Accord piggybacked on the Bretton Woods Agreements Amendments in late 1975. From the State Department Bulletin at that time:
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/SeizeGold.jpg
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/statement4.gif
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/statement5.gif
Before you run off into private; please describe a sample of decryption. Is the key available on a link? Please link the key.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 02 Sep 2004 09:18:12 |
|
|
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 22:17:12
|
Dear David
Below is a copy of the top part of the IMFS I received through the FOIA. I've redacted personal information for obvious reason. The codes are a series of letters followed by a "-" and number/s. As you can see the code "MFR-05", which indicates "Form 1040 business filer", which I am not! Then code VAL-1 which means "The SSN is not valid for this taxpayer" [strawman vs live]. Not shown is the code further down "JUSTIFICATION-1", which means "An invalid account will be changed to IRS valid"! How nice is that? The invalid acct shown by the "VAL" code is simply changed to valid by the "JUSTIFICATION" code, indicating a manual override is in place, which also means the entire IMF is invalid and unusable. This is confirmed in the IR Manual 4.4.1-31 and printed out as an exhibit with the decoded transript and you can mail this to the IRS to have this put into your file.
These are the codes I referred to. The IMFS consists of six pages of these codes. It is a simple matter to enter the codes into the IMF Decoder and print it out with exhibits supporting as fact that the transcript (your account) is (like the IRS) false and illegal.
I have been studying the tax code -title 26-, and just recently came across ecclesia while looking for new information relating to levy and lien. Looking for a way to get back the funds released by my bank in response to a NOTICE of levy and to remove the federal tax lien from my property. I am totally unfamiliar with UCC, which is why I asked Livefree if I could make contact privately for info relating to it.
Regards
Georgelaurie (aka George) Wife is Laurie
PAGE NO-0001
*IMF MCC TRANSCRIPT-SPECIFIC* EMP NO 79-171-58848
02306
ACCOUNT NO XXX-XX-XXXX 04-19-2004
NAME CONT - XXXX CYCLE 200415
*******************************************************************************
FOR 7917158848 BY 7917158848 ON 041562004 TYPE S 30 199812
TIME 13:49 SRC 1 02306 PROCESSED ON 110
REQUESTED TAX MODULE FOUND ON MF
DROPPED ENTITY DATA IS AVAILABLE
USE MFTRA REQUEST - TYPE -E- HARDCOPY
1999 3 XXXXX X XXXXXXX
XXX XXXX XXXX XX BODC - WI BODCLC-
199910 XXXXXXXXXX CT XXXXX XXXX XXX SPOUSE SSN XXX-XX-XXXX*
PRIOR NAME CONTROL - FZ> -
LOC 0611 MFR 05 VAL -1 IRA- CAF 1
YEAR REMOVED - ENT EXT CYC 200415 FYM 12 SCS - CRINA - 130 -
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2004 : 23:59:05
|
quote:
The IMFS consists of six pages of these codes.
I am thinking you mean six pages of key. Interpretations to decrypt. If you can give me some document information I can find this in the local federal repository. Look for some title and document information please. It is only useful to me if authentic and certified.
I have seen people try to use this technique for years now. Even to the point the IMF (International Monetary Fund) admitted they are not federal (IRS not federal) so they need not respond to the FOIA request.
But I like codes and cryptological mathematics.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. Some suitors, once proven courts of competent jurisdiction, are making headway with their banks by examining and changing the contract's 'prior lien' clause by novation (innovation).
http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=378&whichpage=5 |
Edited by - David Merrill on 03 Sep 2004 00:00:17 |
|
|
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2004 : 13:08:53
|
Dear David
I am not sure what "document information" I can give you for the search. The IMF (INDIVIDUAL MASTER FILE), the IMFS (INDIVIDUAL MASTER FILE SPECIFIC), and the TXMODA (can't recall actual name) can be requested through the FOIA and they are, to the best of my knowledge, required to comply with the request. I have requested and received all of these transcripts relating to me for the years 1993 (the first year I filed a zero return) through 2003. If anyone is interested in the perfected request I will e-mail or post it.
Thank you for directing me to page 5 regarding "suitors". It was very informative. The deposit agreement with the bank that released funds in response to notice of levy, in relation to levy states "WHEN REQUIRED BY LAW". I am satisfied with this because, on the reverse of a notice of levy the statute 26 USC Sec. 6332 is reproduced and clearly states "SPECIAL RULE FOR BANKS - SURRENDER OF DEPOSITS UNDER JUDICIAL PROCESS". So the bank's response was in violation of not only state (Conn. GEN. STAT. 52-337) law but in violation of federal law.
