Association of Autonomous

People

Manifesting Enterprises
Prosperity Program
Members Benefits
Common law trust organization administering program
for the purposes of;
1) Providing funding for new and existing enterprises and
investments
2) Provide education from experts to members on;
Business structures, administration and Funding
Rights The effect of laws on rights (Civics)
Financial education and
Education on Investing
Adverse Possession Common law right
3) Opportunities
Investment group investments scenarios
Business opportunities
4) Provide Coaching in group setting and make available private
consultations with experts.
Business Coaching
Life Coaching

What is Adverse Possession?
Adverse Possession is a common law right.
Adverse Possession is a legal doctrine that
allows a person to acquire legal title to a
property that he treats as his own, if he does so
for a long enough period of time, even though
the property is not his own.
Adverse Possession is older than you know; it
goes back to the Law Codes of Hammurabi.
1772 BC
Is Adverse Possession legal?
There are a few reasons why adverse possession is legal and even a
protected common law right.
Washington State legislature has prescribed the legal means of acquiring
property by adverse possession at Revised Code of Washington Title 7, Section
28
Common Law rights are non-enumerated rights that are part of the focus of
protection in & by U.S. Constitutions 9
th
Amendment
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or
disparage others retained by the people - See more at:
http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment9/amendment.html#sthash.NfjJrL3b.dpuf
Code of Hammurabi
[30] If a chieftain or a man leave his house, garden, and field and hires it out, and some
one else takes possession of his house, garden, and field and uses it for three years: if
the first owner return and claims his house, garden, and field, it shall not be given to
him, but he who has taken possession of it and used it shall continue to use it.

Common Sense If property (real or otherwise) is abandoned, then there is
no owner to steal the property from and cause injury.
Is Adverse Possession Legal?
R.C.W. 6.13.050 - Homestead presumed abandoned, when Declaration of nonabandonment
A homestead is presumed abandoned if the owner vacates the property for a continuous period of at least
six months. However, if an owner is going to be absent from the homestead for more than six months but
does not intend to abandon the homestead, and has no other principal residence, the owner may execute
and acknowledge, in the same manner as a grant of real property is acknowledged, a declaration of
nonabandonment of homestead and file the declaration for record in the office of the recording officer of the
county in which the property is situated.

The declaration of nonabandonment of homestead must contain:

(1) A statement that the owner claims the property as a homestead, that the owner intends to occupy the
property in the future, and that the owner claims no other property as a homestead;

(2) A statement of where the owner will be residing while absent from the homestead property, the
estimated duration of the owner's absence, and the reason for the absence; and

(3) A legal description of the homestead property.

Statute of Limitations R.C.W. 4.16.20 The period prescribed for the commencement of actions shall be as
follows:

Within ten years:

(1) For actions for the recovery of real property, or for the recovery of the possession thereof; and no action
shall be maintained for such recovery unless it appears that the plaintiff, his or her ancestor, predecessor or
grantor was seized or possessed of the premises in question within ten years before the commencement of the
action.
Prescribed by law
R.C.W. 4.16.020 previously mentioned

R.C.W. 7.28.070 - Every person in actual, open and notorious possession of
lands or tenements under claim and color of title, made in good faith, and
who shall for seven successive years continue in possession, and shall also
during said time pay all taxes legally assessed on such lands or tenements,
shall be held and adjudged to be the legal owner of said lands or
tenements, to the extent and according to the purport of his or her paper
title. All persons holding under such possession, by purchase, devise or
descent, before said seven years shall have expired, and who shall
continue such possession and continue to pay the taxes as aforesaid, so as
to complete the possession and payment of taxes for the term aforesaid,
shall be entitled to the benefit of this section.

R.C.W. 7.28.230 A mortgagee cannot maintain an action of adverse
possession
That is, a borrower may not use adverse possession doctrine against lender.

Abandonment
Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 6.13.050 - Homestead presumed abandoned,
when Declaration of nonabandonment.
A homestead is presumed abandoned if the owner vacates the property for a
continuous period of at least six months. However, if an owner is going to be absent
from the homestead for more than six months but does not intend to abandon the
homestead, and has no other principal residence, the owner may execute and
acknowledge, in the same manner as a grant of real property is acknowledged, a
declaration of nonabandonment of homestead and file the declaration for record in
the office of the recording officer of the county in which the property is situated.

