General Discussion · Checkmate The Matrix

General Discussion

I just had an interesting discussion with ChatGpt on Propritership and ownership on council tax/rates, it gave me a clear statement on this meaning. The thing is when a trust is set up, there is no owner anymore, so there is no proprieter anymore, so there is no one to send a council tax/rates bill to as the owner has been removed from the scene and liability, I'll post the discussion to see if what i'm saying is agreed with here, it would be a game changer, i had done a UCC1 filing a while back, what do some here think of this, or am i barking up the wrong tree?

I'm in the UK, so some or all things may not apply?

ChatGPT said:

That’s a very important point — you’re in the UK, so let’s put this in the right context:

1. UCC vs UK law

The UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) is U.S. state law, not UK law.
A UCC-1 financing statement filed in Washington State (or anywhere in the U.S.) is only legally effective under U.S. Article 9 rules.
In the UK, the equivalent system is the Companies House charges register (for companies) and other registries (like the Land Registry for land, DVLA for vehicles, etc.).
UK courts do not recognize a U.S. UCC filing as perfecting an interest in UK property.

2. “SPC” concepts

The “Secured Party Creditor” (SPC) ideas you’ll see online are mostly sovereign citizen / redemptionist theories.
They often suggest filing a UCC-1 against your own name or a “trust” to claim your “strawman” identity.
This has no legal effect in the U.S. and has even been struck down by courts as frivolous or fraudulent.
In the UK, these concepts are equally not recognized in law. A U.S. UCC filing won’t give you sovereignty, erase debts, or give you rights over government records in the UK.

3. Relevance of your WA filing while in the UK

What your Washington UCC-1 shows is that you’ve filed a notice in the U.S. public record.
Unless you have a genuine security agreement and debtor with U.S. assets, the filing has no enforceable effect in the UK.
At most, it’s a record in Washington’s system, visible to anyone searching there.

4. If your concern is UK property or legal status

For land/real estate: it’s governed by the UK Land Registry, not UCC.
For personal property or company assets: it’s governed by UK secured transactions law, Companies Act 2006, and the Insolvency Act.
For status / sovereignty: filing UCC documents doesn’t change your legal standing under UK law.

✅ Bottom line (for someone in the UK):Your WA UCC-1 is a valid U.S. filing, but it doesn’t create rights in the UK and has no effect on your legal status as an “SPC.” If you want to secure property or register charges in the UK, it must go through UK registries (Companies House, Land Registry, etc.).

Would you like me to show you how the UK system actually handles secured interests (like the UK equivalent of a UCC filing), so you can see what’s legally recognized where you live?

You said:

No, but my house and land is covered by a Title Absolute and full owners at Land Registry?

ChatGPT said:

Thanks for clarifying — that helps a lot.

1. Title Absolute in the UK

If you and/or your partner are listed at HM Land Registry as the proprietors with Title Absolute, that is the highest form of ownership the Land Registry grants.
It means:

2. Difference from UCC filings

UK real property is governed entirely by the Land Registration Act 2002 and Land Registry records.
UCC filings in the U.S. have no effect on UK land or property — they can’t add, remove, or alter ownership or mortgages at HM Land Registry.
The only way a creditor can secure an interest in your UK property is by registering a legal charge or restriction against your Land Registry title.

3. So what does your UCC filing mean for your UK home?

Nothing legally — your Washington UCC-1 filing cannot affect your UK Title Absolute.
Your ownership is already secured by HM Land Registry. That’s the definitive legal record in the UK.

4. Where the confusion often comes in

Online “SPC” or “sovereign” material often suggests that filing a UCC-1 protects your property or makes you “senior creditor” over your house.
In reality:

✅ Bottom line for you in the UK:Your Title Absolute at HM Land Registry is what secures your ownership. No UCC filing in the U.S. can add to or override that. Unless there’s a registered charge (like a mortgage), you are the full legal owner.

Would you like me to explain how you can check your Land Registry title online (to confirm exactly what’s registered, including ownership and whether any charges are present)?

You said:

No, I already have these on paper from Land Registry?

ChatGPT said:

Perfect 👍 — if you already have your official title register and title plan on paper from HM Land Registry, then you’ve got the definitive record of your ownership.

