Ground Pounder wrote:

---

Section 52 - Constitution Act, 1982

The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.


www.pch.gc.ca/eng/1355345301024/1355345382146

An if you can't represent you're "PERSON" your self....an think some "LAWYER" will help you defend you're constitutional "RIGHTS"


Then Just bend over an "SUBMIT"

Do you all know what application really means????

---

 yeah ... so ?

the ontario stunt driving law was called unconstitutinal by said courts ... but they still enforce it

how did you end up making out with your smart meter dealieo

supernash wrote:

---

Buy into what you want.

Where's Chuk ? He's our Political Contact.

---

 it looks like his political opinions are not wanted

fatchuk ST MARYS, ONTARIO

Full Name   Gender M Country Name Canada Messages Posted 1415 Status Banned Member Since Sep 30, 2012 Last Access January 12th

In Kanata some time ago a housing development was build around an operating farm and some of the new to the "country life" wanted the city to force the farmer to start farming later in the mornings and then had the balls to try and get the city to have him tear down his barns as they were afraid they might catch fire. The farm is still there and operating.

dualquadpete wrote:

---

workin class wrote:

---

Pete have you ever talked to this guy. I would love to just have a conversation with him out of curiosity of what makes him tick. I have met allot of people that way when I was an antique picker never had any bad experiences. Lots of neat people. Most of the eccentric places I used to go are now gone.

---

 Yes I've tried, but he's not with it. Elderly guy in his late 70's or looks it!!!  Mayor was at his house & couldn't get through to him about the "MESS" he saw nothing wrong with the pile of crap in the front & back yard. It's all "good stuff' & worth a fortune the Mayor told me when he came here after trying to talk to him!!!  How much is a pile of "broken window & doors , & a Clapped out 80's chevy P/up with no engine etc. worth????

---

The Mayor of your town went to his house? Really? I would have told the Mayor to GTFO my property...A Mayor has NO business doing those kinds of visits...

I would love to be your neighbor dualquad...I would have fun with you...You're to easy to get going.  

Yep .... Ballantrae Ontario. New houses built near a farm (approx 20 years ago). Occupants of the farm (renters) moved horses into the existing barn and stalls. Owners of the new homes started a "houses not horses" campaign (complaining about the smell).

That farm no longer exists although I'd be willing to bet the owner of the farm was just sitting on the land (speculating), waiting for the day they could sell to a developer, and were simply renting it out until that day arrived.

Bottom line though, these new home owners bought very close to a farm, then decided they didn't like a farm that close to their homes .... unreal

Stated i would not post on this thread anymore in an earlier post ,However there is just too much info to be shared ..Even if ya just read the content of these posts many will learn alot an besides they are great reads wither or not one acts on what they read is choice brought forward to the table for consideration.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aHD44CHidQ

With Crown Land Grant in hand, tell all Government Officals/Lawyers/Police, this is the basis for my "Claim of Right" in relation to property rights. The Criminal Code is clear.
Hand them the Grant.
Watch their reaction.
:shock:
Oh yeah, then remind them how it says that thing about hemp



The Criminal Code of Canada states:

Defence of Property

Defence of personal property

38. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, and every one lawfully assisting him, is justified

(a) in preventing a trespasser from taking it, or

(b) in taking it from a trespasser who has taken it,

if he does not strike or cause bodily harm to the trespasser.

Assault by trespasser

(2) Where a person who is in peaceable possession of personal property lays hands on it, a trespasser who persists in attempting to keep it or take it from him or from any one lawfully assisting him shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 38.

Defence with claim of right

39. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

See how the Crown exercises its rights and powers because of the Crown Land Grants...
As a "title" holder, with a deed, section 39. (1) doesn't count.
You fall into:

Defence without claim of right

(2) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, but does not claim it as of right or does not act under the authority of a person who claims it as of right, is not justified or protected from criminal responsibility for defending his possession against a person who is entitled by law to possession of it.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 39.

laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts ... .html#h-10

One must use their Crown Land Grant, as the Crown does now, and as our fore fathers did to protect them from over reaching governments.
The Crown Land Grants create a solid foundation for a "Claim of Right" defence.


answer:1. "together with all woods, underwoods, timber and timber trees, lakes, ponds, fisheries, water and water courses, profits, commodities, appurtenances and hereditaments, whatsoever, therunto belonging, or in any wise appertaining ; together with the privilege of hunting, hawking and fowling, in and upon the same.."

and,

2."to HAVE AND TO HOLD the said parcel or tract of (number) Acres of Land, and all and singular other the Premises hereby granted unto the said (Name of individual), heirs or assigns, for ever, in free and common soccage."