The declaration of nonabandonment of homestead must contain:

(1) A statement that the owner claims the property as a homestead, that the owner
intends to occupy the property in the future, and that the owner claims no other
property as a homestead;

(2) A statement of where the owner will be residing while absent from
the homestead property, the estimated duration of the owner's absence, and the
reason for the absence; and

(3) A legal description of the homestead property.
Cases of Abandonment
In the Matter of the Trustee's Sale of the Real Property of Willard H. Brown et al. WELLS FARGO
BANK, NA, Respondent, v. WILLARD H. BROWN ET AL., Appellants. 161 Wn. App. 412, IN RE
TR.'S SALE OF REAL PROP. OF BROWN
A "homestead" is the "real or personal property that the owner uses as a residence." RCW 6.13.010. An
owner is presumed to have abandoned a homestead when the owner vacates the property for six months or
longer. RCW 6.13.050. However, an owner may execute and file a declaration of nonabandonment with the
county recording officer in the county where the property is situated. Id. Abandonment of a legal right is
generally a question of fact
10 In the present case, there is no real dispute that the Browns had vacated the property for over six
months. There is also no dispute that they did not file a notice of nonabandonment of their homestead rights.
The trial court noted that a permanent shut-off of water to the property at the end of May indicated intent not
to return. The Browns' acquisition of Florida driver's licenses and licensing vehicles in Texas was also
persuasive evidence that the Browns had abandoned their homestead. They quit making payments on the
Clarkston residence in favor of paying rent in Florida. The statement of Florida domicile, although not before
the trial court, is further compelling evidence that the Browns had abandoned the Clarkston home. There
was substantial evidence to support the trial court's finding.
[4] 11 The Browns also contend that they must affirmatively abandon the homestead. The argument is
without merit in light of the plain language of RCW 6.13.050 that mere absence from the property for six
months constitutes a presumption of abandonment.
In Re The Trustee's Sale Of Real Property Of: Thomas And Susan Arrington
Docket Number:66103-5, File Date:03/26/2012 Appeal from Snohomish Superior CourtDocket
No:10-2-06089-6
Susan was a co-owner of the property. She lived in the house as her sole and exclusive residence before
being incarcerated in mid-November 2009. Susan did not execute a declaration of nonabandonment. Thus,
in mid-May 2010, six months after Susan had vacated the property, a presumption of abandonment arose.
The nonjudicial foreclosure sale occurred in June 2010, approximately seven months after her incarceration.
Susan had abandoned the house and relinquished her right to assert the homestead exemption by then.
Common Law Right
Common law abandonment may be generally defined as "the
relinquishment of a right [in property] by the owner thereof without
any regard to future possession by himself or any other person, and
with the intention to foresake [sic] or desert the right.... the voluntary
relinquishment of a thing by its owner with the intention of
terminating his ownership, and without [the intention of] vesting
ownership in any other person; the giving up of a thing absolutely,
without reference to any particular person or purpose...." 1 Corpus
Juris Secundum Abandonment 2 (1985)
The common law prohibits the abandonment of real property.
Perhaps it is surprising, therefore, that the following are true:
(1) The common law generally permits the abandonment of chattel
property; (2) The common law promotes the transfer of real property via
adverse possession; and (3) the civil law permits the abandonment of
real property.
Common Law Right
DAVID COULSON, Appellant VS HUNSTMAN PACKAGING PRODUCTS INC, Respondent
52829-7-I (2004)
Torts section 363(2) (1965) ... common law.5 Section 363(2) provides: A possessor of land in an
urban area is subject to liability to persons using a public highway for physical harm resulting from
his failure to exercise reasonable care to prevent an unreasonable risk of harm arising from the
condition of trees on the land near the highway.6 But before we adopt a rule of law in a case
where it may not apply, we first analyze whether Pliant was indeed a "possessor" of the planting
strip within the meaning of the Restatement.
As used in Section 363, the term "possessor of land" is defined as: (a) a person who is in
occupation of the land with intent to control it or (b) a person who has been in occupation of land
with intent to control it, if no other person has subsequently occupied it with intent to control it, or
(c) a person who is entitled to immediate occupation of the land, if no other person is in
possession under Clauses (a) and (b).7 Unlike the rule in Section 363, Washington courts long
ago adopted the Restatement's definition of "possessor of land."8 The fact that Pliant does not
own the planting strip is irrelevant to our analysis. As the comment to Section 328E states:
"Possession" has been given various meanings in the law, and the term frequently is used to
denote the legal relations resulting from facts, rather than in the sense of describing the facts
themselves. It is used here strictly in the factual sense, because it has been so used in almost all
tort cases. The important thing in the law of torts is the possession, and not whether it is or is not
rightful as between the possessor and some third person. Thus a disseisor is a possessor from
the moment that his occupation begins, although as between the disseisor and the true owner he
is not legally entitled to possession until his adverse possession has ripened through lapse of time
into ownership.
Torts
Tort is defined as, A civil wrong for which a remedy may be obtained, usu.
in the form of damages, a breach of a duty that the law imposes on
everyone in the same relation to one another as those involved in a given
transaction. Blacks Dictionary, 7
th
edition.
Intentional Tort A tort committed by someone acting with general or specific
intent.
Government tort A tort committed by the government through an employee,
agent, or instrumentality under its control.
In Davis v. Elmira Savings Bank ,85 the Court stated the second proposition thus:
"National banks are instrumentalities of the Federal Government, created for a public
purpose, and as such necessarily subject to the paramount authority of the United
States.