That’s really the key document in the UK:

Title Absolute = strongest ownership you can hold.
If there are no charges or restrictions listed in the Charges Register section, then no lender or third party has a claim registered against your house/land.
Even if you see a charge (e.g. a mortgage), only the lender listed has rights until it’s discharged.

So in short: your Land Registry papers trump everything else. The Washington UCC-1 you filed doesn’t change or add anything in respect of your UK property.

✅ You can safely rely on your Land Registry records as the true legal proof of ownership.

Do you want me to also show you what each section of a Title Register (A, B, and C) means, so you can easily read through yours?

You said:

All charges were removed last year, They should have been removed by the Bank and Building Society, I found these charges by mistake, just by looking at the last page and there they were?

ChatGPT said:

That’s a really important discovery you made — and it’s good you caught it. Let me break it down:

1. What charges mean on your Title

A charge in the Land Registry record is usually a mortgage or secured loan.
If it’s still listed, it means the lender is technically shown as holding a legal interest in your property.
Even if the loan was repaid long ago, the charge stays on the title until it’s formally removed by the lender (or, in some cases, by application from you).

2. Why charges sometimes remain

Banks and building societies are supposed to notify HM Land Registry once you’ve paid off the mortgage, by sending a discharge form (DS1).
But sometimes they fail to do this, especially for older mortgages or if the lender has merged/closed.
That leaves a “historic charge” still sitting on the record even though the debt is gone.

3. How you got them removed

If you said all charges were removed last year, that means either:
Once removed, the Charges Register (Section C) of your title will say “No entries”. That means your title is free of registered mortgages or encumbrances.

4. Why it matters

With no charges, your ownership is clear and absolute.
Nobody (bank, building society, creditor) has any registered claim over your home.
That’s the best position to be in: you have Title Absolute, and the Charges Register is empty.

5. Practical tip

Keep copies of your updated Title Register showing the charges are gone.
If you ever sell or remortgage, buyers/solicitors will check the register, and having that cleared record avoids delays.

✅ Bottom line:You’ve done exactly the right thing. By checking the last page, you spotted charges that were left behind, and now they’re cleared. Your Land Registry entry is the final word on ownership in the UK, so your home is now yours outright, free of encumbrances.

Would you like me to explain how you can make sure no old charges reappear (for example if Land Registry data isn’t updated properly or if another lender tries to lodge one without your consent)?

You said:

The Ulster Bank still had an enduring POA and proved extremely difficult for the solicitor to understand, she wrote to them to explain the wording of the charge, which took nearly 3 weeks to clear.

ChatGPT said:

Ah — that makes sense now. What you’ve described happens more often than people realise, especially with older mortgages or banks that have changed hands. Let’s unpack it in plain terms:

1. Why the Ulster Bank charge was tricky

Some older mortgage deeds gave the lender very broad powers, including an enduring Power of Attorney (POA) over the borrower’s property.
This meant that if you defaulted, the bank could act in your name to sell or otherwise deal with the property.
Those kinds of provisions look very heavy-handed compared to modern mortgage wording, and they can confuse solicitors or Land Registry caseworkers because they’re unusual now.

2. Why your solicitor had to write to Ulster Bank

Even when the loan is fully paid, if the mortgage deed/charge still shows as registered, it’s legally effective until the lender formally releases it.
Your solicitor couldn’t just ask the Land Registry to “delete” it; they needed written confirmation (usually a DS1 discharge) from Ulster Bank.
Because of the odd wording (with the POA clause), the bank’s legal team had to review and confirm the release — which is why it dragged on for weeks.

3. Why it’s important that it was cleared

Once Ulster Bank issued the discharge and Land Registry registered it, the charge and POA fell away completely.
Now, no bank has any power over your property.
This is a one-time fix — it won’t come back once it’s cleared.

4. Practical advice for you now

Keep a copy of the updated Title Register showing the charge has been removed.
Also keep the solicitor’s letter and Ulster Bank’s discharge in your records — that way, if there’s ever any question in future, you’ve got clear proof the debt and charge are gone.
If you ever remortgage or sell, your solicitor will simply see a “clean” Charges Register and you won’t have to go through that headache again.

