Wednesday, October 28, 2015

How Asheville Destroyed My Livelihood

Detailed Summary of The Murray House Saga at 191 Cumberland Ave

In 1988, I purchase the historic Murray House at 191 Cumberland Ave in a near-condemned state as a restoration project using the 8 bedrooms as rental in order to finance the restoration.  The property’s 1977 R3 zoning had no prohibitions against “boarding houses”, non-retail businesses, and B&B’s.

While the historic site needed much work in order to complete the restoration, I viewed the property as a good investment seeing how there were such a variety of property use options,  while I could simultaneously offer very affordable housing in a green living environment, as well as making a valuable contribution to the Montford Community in restoring an old historic home to a condition it hadn’t seen for several decades.

I thought after restoring it I might perhaps sell it to someone interested in opening it as a B&B, as it would have been perfect for this use.  In addition, I also wound up operating a small computer consulting business out of it between 1988 and 1995, bringing a variety of local print & design businesses like Biltmore Press & Daniels Graphics up to speed with current electronic publishing technology.

Until my financial hardship in 2010, throughout the entire process of this long term restoration project I had never missed nor been late on any mortgage payment and I never went in debt on the project beyond what I could afford.

In mid-2010, I was informed by the City of AVL that by using all 8 bedrooms for tenants I was in violation of a city ordinance which wasn’t created until the passage of the 1997 UDO (Unified Development Ordinance) — about a decade after I purchased my home — which prohibited “boarding houses” in the redefined zoned areas in Asheville (my R3 became RS8).

Under threat of an unreasonably exorbitant fine of $100/day, I was told by the City that I would have to kick out 3 of my renters to comply with its ordinance.  When I questioned “grandfathering” or “Use by Right”, City representatives told me that this was not an option, even though I had been using my home for what they consider a “boarding house” for 22 years since 1988.  So while I had later discovered that I had the civil right to be “grandfathered”, the City representatives deceitfully convinced me otherwise.

Further, I discovered that in 1998 a short clause was added to the UDO which instituted a 500’ proximity restriction for B&B’s.  I was never notified of this property use rights “taking” without compensation by the City (Fifth Amendment violation; also a 14th Amendment violation for unequal protection and enforcement of law).  Thus again greatly devalued my property.  By comparison, Carolina B&B next door (much smaller house & property) sold for $1.1M in 2009, at the height of the mortgage bubble burst.  Even after market bounce back and again began to thrive, my property was only appraised for ~$800k due to the UDO B&B restriction, and for which I never received compensation.

All these actions thus far exemplify at least several rights violations by the City of Asheville:
1. violation of my natural right to privacy;
2. deceitful denial of my civil right of “Use by Right”, or “grandfathering”;
3. Fifth Amendment violation — “boardinghouse” property use rights taking (thus devaluing my property) without compensation;
4. Fifth Amendment violation — B&B property use rights taking (thus devaluing my property) without compensation (Fifth Amendment violation);
5. Fourteenth Amendment violation — unequal protection and enforcement of law.

In spite of explaining to City representatives that my compliance with newly adopted codes would prevent my ability of making my mortgage payments due to such a drastic reduction in my monthly income risking default on my mortgage note and foreclosure of my property, under duress of a $100/day fine, on Dec of 2010 I complied with the City kicking out 3 tenants, and then continued in my attempts to work with the City in seeking a zoning variance/modification by following its instructions.

The City led me into a course of action seeking a zoning change it claimed would remedy the so called “violation” dependent upon the investigative site plan by a local landscape architect, whom I was supposed to hire.  After spending ~$1500 on all this, the landscape architect found that my property would in fact qualify for the new RM11 zoning regulations after a few thousand dollars worth of shrub & tree planting.  However, when he went to present his final site plan before this very same committee which instructed this very course of action and worked with him directly on the plan for some time, both he and I were shocked and infuriated when told that this course in which we were instructed to follow was not an option because of the B&B next door.  The committee knew this fact from the onset because this was one of the primary reasons I had been seeking a zoning variance/modification to being with.  It then became blatantly obvious that the City representatives deceitfully lured me into an expensive plan which it had never intended to approve.