All of above-mentioned rights and privalages tranferred to the heirs or assigns.
All land granted is held in "free and common soccage" and not "fee simple".

The Land Grant is like a Standing Order from the King/Queen.
The RCMP should not have a problem recognising it, even though lawyers, county or municiple employees or provincial agents may not.
After all, it bears the royal seal.

This proves the "fee (estate) simple" system is nothing more then rent leases.
A game, invented by lawyers, for lawyers.




James MacLaren used to own this land we are on through a grant


Landowners group puts municipalities on notice

By Paul Jankowski, Sun Times, Owen Sound

Wednesday, August 18, 2010 8:00:00 EDT AM



Change text size for the story

Print

Report an error

The Ontario Landowners Association has sent letters to every mayor in Ontario warning them against sending municipal representatives or staff onto private property.

The letter says that under the Crown Land Patent Grant -- something OLA president Jack MacLaren calls "the highest law of the land in Canada when it comes to property rights" -- all Canadian citizens who own land are "protected from any interruption, legislation or regulation, be it municipal, provincial or federal, from all associated actions as to entry or surveillance (by any means) of/onto private land of/or into private property."

Any infringement of those rights by a government representative or of any agency supported by the public purse "will be met with as much force as necessary," the letter says.

"The letter was written with some pretty strong legalese-type language," MacLaren said in a recent interview. "Really what we're saying is it's private property . . . and nobody has the right to come onto your property without permission."

South Bruce Peninsula councillors this week voted to recommend a copy of the letter sent to Mayor Gwen Gilbert be passed on to the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the town's solicitor.

The OLA has about 10,000 members, said MacLaren, a farmer from Woodlawn, Ont., northwest of Ottawa. The group's website says its mandate includes aiding landowners "whose rights to own use, manage, enjoy or benefit from have been or will be affected or harmed through Government actions" and to "educate the public that the greatest threat to Ontario is excessive legislation and over regulation and that the inclusion of Property Rights in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is necessary to reverse this trend."

Considering all the legislation and regulations in Ontario that impact on property rights -- MacLaren lists The Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Conservation Authorities Act, the Green Belt Act and the Planning Act as examples -- "what we're talking about here is a pretty significant change," he said. If courts recognize Crown Land Patent Grants as "the ultimate authority on property rights, which it is . . . that means there's going to be quite a few legislations that are illegal legislations."

The OLA does have a test case -- a Beamsville-area man who was fined by a Justice of the Peace for failing to comply with an order from the Niagara Escarpment Commission. He will appeal that decision based on his property rights under the Crown Land Patent Grant and "we're going to be backing Bob 100% and doing everything we can for him financially and doing some significant fundraising to pay for the legal services he's going to require and we want to take this to as a high a level as we can afford," MacLaren said.

Governments, MacLaren says, should pay property owners for any restrictions they impose on their use of their property. "If it's in the interest of the public to save a feature, then the public should pay . . . if there's a limited amount of money . . . they'd have to pick out the wetlands they want the most, what endangered species are the most important, et cetera, et cetera. The government would have to set priorities and have a shopping list."

With the Crown Land Patent campaign "we don't mean to say at the Landowner's Association we have discovered the Holy Grail of property rights and we're going to use it like a big stick and go around and bang all governments on the head and say how bad you are and we win . . . What we're trying to do right now and part of what that letter was intended to do was to inform and educate municipal governments that Crown Land Patents are documents that exist, that it's the highest law of the land," MacLaren said.





the whole article an how do an acquire your grant is here:
worldfreemansociety.org/forum/43-general-discussion/28909-provincial-crown-land-grants
www.ontariolandowners.ca/


So you or no body will get TAXED OFF their land...biggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrinbiggrin

-- Edited by Ground Pounder on Thursday 14th of April 2016 07:17:02 AM

-- Edited by Ground Pounder on Thursday 14th of April 2016 07:54:34 AM

chips wrote:

---

I don't think everyone complains about neighbours getting too close.

There was a farm right in Markham Ontario (no livestock that I remember seeing though) that ended up completely surrounded by new (and quite expensive) homes. It was on the north side of 16th ave, somewhere between Kennedy rd and Markham rd. It sold approx roughly 5 years ago for a rumoured NINETY NINE MILLION DOLLARS.