Regards
George |
|
|
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2004 : 13:30:11
|
David
One other thing, I am in the process of drafting a complaint to file an action against this bank (FLEET BANK). A search for "NOTICE OF LEVY" actions shows that most have been made on the theory that a "NOTICE" of Levy is not a levy, but only a notice of. I believe this theory to be accurate. However, the courts have rejected this. GO figure. Other actions were based on the theory that the IRS agent was not authorized to issue a notice of levy. I believe this argument also is accurate and is supported by numerous federal statutes. The courts have rejected this also. My complaint makes these arguments but is predicated on the fact that the funds surrendered were not under judicial process which is a requirement of state statute, federal statute, and the deposit agreement. I believe this action may be a precedent since I can't find any similar actions.
George |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 04 Sep 2004 : 04:59:56
|
Perhaps I am presuming you are familiar with cryptological mathematics. Also I am presuming you have in your possession "six pages of codes". I picture in my mind a list of gibberish in the left column followed by a hyphen and then followed in the right column by what the gibbering means in plain(er) English. This is not code; it is a key. That was what I am inquiring about.*
http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=306&whichpage=1
The link above is another place you may find interesting if you are into various approaches. I am not sure what you are calling precedent about the Notice is a valid lien concepts but if you find no precedent it may be due to a violation of rules. There are specifics codified into the court rules (district court) that dictate certain steps must be followed in forming a valid cause. See "Judicature Acts" and that they have been adopted into the F.R.C.P. But I am not saying that to discourage you in an endeavor.
So let's pretend you get your hearing. You present the IMF or whatever:
quote:
1999 3 XXXXX X XXXXXXX
XXX XXXX XXXX XX BODC - WI BODCLC-
199910 XXXXXXXXXX CT XXXXX XXXX XXX SPOUSE SSN XXX-XX-XXXX*
PRIOR NAME CONTROL - FZ> -
LOC 0611 MFR 05 VAL -1 IRA- CAF 1
YEAR REMOVED - ENT EXT CYC 200415 FYM 12 SCS - CRINA - 130 -
and you assert,
quote:
As you can see the code "MFR-05", which indicates "Form 1040 business filer", which I am not!
The attorney in the black robe you have hired to be a "judge" is awaiting you to offer an authenticated key. Something to prove that you are interpreting that codified message correctly. Being an attorney he will not request it. If you are an attorney even pro se, it is expected of you to authenticate or have your assertion void for not clearing rules of evidence. The other party is certainly not going to suggest you authenticate - choosing 'silent judicial notice' that your assertions just went into the garbage.
Then again if you say, "Patriot for Hire so-and-so says that is the correct interpretation of MFR-05" without any authenticated key, expect the same 'silent judicial notice'. Now that I have told you, you will understand why the ruling went south.
But here is the insidious part of the trap. If you have an authentic looking key but the IMF/World Bank has not labeled it for easy recall and distribution with a Form #XXXXX-XX or something, you may be holding a true and correct copy that the Patriot for Hire altered so that he could keep it private intellectual property; charging people like you to sell it to them. But if the Patriot will change that, then you do not know what else has been spun into the document.
So about your hearing and precedent. The theory that Notice of Lien or Levy is invalid for an actual lien or levy is faulty. Law dictates that a foreign agent must file and acquire judgment in the district courts of the United States before proceeding against a man's property. True. You will even find it in the IRS codes. But literally every dispute out there is over Federal Reserve Notes so expediency of process is necessary.
Therefore the district courts of the United States have extended (Nixon Administration importing Navy contractor 'Postal Service') to your mailbox. In other words, for the district courts to handle the workload, they must be exactly the size of the Postal SERVICE.
Reading around ecclesia.org you will probably get the gist fairly quickly. Sometimes the postal carriers get downright nasty about their responsibility to serve Treasury process. Especially when they see a man picking and choosing when he wants to open and appear for the legal name. "Well! We will just stop bringing any mail here with that name on it!" No. It can have "MICKEY MOUSE" on the address and if the number and street are there, the man gets to sort who he appears for; not the carrier.