In the weeks leading up to Dec of 2010, I had already approached a few mortgage lending sources, including the so called “HAMP/HARP” services, as well as Wachovia/Wells Fargo (who held my mortgage note) about seeking help with a loan modification of some kind which would allow me to prevent defaulting on my mortgage loan.  Thinking it to be rational, my goal was to avoid any chance of default by addressing the matter ahead of time.  I was instructed by these various groups that due to my never missing any payments, I would have to be at least two months behind on my mortgage payments before any lender would even consider helping me with a loan modification.

Also, among the myriad of advertisements regarding loan mods due to the “bank bailouts”, I also heard about a law firm in CA called K2 Law who was advertising for their “mass joinder” (class action type of suit) explaining how many loans that were made in the 2000’s were done so using fraudulent methods of transfer.

Upon contacting K2 Law, I was led to believe that my loan fell into this category.  Upon paying their retainer of $5000, I was told that the worst case expected from this mass joinder settlement would be 80% loan to value @ 2% fixed rate (which would have been around ~$1200/month (plus taxes & insurance) — this would have been certainly doable should I continue to be restricted by the City to have only 4 or 5 renters.  I was also told by K2 Law that it would also handle possible loan mod negotiations with Wachovia/Wells Fargo, should anything occur other than success of the suit.

Noteworthy: both the representatives of Wachovia/Wells Fargo (among others) and K2 Law advised me to stop paying my mortgage payments.  While I was merely following the instruction of those from whom I sought advice, my compliance with the City in kicking out 3 renters prohibited my being able to continue making my payments regardless.

The first half of 2011 mostly consisted of periodic communication with my K2 Law representation, all the time being reassured they were handling various communications with Wachovia/Wells Fargo during this time — and I recall, they were.  At some point mid 2011, the case had been advanced from district to federal court.  It was explained to me that the case was moving forward as predicted.

Late Summer 2011 I was notified by the CA State BAR that K2 Law was under investigation for “breaking advertising rules”.  Out of concern, I asked my K2 Law rep if this would in any way interfere with or hinder the suit and my case — I was told “no”.  Shortly thereafter, all communication from K2 Law ceased.  I attempted to contact Phillip A. Kramer (K2’s primary attorney) directly, but was only given contact info from the CA BAR for the legal firm representing his defense — I never heard back from them.  I later discovered that Phillip A. Kramer would soon be disbarred and our mass joinder case dismissed.  I applied for reimbursement of my retainer through the CA BAR jumping through a myriad of bureaucratic hoops, and then waited until October of 2015 only to discover that out of the $5000 retainer for doing absolutely nothing, I was reimbursed $375.  I can only wonder what the CA State BAR did with all that extorted money.

Communications ceased from K2 by Fall of 2011, and I then received a foreclosure sale date letter from Wells Fargo, who had apparently by that time completed the purchase of Wachovia through one of the bank “bailouts”.  I then sought new legal defense.  By Jan 2012, I hired SoboleskI Law, a local firm specializing in foreclosure who was able to stop the foreclosure proceedings and represent me regarding this matter with Wells Fargo.

SoboleskI Law spent the beginning of 2012 becoming acquainted with the history of all that had occurred thus far as well as investigating the legitimacy of the WF mortgage note.  Although their investigation concluded that the origination of the note and its two transfers (from World Bank, to Wachovia, to Wells Fargo) was supposedly “above board”, I continue to have my doubts due to it being a negative amortization loan, as well as the time period in which it had originated.  “Bad mortgage loans” were being uncovered during this time at an alarming rate.

Around mid Spring of 2012 we finally entered the long awaited loan modification application process with Wells Fargo that I wanted before I ever defaulted.  Most of this process was spent waiting for Wells Fargo to reply after all the data was submitted for the application.

It was June 25, 2012 before WF responded having denied the loan mod.  However, when Jane SoboleskI notified me of this news she was happy, because according to WF the figure they gave us was less than $300/mo shy of loan mod qualification.  Were were told by WF that if I could attain and prove just a bit of additional monthly income, it would re-consider the loan mod decision.

Around that time my employer, Sunspots Productions, was in the process of losing an engineer so I soon began getting more hours.  I also began getting some additional side work in a local event hall called The Altamont.  Further, I added one more tenant increasing the number to 5 (an option for an alternative plan the City had also mentioned) and increased the rent to $500/mo.  All this surpassed the targeted ~$300/mo target goal by more than double.