✅ Bottom line:The Ulster Bank’s old-fashioned charge with POA wording made things slower, but once they issued the discharge, the bank’s rights disappeared entirely. Your Title Absolute + “No entries” in the Charges Register now mean your house and land are legally yours, free and clear.

Would you like me to show you how to double-check online at HM Land Registry right now that the Ulster Bank charge has been fully removed, so you can be 100% certain?

You said:

ok, but I'm sure it is .

ChatGPT said:

That’s reassuring — if you already have the updated Title Register on paper that says “No entries” under the Charges Register (Section C), then you’re right: the Ulster Bank charge has been completely removed, and you don’t need to worry further. ✅

Here’s a quick way you could double-check online in future if you ever want peace of mind:

Go to the official HM Land Registry “Search for property information” service (on gov.uk).
Enter your property address or title number.
Pay the small fee (£3 for the register).
Download the current title register — it will show the same details as the paper copy, including whether the Charges Register is empty.

💡 Tip:It’s often worth checking once every few years (or before a remortgage/sale), just to confirm the record stays clean. But if you’ve got the “No entries” statement already, that’s definitive.

Do you want me to show you exactly what each section of the Title Register (A, B, C) means, so you can interpret your document easily any time you look at it?

You said:

ChatGPT said:

Great 👍 — here’s a plain-English breakdown of what the HM Land Registry Title Register means. It always comes in three main sections:

📄 Section A — Property Register

What it shows:
What to look for:

📄 Section B — Proprietorship Register

What it shows:
What to look for:

📄 Section C — Charges Register

What it shows:
What to look for:

✅ In your case:

A: Confirms your address/title absolute.
B: Confirms you/your partner as legal owners.
C: Should now say “No entries” (since Ulster Bank and others have been removed).

That means your ownership is clean, secure, and uncontested.

Would you like me to also explain what the Title Plan (the red outline map that comes with the register) legally means — especially about boundaries and rights of way?

You said:

I see B has a proprietorship registry, this is not a business, but that is put there unbeknown to the owners, which means they can charge Council Rates or Tax, this underhand as domestic accommodation is rate and tax free?

ChatGPT said:

I need to clear this up carefully, because there’s a lot of misleading information online about Land Registry wording and council tax.

1. “Proprietorship Register” doesn’t mean business

In the Title Register, Section B is always called the “Proprietorship Register”.
“Proprietorship” here simply means ownership — nothing to do with running a company or business.
Whether you’re a private homeowner or a company, the legal owner’s details are listed in this section.

So, the fact that your name(s) are in the “Proprietorship Register” doesn’t mean your home has been classed as a business asset — it just means you are the registered proprietors (owners).

2. Council tax and domestic property

In the UK, domestic properties are liable for Council Tax by law under the Local Government Finance Act 1992.
There isn’t a way to “opt out” by saying a property is domestic accommodation or owner-occupied.
The Land Registry’s wording does not create or remove liability for council tax. The liability comes directly from statute.

3. Where confusion comes from

Some “freeman/sovereign” style materials claim that if a property is listed in the Proprietorship Register, it somehow makes it “commercial” or “chargeable.”
That’s a misunderstanding: every piece of land that’s registered will have a Proprietorship Register, because the law requires a record of who owns it.
Council tax is charged because the property is a domestic dwelling — not because of anything in the Land Registry.

4. Your position

Your house/land is on Title Absolute with you as the proprietors — that’s normal and correct.
The Council’s right to charge Council Tax comes from legislation, not from the Land Registry entry.
Even if the Land Registry had no record at all (say, unregistered land), the Council could still lawfully bill for Council Tax if it’s a dwelling.

✅ Bottom line:The “Proprietorship Register” wording is not underhand — it’s just standard terminology meaning “owners’ register.” It does not make your house a business, and it’s not the reason council tax applies. Council tax liability is automatic on any domestic property used as a dwelling.

Would you like me to show you an example Land Registry Title Register extract (with anonymised details), so you can see how “Proprietorship Register” appears for every normal homeowner, just like yours?

You said:

Proprietorship is a business, it then should be changed to domestic accommodation, this where the Fraud comes, mislabelling to gain at another's loss?

ChatGPT said:

I hear your concern, and I want to carefully separate how the term is used in everyday English from how it is used in property law in England & Wales.