Now THAT is one healthy nest egg for that farmer.

Along those same lines, for years homeowners have been complaining about the noise from the airplanes that were constantly coming and going from Buttonville airport (in Markham, just north of Toronto, beside the 404 highway). These idiots bought their homes NEAR AN AIRPORT then complained about the noise from airplanes. Once again .... unreal .  The airport is still in operation today but it will be closed in the near future as it is slated to be developed.

---

 Correct an Green bank or the purposed Pickering airport will take its place.

Green bank is getting so huge that a commercial airliner could be landed!

chips wrote:

---

I don't think everyone complains about neighbours getting too close.

There was a farm right in Markham Ontario (no livestock that I remember seeing though) that ended up completely surrounded by new (and quite expensive) homes. It was on the north side of 16th ave, somewhere between Kennedy rd and Markham rd. It sold approx roughly 5 years ago for a rumoured NINETY NINE MILLION DOLLARS.

Now THAT is one healthy nest egg for that farmer.

Along those same lines, for years homeowners have been complaining about the noise from the airplanes that were constantly coming and going from Buttonville airport (in Markham, just north of Toronto, beside the 404 highway). These idiots bought their homes NEAR AN AIRPORT then complained about the noise from airplanes. Once again .... unreal .  The airport is still in operation today but it will be closed in the near future as it is slated to be developed.

---

 i had some buddies years ago who lived somewhere in that neighborhood in a big old farm house they rented close to where they built the new fair grounds at the time. they were there for a long time paying rent to someone who owned 2 or 3 other farms around them also. it was cheap rent with 4 of them living there at about 300.00 a month each all in. next time i'm up to the big smoke i should take a drive over that way to have a look. it has to be 30yrs ago now. we had had some memorable parties there in the middle of nowhere at the time. lol

man o man - i can not beleive the miss-information out there

zoning does not change your taxes unless you go from being residential to commercial - and no one does that unless they need to
Zoning changes by reason of municipal wide updates have to be circulated, and have public meetings and one can most certainly contest - and win - any such notable change to thier property

MPAC isnt a system - its a regulation - and due to the market sale valuation system - all tax increases are done once every four years and are phased in over a four year period so it is NOT as hard on your wallet

as to lakefront properties - they are generally undervalued by about 40% in the MPAC evaluations so just imagine what the taxes would be if one were paying on the actual value - if you are being taxed out of your ability to pay - then you were either getting away with paying too little or you were/are living beyond your means

LAST but not least - the municipality does not tax anyone - nor do they set the amount of taxes - they just collect the taxes on behalf of the province - so lay that one where it belongs - at the provinces feet - they are the ones setting the property values that the  tax rates are based on. Municipalities - do set their own mill rate that calculates the taxes in your municipality  - and that mill rate is based on the services you recieve ie plowing, garbage, libraries, maintenance etc etc etc

I have yet to see a municipality set a mill rate high enough to be able to bank money - matter of fact most municipalities run in the red precisely because they try not to have your taxes any higher than necessary 

-- Edited by Seeker1056 on Sunday 24th of April 2016 08:21:32 AM

-- Edited by Seeker1056 on Sunday 24th of April 2016 08:23:16 AM

-- Edited by Seeker1056 on Sunday 24th of April 2016 08:26:26 AM

wuga wrote:

---

Also, if you are rural and have been farming, you are taxed at a much lower mill rate. If you stop farming, then your property is reassessed at residential rate. If you want to maintain that farm rate, lease your fields out to a active farmer. That's how most do it down here. Your property must generate $7000 a year in farm income to maintain farm rate. Our property is water front which generally demands more money in today's market thereby having a higher assessed rate and thus more taxes.

Also, I worked f**kin hard all my life so one day I could retire. When I did, I moved from the city to a nice rural property. The money I invested in the property is part of my retirement fund and I expect it to keep it's value so when I am forced into long term care, the money will be there. I do not want some a**h*le having his own personal junk pile accumulating next to me. We already have one 'hoarder' who is declared mentally ill not allowing the municipality to have him clean up. His cars sit there leaking oil into the groundwater, my well water and polluting our lake. I have 6 vehicles on my property, they are all licenced and kept garaged. I respect my neighbours rights. I know lots of car guys in the same boat who have built garages where they work and to store their stuff. I am on the municipality standards committee and in a society where it is pretty well impossible to build anywhere and not see a neighbour, standards are enforced for the overall good of the community. The only one allowed to break that rule is Kathleen Wynne.