By Fall of 2012 I began showing this increase of monthly income via reporting check stubs and bank statements through Soboleski Law as instructed by WF.  By Dec of 2012, I was ready for reapplication after at least three months of increased proof of income.  Laura Ceva, of SoboleskI Law, was at that point handling my case and sending all monthly follow-up reporting of my documents to WF.  Her attempts of getting WF to address the new numbers were met with silence for months as we continued the process as instructed by WF.

On April 24, 2013 my attorney, Laura, was finally contacted by the WF attorney who said WF was now unwilling to consider me for a loan mod because I had applied before and been denied.  Laura immediately responded with a letter stating she was very confused by this considering the loan mod process thus far.  She also explained that I had taken steps based on these representations over the last year in anticipation of successfully reapplying for the loan mod, especially resultant from the most recent statements by WF, and that I would have certainly chosen a different route upon the loan mod denial of June 25, 2012 (nearly a year previously) if I was told then that WF would deny any reapplication for the loan mod, rather than it saying the opposite of merely attaining a bit more more monthly income.  She further stated that I should have been informed upon WF’s hiring of counsel of this fact, or at least when she requested info regarding using some new reapplication forms in Jan & Feb 2013 (details in Laura’s letter to WF).

Laura also stated that I was at that time poised to file suit against WF for violations of NC’s Unfair & Deceptive Trade Practices Statute §75-1.1 along with other equitable and injunctive remedies pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §45-21.34.  Although she further explained in her letter that WF’s actions have been substantially injurious to me, she also stated that I continued to desire another review for modification at this time (again, details are in her letter).

After a short time she heard back from the WF attorney stating that WF will again consider a loan mod, but that we would have to begin all over again from the start of the application process.  We did so and later heard back from WF that my loan mod was again denied and gave no reason.  When Laura pressed for the reason for denial, WF said that my monthly debt-to-income ratio still didn’t qualify but gave no specific numbers.  And of course at this point, an entire year had passed since the first denial, so WF was now able to increase the arrears by at least double, plus added fines.

I had already known that such actions by various banks — including WF — whereby loan mod application processes are drawn out while giving hope to the homeowner of success to the point where the lending institution can more easily deny the modification, making it appear that it actually had intentions on helping the homeowner.  I just didn’t think such fraud was so easily possible within the American Justice system while having legal representation.

Upon consultation with both Jane and Laura of Soboleski Law, it was decided at that point (July of 2013) the best way to stop the foreclosure proceeding WF had apparently intended all along, was to seek bankruptcy defense while simultaneously bringing suit against WF for the previously mentioned violations of NC Law.  The hope was still to seek a loan mod as settlement to this lengthy plight.

I then discovered Oliver Max Garner Law in Shelby, who apparently had a good reputation in mortgage dealings, and especially with fraudulent actions of banks during these “bailouts”.  However, since he was apparently very sick, his cases were being handled by Kerry Lowery, and she began the Chapter 13 application process.  While Soboleski Law had prepared to handle the suit side of the case, Kerry told me that she would handle it.

Beginning in Aug 2013, I began making payments as prescribed by the Federal Bankruptcy Court in Asheville starting at $4200/mo, and then in Jan 2014 increasing to $4900/mo — I had not missed any payments.  In order to afford such payments, it was only at this point that I had to fill the remaining empty rooms back up in my house.  Regardless, WF objected to the Chapter 13 plan.  Within its objection documents I found inaccurate information regarding various pieces of data.

Due to apparent personal sickness, Kerry had continued the scheduled court hearings a few times.  I continued to follow her advice in coming up with some fallback plans, so I listed my lake property lot with my realtor.  When she asked about selling my house, I explained that I just didn’t want to rush the sale as the real estate market continued to improve.  However, I decided in December to list my house on a WNC FSBO listing service for my planned asking price of $1M, in case I might attract a buyer before reaching settlement with WF.