1. Everyday meaning vs. legal meaning

Everyday English: “Proprietorship” can sound like running a “proprietorship business” (a sole trader).
Legal Land Registry usage: “Proprietorship” just means the state of being a proprietor (owner).

So when HM Land Registry labels Section B as the Proprietorship Register, it is simply the list of who the legal owners are.

2. Why it cannot be changed to “Domestic accommodation”

The Land Registration Act 2002 prescribes the format of the title register.
Section B will always be called the Proprietorship Register, whether the property is:
It is not tailored to property use.
Changing it to “domestic accommodation” would be legally incorrect, because Section B isn’t about use of the land — it’s about ownership.

3. Council Tax liability

Council Tax is not triggered by the Land Registry wording.
It is triggered by statute law: the Local Government Finance Act 1992 says all domestic dwellings are liable.
Even if Land Registry used “Domestic Accommodation Register” instead of “Proprietorship Register,” you would still be liable for Council Tax, because it comes from law, not from the title wording.

4. Fraud?

For fraud in English law, there must be false representation with intent to cause loss or make a gain.
HM Land Registry calling Section B the “Proprietorship Register” is not a misrepresentation: it accurately records who the proprietors (owners) are.
Courts have repeatedly dismissed claims that Land Registry wording creates fraud or mislabels property as commercial.

✅ Bottom line:The word “Proprietorship” in your title is not evidence of fraud, nor does it make your home a business. It’s just the legal term Land Registry uses for ownership. Council tax liability exists separately under statute, and it applies to all domestic dwellings regardless of Land Registry wording.

Would you like me to pull up an official HM Land Registry practice guide (with the exact definitions they use for “Proprietorship Register”) so you can see the source directly?

You said:

Then the word “Proprietorship” should be changed to ownership?

ChatGPT said:

That’s a really fair thought — because in plain English, “ownership” would make more sense to most people than “proprietorship.”

But here’s why HM Land Registry sticks with “Proprietorship Register”:

1. Legal tradition

The Land Registry system has used the term “proprietor” since the Land Registration Act 1925, and it was carried forward into the Land Registration Act 2002.
In property law, “proprietor” simply means the person entered in the register as owner of the estate or charge.
Because this wording is set in legislation, HM Land Registry can’t just swap it for “ownership” — Parliament would have to amend the law.

2. Precision in law

Lawyers prefer “proprietorship” because it avoids ambiguity:

3. No effect on taxation

The use of “proprietorship” vs. “ownership” has no bearing on council tax or business rates.
Council tax is decided by whether a property is a domestic dwelling (house, flat, etc.), under the Local Government Finance Act 1992 — nothing to do with Land Registry wording.

4. In plain English

You are right: if HM Land Registry called Section B the “Ownership Register,” most homeowners would immediately understand it.
But in law, “Proprietorship Register” is the term of art that Parliament chose, and it’s been consistent for nearly 100 years.

✅ Bottom line:Yes — in everyday speech, “ownership” would be clearer than “proprietorship.” But in the legal system, “proprietorship” is the standard technical term, and it doesn’t mean your home is treated as a business. It simply identifies you as the legal owner.

Would you like me to show you the official Land Registry definition of “proprietor” from the legislation or practice guides, so you can see exactly how they use the word?

You said:

No, I know in my own mind that, sleights of hand are always used to extract hard money from peoples back pocket and at extortionate rates, I did ask LPS for a % equivalent road map in money terms, they would not supply these figures, so methinks that this is fraudulent if they can't or won't supply these, my own rates is £2800.00 approximately?

ChatGPT said:

Thought for 13s

You’re right to be suspicious — if a public body won’t explain how a charge/figure is calculated, that’s not good practice. But before calling it fraud, it’s best to follow the formal routes that force transparency and create a paper trail. Below I’ll give you:

A short plain-English plan you can follow right now,
What powers and routes LPS / the NI system give you, with links, and
a ready-to-send template you can paste/email to LPS (or the Council / Housing Executive) asking for the breakdown and explanation.

I’ll assume you mean LPS (Land & Property Services) in Northern Ireland since you mentioned LPS and “rates.” If that’s wrong, say so and I’ll tweak the wording.

0 comments