Prima facie tort An unjustified, intentional infliction of harm on another person,
resulting in damages, by one or more acts that would otherwise be lawful.
***Constitutional Tort A violation of ones constitutional rights by a
government officer, redressable by a civil action filed directly against the
officer. A Constitutional tort committed under color of state law is actionable
under 42 USCA 1983.
Common Law in Washington State
Supreme Court
WICHERT v. CARDWELL,117 Wn.2d 148, P.2d 858 (1991)
Quoting McNeal v. Allen, 95 Wn.2d 265, 269, 621 P.2d 1285 (1980)
Held that there must be a clear intent to change the common law and the
statute must be strictly construed.
In the Matter of the Parentage of L.B.SUE ELLEN ("Mian")
CARVIN , Respondent , v. PAGE BRITAIN , Petitioner
Common Law - Application and Interpretation - Matters Not Addressed
by Statute - Gap Filling. RCW 4.04.010 , which adopts the common law
as the rule of decision in the courts of this state insofar as it is not
inconsistent with the laws and constitution of the United States and the
state of Washington, permits the courts to adapt the common law to
address gaps in existing statutory enactments; i.e., the common law
may serve to fill interstices that statutory enactments do not cover
Common Law - Alteration - Legislation - Intent - Necessity. Whether a
statutory enactment preempts or diminishes common law rights is a
question of legislative intent. It must not be presumed that the
legislature intended to supplant the common law absent a clear
manifestation of such an intent.

Purpose of Adverse Possession &
Doctrine in Washington Courts
Chaplin v. Sanders , 100 Wn.2d 853 , 857, 676 P.2d 431 (1984)
[1] The doctrine of adverse possession was formulated at law for the purpose of, among others, assuring
maximum utilization of land, encouraging the rejection of stale claims and, most importantly, quieting titles. 7
R. Powell, REAL PROPERTY 1012[3] (1982); C. Callahan, ADVERSE POSSESSION 91-94 (1961).
Because the doctrine was formulated at law and not at equity, it was originally intended to protect both those
who knowingly appropriated the land of others and those who honestly entered and held possession in full
belief that the land was their own. R. Powell, at 1013[2]; C. Callahan, at 49-50; 3 Am. Jur. 2d
ADVANCEMENTS 104 (1962). Thus, when the original purpose of the adverse possession doctrine is
considered, it becomes apparent that the claimant's motive in possessing the land is irrelevant and no
inquiry should be made into his guilt or innocence. ACCORD, SPRINGER v. DURETTE, 217 Or. 196, 342
P.2d 132 (1959); AGERS v. REYNOLDS, 306 S.W.2d 506 (Mo. 1957); FULTON v. RAPP, 98 N.E.2d 430
(Ohio Ct. App. 1950); SEE ALSO Stoebuck, THE LAW OF ADVERSE POSSESSION IN WASHINGTON, 35
Wash. L. Rev. 53, 76-80 (1960).
Washington is not the only state which looks to the subjective belief and intent of the adverse claimant in
determining hostility. SEE, E.G., ELLIS v. JANSING, 620 S.W.2d 569 (Tex. 1981); VAN VALKENBURGH v.
LUTZ, 304 N.Y. 95, 106 N.E.2d 28 (1952); SEE GENERALLY 3 AMERICAN LAW OF PROPERTY 15.4 (A.
Casner ed. 1952). However, the requirement has been regarded as unnecessarily confusing by many legal
commentators, SEE Dockray, ADVERSE POSSESSION AND INTENTION I, 1981-82 Conv. & Prop. Law.
(n.s.) 256; C. Callahan; Stoebuck, 35 Wash. L. Rev. at 76-80; and A. Casner; and has been abandoned by
the apparent majority of states. 3 AMERICAN LAW OF PROPERTY 15.5, at 785.
For these reasons, we are convinced that the dual requirement that the claimant take possession in "good
faith" and not recognize another's superior interest does not serve the purpose of the adverse possession
doctrine. SEE DUNBAR v. HEINRICH, 95 Wn.2d 20, 622 P.2d 812 (1980); WICKERT v. THOMPSON, 28
Wn. App. 516, 624 P.2d 747 (1981). The "hostility/ claim of right" element of adverse possession requires
only that the claimant treat the land as his own as against the world throughout the statutory period. The
nature of his possession will be determined solely on the basis of the manner in which he treats the property.
His subjective belief regarding his true interest in the land and his intent to dispossess or not dispossess
another is irrelevant to this determination. 2
Four Required Elements
The possession must be..........