When we finally met again at the Federal Court for the rescheduled hearing early Feb 2014, she began to change her tune in regard to the potential of my suit’s success against WF.  It was the first I heard of this.  She said it was “difficult to prove intent”, to which I wondered what proving “intent” had to do with proving damages resultant of fraud — if a mugger murders someone in the process of committing larceny, shall he be absolved of murder because he didn’t intend it?  Besides, in this case intent should not be all that difficult to prove beyond damages seeing how WF, among other banks, have been telling people as a standard practice they have to be two months behind in default prior to considering a loan modification, then dragging the process out and denying them.

Regardless, she suggested we make a settlement offer to WF of dispensing with the bankruptcy plan to which it objected, make a $50,000 payment that would cover all claimed arrears (~$115k) and bring the note current, upon which I would continue in the loan payments, and we would not pursue the suit dropping all claims against WF.

Upon conveying our offer, the WF attorney implied she might be bluffing about the suit to which Kerry responded, “If I say I’m going to initiate the suit — I’m going to do it!”  The WF attorney said she would take our offer back to WF.  Kerry thought it was a reasonable offer and that she would be surprised if WF turned down.

Later Kerry told me that she was told by the WF attorney, Julie B. Pape, that WF was never going to grant me a loan modification because of my “not being in compliance with the City codes.”  This was of course a lie, as the entire reason I was in default was because I complied with the tyrannous demands of the City of Asheville.  I wondered just how long WF had taken this position while it was having me jump through the hoops of its loan mod application process.  Also noteworthy, if WF had been telling the truth regarding my being only ~$300/month shy of it approving a loan mod qualification in June of 2012, I would have been able to make the monthly payments while continuing in compliance with the City.

I waited a couple weeks before writing Kerry to ask if she had heard back anything.  She responded saying she would imagine we would not hear a reply so quickly.  I continued to wait for another few weeks and asked again, but she told me she had still yet to hear any reply.

She also asked me if my lake property had sold yet.  I explained that the lake lot selling season had not even yet begun, but that I listed it for its assessed tax value of $100k late in 2013 — I reminded her that I didn’t wish to lose money by such a fast sale and that I would rather come up with the $50k settlement offer in other ways.  She said I should drop the price and sell it fast in case because we should have all the money ready immediately should WF accept our offer — this was the first I heard of this plan, but I contacted my real estate agent and reduced the lot listing price to $75k.

I later asked her that since our offer doesn’t include continuing in the Chapter 13 application process to which WF objected, then I should be able to use all the money currently in escrow with the Ch13 trustee I had paid toward these ends, which was ~$30k (minus Kerry’s and the trustee’s legal fees) and then only have to come up with ~$20-30k more, which I might be able to do with the help of friends/investors.  She gave me some convoluted answer which meant no sense whatsoever to me.  I tried to ignore and not worry about it, yet it continued to bother me.

I continued to wait for a reply about our settlement offer to WF.  As of Thursday, May 1, I also decided to list my house in the MLS directory.  Also on this date, I received an email from Kerry stating that WF had sent a counter offer to her office on April 7, but her secretary failed to forward it to her.  She gave me the overview of their counter offer which is a bad offer, considering all of the circumstances leading up to this point in this entire matter beginning in 2011.

·         The Debtor will pay $5,000 per month into his plan with Wells Fargo receiving its regular monthly payments out of that amount. *
·         The Debtor will have one month to pay $50,000 to Wells Fargo to be applied against the arrearage.    
·         The Debtor will release any and all claims against Wells Fargo. 
·         The Debtor will have six months to sell the real property comprising Wells Fargo’s collateral and pay off Wells Fargo in full, including the remainder of the arrearage claim.  The Debtor must take affirmative steps to sell the property, including but not limited to engaging an agent and listing the Property on the MLS by a date certain. 
·         In the meantime, the Debtor will make his regular monthly payments due under the Note to Wells Fargo either through a chapter 13 plan or independently.
·         If the Debtor misses any monthly payment or the total payment due at the end of the six-month period and does not cure the default within 30 days, Wells Fargo shall be entitled to immediately commence or reconvene foreclosure proceedings without seeking relief from stay or taking any other action.

She also stated:

“It appears we will not be able to work them toward any solution other than sale of the house.  My initial impression is that you would be better off to dismiss the bankruptcy, take back the money you have paid into the case and then let them foreclose.  The only reason we would offer the $50,000 is for settlement of the arrears and continuation of the loan under its current terms.  I have a phone call scheduled with their attorney on Monday at 1pm.  Let’s talk about this before then.”