Then again a few years ago, a suitor's wife was just getting started with the "Vultures in Eagle's Clothing" doctrine from Lynn Meredith. She was obviously nervous about signing a certified letter from the Treasury with her husband at work. The carrier said, "Just write "Refusal for Cause" on it and mail it back. It will go away." Of course until I explained the processes of international law, it was a useless gesture. The couple did not understand well enough to act.
Regards,
David Merrill.
* The key is the most important document to require authentication. Replacing even subtle nuances in the key is called counterintelligence. If some Patriot somewhere thought he knew enough to make up a key, that may be what you are looking at and unfortunately willing to share under the impression it is authentic.
P.S. FOIA only applies to governmental entities. I learned this trying to get my records from the phone company years ago. However on the same tone, international banking cartels like the Treasury are not governmental either. They only comply to create the illusion they conform to governmental regulation. Title 12 §95(b) incorporating the "Trading with the Enemy Act" should convince you within the scope of banking, the Secretary is every bit as powerful as the President.
I added a Crosstalk note on Rules of evidence over on 'advanced-resonance' Page 5. You might want a look. http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=378&whichpage=5
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 04 Sep 2004 10:24:32 |
|
|
|
Jaywood216
Occasional Poster
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 01:35:17
|
Dear all,
May I pose a different kind of question here? Can anyone here tell me what the connection is between the number on the back of the SS card and serial number on the FRN? I read it somewhere but forget where. I was looking for it on the net but couldn't find anything. I got the impression that it shows that the card holder is the colateral for all the money with that serial number. Thanks for any help on the matter.
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 09:24:08
|
Dear Jaywood216;
That is wonderful you bring up something along those lines. The Crosstalk on Page 5 of "advanced-resonance" brings to light my quest for characterization of a social disease, a mental disorder akin to communal paranoia. Please do not take offense. I am just noting you are inquiring about another key. Not a code. You want a key to decrypt the code you have heard exists.
quote:
Problem definition is of course essential to acquire a meaningful solution. Thus I designed an "echo chamber" over on ecclesia.org in a topic called "advanced-resonance inductive plasma physics.
The linking of humans as collateral [Special Drawing Rights] is through the Bretton Woods Agreements (1944) and the Jamaica Rambouillet Accord http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/SeizeGold.jpg that piggybacked the Amendments to BWA in 1975. But all this activity is based upon the 1933 bankruptcy and an accusation of Americans hoarding our own gold. That put things in a condition of necessity by substituting honest people as the German Nationals in the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917. So there is likely no link between the serial numbers on the FRNs and the SSN; said primarily because I see no need for it.
However if there is, the link is defined by a KEY. Not in the CODE. If you find the key you seek, linking the FRN S/N with SSN, then the primary concern is authentication of that key. If you were to show me what you thought was the key, I would only be interested (like with the IMF decoder key) if I could find it from an authentic source. So please share if you find it. It may lead me to an authenticated key. That would be interesting information.
If you go to Credit River Money Decision you may read a true account of a farmer who contacted me in the eleventh hour of his failed UCC Redemption. http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=303&whichpage=5 I pumped up his confidence and he was preparing for a peaceable reentry into his property even after bonding out of jail. He lost track of the paperwork on his case during the sheriff move. I told him no matter; go get certified true and correct copies from Spokane. Well he wanted me to furnish a copy of the CRMD right away so I emailed .JPG images. Then he wanted me to fax it as well. The fax line was on the Internet and by the time that was cleared, I had lost the number from my fax memory. I told him to get the papers from Spokane again. Well he was in a panic and I told him, If you cannot or refuse to see the importance of the papers you have already filed; the importance of authentication, then you better not try peaceable reentry.
I gather by the subsequent silence, he took my advice.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. I suppose the closest thing to your alleged code is that giving a SSN is presumed to be giving the indentical TIN (Taxpayer Identification Number) to the IMF/IBRD a/k/a World Bank. The Birth Certificate bond is used for Good Faith bolstering of Credit of the US and grants issuance of FRNs. The CRMD expresses this process eloquently. The "borrower" grants credit by signing unwittingly with the legal name in place of the true name. It is a grand old shell game.