By the way, our little community has a pretty high mill rate and still cannot properly maintain services, just a matter of scale.

My rant, I have always believed you pay your way and respect others.

Warren

---

Sorry for changing the topic here. You say that your rural property is your way for future funds. I am assuming you have acrerige but did you know you will be paying Capital Gains tax on your rural property that you LIVE on.  

How many of you's here have DONE a claim of RIGHT ??

Tort law

Trespass to land is one of the oldest torts known in law. Historically, it has been held to occur whenever there has been an unauthorized physical intrusion onto the private property of another. Trespass also occurs when a person remains on an individual's land after permission has been withdrawn.

Trespass to land is actionable "per se". That means that someone can be sued and found liable for trespassing even if there is no proof of damage. In a trespass case, if the incident was for particularly malicious purposes, such as to intimidate the land owner, even punitive damages may apply.

That said, however, any person can go onto the private property of another during daylight hours if permission to do so is implied. For example, if there is a path up to the front door of a residence and there are no signs warning people to stay off the land, there is implied permission for people to enter, such as a letter carrier. This implied permission can, of course, be revoked instantly by the person in charge of the property. If you are told to leave, you must leave or you could be sued for trespass.

Section 39,1 of the criminal code says:
Defence with claim of right

39. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary.

wuga wrote:

---

Also, if you are rural and have been farming, you are taxed at a much lower mill rate. If you stop farming, then your property is reassessed at residential rate. If you want to maintain that farm rate, lease your fields out to a active farmer. That's how most do it down here. Your property must generate $7000 a year in farm income to maintain farm rate. Our property is water front which generally demands more money in today's market thereby having a higher assessed rate and thus more taxes.

Also, I worked f**kin hard all my life so one day I could retire. When I did, I moved from the city to a nice rural property. The money I invested in the property is part of my retirement fund and I expect it to keep it's value so when I am forced into long term care, the money will be there. I do not want some a**h*le having his own personal junk pile accumulating next to me. We already have one 'hoarder' who is declared mentally ill not allowing the municipality to have him clean up. His cars sit there leaking oil into the groundwater, my well water and polluting our lake. I have 6 vehicles on my property, they are all licenced and kept garaged. I respect my neighbours rights. I know lots of car guys in the same boat who have built garages where they work and to store their stuff. I am on the municipality standards committee and in a society where it is pretty well impossible to build anywhere and not see a neighbour, standards are enforced for the overall good of the community. The only one allowed to break that rule is Kathleen Wynne.

By the way, our little community has a pretty high mill rate and still cannot properly maintain services, just a matter of scale.

My rant, I have always believed you pay your way and respect others.

Warren

---

 
Also, if you are rural and have been farming, you are taxed at a much lower mill rate. If you stop farming, then your property is reassessed at residential rate. If you want to maintain that farm rate, lease your fields out to a active farmer. That's how most do it down here. Your property must generate $7000 a year in farm income to maintain farm rate. Our property is water front which generally demands more money in today's market thereby having a higher assessed rate and thus more taxes.

 warren, yes your farm land is taxed much lower if it is being used as such by either you or another registered farmer but the house on the farm and 1 acre are taxed at the going mill rate for rural residential property in your township. the 7000.00 number is correct but you have to be registered with the o.f.a.. there was another one also when they implemented, {forced} you into it at about 100.00 yrly at the time.

 this year there is a farmer going to use some of my land for farm use, crops. it use to be a 75% rebate on the tax for the vacant land the farmer or yourself uses for farming purposes after submitting a form with your farm registration number or the farmer that uses it and i am thinking it is the same today on the %.. for a round number i pay approx 5000.00 a year now in tax. next year after submitting the form i am willing to wager that the tax bill will be still over 4000.00 after getting a 75% rebate on the farm land. don't get me wrong i will take the savings and i should of done it some years ago but i didn't. the 75% number is misleading as a lot of people move onto one of these places and figure they get it on the total, they don't.

 i can't remember the process after you quit farming because i forget what all the process was when i quit 20 yrs ago. today if you sell your farm operation whatever number you or your accountant settle on with the c.r.a. is considered profit and is taxable unless the money is reinvested into agriculture again. i know if you are claiming farm status, registered and the 7000.00 number is met on your paper work. but if they audit and the numbers aren't there you are in for big $$ paying the back taxes on the land and the tax claims you made as a farmer, fuel-insurance-equipment, etc. plus a fine.