I was of course shocked at her apparent recent decision to forego the suit against WF that she said she would do for me from the onset.  She didn’t even suggest anything other than giving up and giving WF my home of 25 years after all this.

I sent her my reply stating that I would like to reply to WF with a reasonable settlement counter offer:

$50,000 + ~$30,000 (in Ch13 trust) = $80,000 — this $80k payment settles all claimed arrears & fines (~$115k) and brings current mortgage to current (immediate payment of the ~$30k trust, 90 days of the $50k payment).
~$485,000 balance remains on the same bad neg-amoritization Note; terminate the unfinished Chapter 13 application process to which WF objected; the Debtor will make his regular monthly payments due under the Note to Wells Fargo.
The Debtor will release any and all claims against Wells Fargo.
If the Debtor misses any monthly payment for the duration of the Note and does not cure the default within 30 days, Wells Fargo shall be entitled to immediately commence or reconvene foreclosure proceedings without seeking relief from stay or taking any other action.

Upon pleading along such lines via emails over the days to follow, she responded on Sunday, May 4:

I wish I had an answer to what you are going through but with this recent “offer” I’m afraid the options are now limited.  I will call you tomorrow to discuss.  I think it is time to consider dismissal of the case and surrender of the house.

I was further infuriated.

Then I received a phone call at work from Kerry on Monday, May 5.  She told me for the first time that there was a hearing scheduled for the next morning Tuesday, May 6 in which I would probably have to speak before the judge, explaining how I believe I was wronged.  I had little time to prepare, as this was the first I heard about the hearing date.  In fact, a similar thing happened with regard to the Feb hearing date — I received a phone call around 8AM that morning from Kerry informing me the hearing was happening at 9:30AM that morning.

Still in shock, as I continued to ponder over all that had recently occurred over the past several months since hiring Kerry, I also wondered why she didn’t even suggest seeking a continuance in order for me to have time to consider the counter “offer” from WF to which I only days prior became privy, or to seek an alternate pathway to settlement.  I decided this was the best plan that I would speak with her about the next morning prior to entering the courtroom.

She called me in the morning to tell me her car broke down leaving Shelby.  I shared with her my idea of continuance for having just been notified, and she agreed.  I then shared with her my great disappointment in her recent change of heart with regard to pursuing suit against WF in hopes of getting the arrears reduced and fines dropped, along with sharing how I would have spent around $15,000 in legal fees since all this began yet feeling no closer to a resolve.  She said that while she attempted to help me, she felt as though I was not satisfied with her representation and offered to withdraw and she would waive her legal fees — it wasn’t until sometime in the beginning of 2015 that she claimed she never made this offer and expected full payment in spite of her utter negligence and deceit in representation.

She decided it was not necessary for her to come to the hearing, and I went before the bankruptcy judge by myself requesting a continuance to consider the WF offer and alternate options for settlement, as well as seek new counsel to represent and advise me at this point.  He granted 15 days and set up the continued hearing for May 20.

Over these months I had been sharing much of this with a friend of mine, Dan Rosenthal, who has been living in Historic Montford over the past few years.  He and his wife had been looking for another Montford property with more house and yard space for their two growing daughters.  They had been considering the possibility of purchasing my house, and became more serious about doing so.

Although I had longed to sell my investment property of 26 years for at least market value (~$800k), the City forcing me into a literal nightmare in dealing with a crooked lending institution who merely wanted to take my property, along with a couple of dishonest lawyers, had driven me to a point of despair where I no longer felt I had any recourse whatsoever to these various injustices, causing me great financial and emotional damages.  I therefore settled on a sort of unofficial “short sale” of $650 selling price for my property, in order to settle this matter of the outstanding note and finally put an end to this entire ordeal without it being dragged on any longer than it already has by what can be described as nothing more than a bunch of looters.

I then spent another several thousand dollars on hiring yet another bankruptcy lawyer in Asheville, Rod Kight, to handle the settlement proceedings with WF.