Over on "advanced-resonance" the suitor with a bank account has changed the signature card to authorize "True Name dba First M. Last". I told him no barratry, to write checks just to force the bank's rubber stamp, but he is writing checks as usual with the new signature. The checks will likely clear with the cashing bank wherever but once the suitor's bank honors the draft, he has acquired approval of his true authorizing signature. This removes him from the presumption you feel is in the codification you mention above.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 05 Sep 2004 09:43:14 |
|
|
|
Jaywood216
Occasional Poster
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 21:04:42
|
| Thanks David for your quick reply in spite of you being a busy man. I figure there must be a connection but maybe not. It's not that it is any big deal for me, just that if there is a connection I would like to know. I wouldn't even know how to look for a key. Maybe the number is on my card because I am an old timer. Was born in 31 and go my number in the early 40s. |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2004 : 22:45:20
|
Dear Jaywood216;
I do not recall any numbers on the back of the card I destroyed over a decade ago. So there may have been a cite referring to a document about the "new forms" that Roosevelt was speaking of in 1933.
quote:
Recognized Government bonds are as safe as Government currency. They have the same credit back of them. And, therefore, if we can persuade people all through the country, when their salary checks come in, to deposit them in new accounts, which will be held in trust and kept in one of the new forms I have mentioned, we shall have made progress.
Franklin D. Roosevelt; March 6, 1933 - Address before the Governors' Conference at the White House.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 05 Sep 2004 22:46:35 |
|
|
|
Jaywood216
Occasional Poster
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2004 : 00:10:44
|
Dear David,
The numbers on the FRNs are a letter from A to L, representing the 12 Fed banks, followed by 8 digits. The number on the ss card is the same configuration. That's why there appears to be a connection. The Fed demanded colateral and the bankrupt government had nothing to put up for it except the people and their labors. At least that is the drift I got of it.
That is interesting that you destroyed your card. Did you rescind it first? |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 06 Sep 2004 : 08:57:09
|
Tried.
The manager at the SS office told me they do not rescind or in any way destroy Social Security Numbers. I thought he was just giving me political double-talk but then he asked me questions. He asked when I had requested we form a SSN. Then he asked me how I keep it in existence? That was great! I said, "By speaking it or writing it down." He told me to quit doing that and I would destroy it myself. It took me six months to discover he was telling me the truth.
I went to the bank where I had drawn a $4K letter of credit (prior and in good faith) and told them to take my SSN off the account. They said they could not without closing the account. At the time, I looked at cause and effect like everyone else does.
I thought I had to repay the $4K when they closed the account. Then they called my father on the phone and asked him for my SSN. He did not provide it. It was the SSN entity on the birth certificate that acted as debtor. [You call it collateral above.] Me the man, I do not have a SSN unless I say so. Even then I would be lying because my name is not on the birth certificate.* So the debt was forgiven because I forgave it - I was the creditor, not the debtor [capital integration both microcosmic and macrocosmic].
That is the same thing you say in the Reply above. Just different words and a different paradigm on cause and effect. Get a load of the last paragraph on the first page of the Credit River Money Decision. http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/p1.jpg
That is why nobody will challenge the validity of an energy-based bill of exchange: http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE1.gif ...and why judgment cured exactly thirty days from the due date - September 11, 2001.
Now that you provide the added information; that the form of the numbers and letters are the same on both FRNs and the back of old SSN Cards, I would not doubt it. At least other than it might be coincidence. The only problem is that the collateral would be attached to a FED bank and there is only one card but approximately $670K in FRNs floating on the one card number. That is where the key comes in handy; to establish the "=" sign in the equation. THIS equals That. Now you can decrypt.
Regards,
David Merrill.
* IT, the legal name has a social security number. Upon my choice to use IT for commercial intercourse, the SSN becomes a TIN or EIN (Employer Identification Number), me being the employer of IT. This is also where the Strawman becomes insidious doctrine. I am talking about the legal name, not the nom de guerre. If you cannot wrap your mind around true name then you will not grasp this.
Quoting from above:
quote:
Over on "advanced-resonance" the suitor with a bank account has changed the signature card to authorize "True Name dba First M. Last". I told him no barratry, to write checks just to force the bank's rubber stamp, but he is writing checks as usual with the new signature. The checks will likely clear with the cashing bank wherever but once the suitor's bank honors the draft, he has acquired approval of his true authorizing signature. This removes him from the presumption you feel is in the codification you mention above.