Exclusive. Only you, or people authorized by you, can have
possession of the land in question for the required period of
possession (which is 10 years)
Actual and uninterrupted. That means that you actually have
possession and control over the land in question, and that
possession is not interrupted by an adversary.
Open and notorious. An adversary must be reasonably made
aware that his land is being taken. But you don't have to write the
landowner, or anything like that. Your possession must be in a
manner that is open and seen.
Hostile. That means that you treat the land in question as your
own, and defend it against the world. Adverse possession is not
created when you have the permission of the landowner to use
his land


Washington State Land
Washington State is one of several States that
gave up its rights to lands that were unclaimed
by the people and government.
Washington State Enabling Act 1889
the people inhabiting said proposed States do agree and
declare that they forever disclaim all right and title to the
unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries
thereof, and to all lands lying within said limits owned or held
by any Indian or Indian tribes; and that until the title thereto
shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same
shall be and remain subject to the disposition of the United
States, and said Indian lands shall remain under the absolute
jurisdiction and control of the Congress of the United
States

Criminal Trespass:
The Bump in the Road

RCW 9A.52.070 - Criminal trespass in the first degree. - (1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the first
degree if he or she knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in a building.
(2) Criminal trespass in the first degree is a gross misdemeanor.

RCW 9A.52.080 - Criminal trespass in the second degree. (1) A person is guilty of criminal trespass in the second
degree if he or she knowingly enters or remains unlawfully in or upon premises of another under circumstances
not constituting criminal trespass in the first degree.
(2) Criminal trespass in the second degree is a misdemeanor.

RCW 9A.52.090 DEFENSES: In any prosecution under RCW 9A.52.070 and 9A.52.080, it is a defense that:

(1) A building involved in an offense under RCW 9A.52.070 was abandoned; or

(2) The premises were at the time open to members of the public and the actor complied with all lawful
conditions imposed on access to or remaining in the premises; or

(3) The actor reasonably believed that the owner of the premises, or other person empowered to license
access thereto, would have licensed him or her to enter or remain; or

(4) The actor was attempting to serve legal process which includes any document required or allowed to be
served upon persons or property, by any statute, rule, ordinance, regulation, or court order, excluding delivery by
the mails of the United States. This defense applies only if the actor did not enter into a private residence or other
building not open to the public and the entry onto the premises was reasonable and necessary for service of the
legal process.

Cons and Pros of Adverse
Possession
Cons
You are in someones property & your stay is dependant upon the
homeowner of record not returning
You are taking on the problems someone left behind
Public Perception appears to be negative towards Adverse
Possession
Pros
The home is occupied and maintained
The neighborhood does not suffer an abandoned property as an
eyesore
Home being occupied means unsavory activities can be avoided.
Drug Houses
Positively affects local Real Estate market. Supply & Demand
Can keep properties with clouded titles off of the real estate market
Keeps away animals seeking shelter



Consent of the Governed
"Consent of the governed" is a phrase
synonymous with a political theory where in
a governments legitimacy and moral right to
use state power is only justified and legal when
derived from the people or society over which
that political power is exercised. This theory of
"consent" is historically contrasted to the divine
right of kings and has often been invoked
against the legitimacy of colonialism. Article 21
of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights states that "The will of the people shall be
the basis of the authority of government."
Resources
http://www5.kingcounty.gov/parcelviewer/viewer/kingcounty/viewer.a
sp
This data base can be searched by address, street intersections and
Parcel numbers.

http://146.129.54.93:8193/legalacceptance.asp?cabinet%3Dopr%26
err%3DNo%2520Matches%2520Found%252e%26l%3D738%26t%
3D0
King County Public Records
http://www.mrsc.org/wa/courts/index_dtsearch.html
Washington State Supreme Court and Appellate Court case

www.zillow.com
www.usa-forecloure.com
Exchange of Tangible Value
Entrance to program requires a commitment
of Exchange:
2013 $7,000 that can be paid up front or
over a years time with $1,500 down and
$500 per month for 1 year

New 2014 members exchange
$6,500 for upfront payment or,
$7,500 to be paid over a years time with
same terms