[humans for collateral]
I delve into this specifically in "'Schedule A'; cracking the code" http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=376&whichpage=1
Consider the humans as collateral on Schedule A, the assets list of the public trust. I figure one has to understand the mechanism to most effectively remove and convey the pledge (social compact) by proper novation - notice and grace.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 06 Sep 2004 09:50:48 |
|
|
|
Jaywood216
Occasional Poster
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2004 : 11:30:36
|
David,
Thanks much for the input. That is interesting that just quitting using the # does the job. And about the debt being forgiven. Would that work with a mortgage as well?
I have another situation. A friend of mine has a 2 acre lot in Colorado Springs that they have declared open space and won't let him do anything with it. Is there a solution to this. For instance the 5th ammendment. Isn't that taking property without giving just compensation?
All the best, Jim |
|
|
|
Jaywood216
Occasional Poster
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2004 : 12:03:09
|
Dear David,
This is another subject altogether but it may prove to be more interesting. What do your numbers tell you about Daniel 11? Who are the two kings?
Jim |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2004 : 13:18:02
|
About everything I am about is highly theoretical and purely idealistic. So I say sure, it works with mortgages; just look at the Credit River Money Decision. The heart of this is true identity. The social compact and presumption will always supersede any arguments made by the legal name into external courts. This is the difficult paradigm shift. Once made however, getting through a bout or two builds confidence (competence).
Your friend is being presumed to be in the City of Colorado Springs, which is a positive law jural society formed under Home Rule Cities and Towns in Article XX of the State Constitution. But your friend is also under the Colorado Jurisdiction of the Freemasons too. The headquarters for the Western States is right there on Mesa Hill. See what I mean?
If your friend thinks he is in the City of Colorado Springs he probably is. Jurisdiction is formed by three necessary components; 1) territorial 2) in personam and 3) subject matter.
The two kings? I will have to study those symbols before I dare to change the subject. Maybe you will hear about that on the "advanced-resonance" thread later. I have been publishing an accurate to the day timeline called Daniel's Calendar.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/DanielCalendar.jpg
Regards,
David Merrill. |
|
|
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 11:02:26
|
David
I stated in my last post;
quote:
As you can see the code "MFR-05", which indicates "Form 1040 business filer", which I am not!
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
The attorney in the black robe you have hired to be a "judge" is awaiting you to offer an authenticated key. Something to prove that you are interpreting that codified message correctly.
The authenticating key is found in Internal REvenue Manual 6209 which I downloaded from the U.S. Government website. This manual (9000 KB) has disappeared from that site and is now no longer available for viewing or downloading.
quote:
Reading around ecclesia.org you will probably get the gist fairly quickly.
Sorry I took so long to answer. I've taken your advice to read around. Found some very good info relating to my situation.
quote:
P.S. FOIA only applies to governmental entities.
Search of 31 USC -ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE OF THE DEPARTRMENT OF TREASURY- confirms that the IRS is not a government agency and is actually in violation of statute by using the TREASURY SEAL.
The Internal Revenue and Audit Service (a private business) was created in 1933 by Clifton Barton, Helen Barton, and Hector Errchevaria under the auspices of Prescott Bush (President Bush's grandfather). In 1937 it was registered in the State of Delaware under the new name "INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE"
Just some trivia, thought it may be of some interest.
George |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 15 Sep 2004 : 14:34:00
|
Dear George;
Two pointers:
Nothing you download is authentic. So go get Manual 6209 from the local IRS office if you want an authenticated key.
The IRS may appear to be in violation of statute for using the Treasury seal but 1857 Bouvier's defines bankruptcy law to be an encroachment upon the common law. What this means in this context is that it is contrary to say, Biblical (Proverb 11:1) standards of just weights to just blame an artificial entity for your own business failure and blunder. In the common law if you blunder a business it dies; live and learn.
quote:
Pr 11:1 A false balance is abomination to the Lord: but a just weight is his delight.
So you may have a valid point there but nobody will hear your cause outside common law. Setting up that forum is tricky and the reason I keep spouting that authenticated document, the Credit River Money Decision. Somebody intrepid might get a pretty quick settlement from the IMF suing that point in the proper forum.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 15 Sep 2004 14:36:24 |
|
|
|
georgelaurie
Regular Member
USA
28 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2004 : 13:20:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
Dear George;
Two pointers:
Dear David
Thanks, pointers well taken.
I've seen Credit River Money Decision mentioned a few times and I will read about it more.
Best regards
George |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
UCC-1 / LIENS / UCC-3 / THEFT??