During these negotiation proceedings to follow, while WF was being insistent upon its claim of “legal fees” totaling over $40k, plus a host of other frivolous fines and fees, Laura Ceva (formerly of Soboleski Law) came to the rescue by writing yet another letter on my behalf explaining how she viewed a potential lawsuit against WF to be successful for now being able to much more easily show the financial damages I had incurred.  WF then finally agreed to settle for principal plus interest, and withdraw all other claims.  I then agreed to withdraw my various charges against WF.

The house closing occurred on Nov 17, 2014.  I finally saw the proceeds of the sale in June and July of 2015, which were only a fraction of what would have been according to fair market value of the property.

— — —

I have to wonder about the present state of our American system of justice which allows a banking institution to get away with intentional deceit and fraud.  To recap, here is a list of factual events for consideration regarding my dealings with Wells Fargo:

• My attempt to seek a loan modification prior to mortgage default from this publicly bailed-out bank;
• My being told that my payment history was perfect and therefore was not eligible to apply for a loan modification unless I was in at least two months of default;
• My following this advice and proceeding to request for the loan modification application to be considered, yet WF initiated the foreclosure procedure thus forcing me to cover legal fees in order to protect my property rather than simply working with me on a loan modification process;
• My being led to believe WF actually had intention to consider the loan modification once I procured legal counsel — I discovered much later that the WF attorney told my first bankruptcy attorney that while it was supposedly considering a loan mod, it was really not going to ever consider approving one because I was "violating City code", which was false because I had complied with the City's mandate under duress of massive daily fines since December of 2010;
• My attorney and I being told by WF that upon going through my financial data, I would qualify for the loan modification if I could increase my monthly income by ~$300;
• My following this advice by gaining more hours from my employer, gaining additional employment, and adding one additional renter (in accordance with another suggested zoning plan by the City allowing for 5 rather than 4 renters to maintain compliance), thus showing an increase in monthly income of at least $600 (doubling WF’s qualification figure);
• My supplying WF this financial data via my attorney for at least six months as instructed by WF;
• WF dragging out this process for at least six months only to finally respond to my attorney that it decided to foreclose on my property, giving absolutely no reason for doing so and making no mention of the fact that we had been showing the financial data WF requested from me in order to qualify for the loan modification;
• My attorney immediately responding to WF in the 4/29/13 letter which included the following statement:  "Mr. Carman has, in good faith, been ready, willing, and able to submit this application since December 2012 showing, as advised by Wells Fargo’s representatives, additional income.  At this time, Mr. Carman is poised to file suit against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. for violations of North Carolina’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Statute (N.C. General Statute §75-1.1) along with other equitable and injunctive remedies pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §45-21.34.";
• My continued effort to again follow the instruction of WF, in initiating from scratch the entire loan modification application process, thus dragging on the entire ordeal even further — again, by WF's instruction;
• WF's response, denying my loan application giving no specific reason and ignoring the financial data given which proved monthly income qualification for the loan modification according to the previous statement by WF;
• WF's continued perseverance toward foreclosure in spite of even a legitimate bankruptcy plan to save my property, and in light of WF's attorney's comment regarding WF's intent to deny said loan modification because of non-compliance with the City (which again is a complete falsehood);
• That in spite of this loan modification process being dragged out so long by WF rather than myself, WF insists that I should pay for its own self-induced claimed legal fees;
• That this entire ordeal perfectly exemplifies how in spite of my procuring legal defense, WF and other various banks who capitalized on the publicly funded bank bailouts have likewise victimized homeowners by luring them into a loan modification application process which would be dragged out as long as possible in order to create a financial mountain of debt which cannot be reasonably covered by the homeowner, so that foreclose on their property would ensue;
• That WF cannot even produce the original signed in ink note in accordance with the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C. § 3-501. PRESENTMENT.) — I have been told by my last bankruptcy attorney that adherence to this law isn’t mandated in NC.. I then must wonder why both creditor and debtor must sign in triplicate three original notes, as opposed to simply signing one and make copies;
• That in spite of my following every procedure and instruction given to me by WF in good faith that it would actually work with me in a loan modification, and after procuring legal defense to ensure WF would not likewise financially victimize me, I have now lost all of the equity I have created in my historic property over 26 years — and in effect, lost my home and investment which I was bequeathed upon the death of my parents;
• That it is deplorable WF can break the law and steal property from homeowners who are supposed to be aided in the taxpayer funded post-mortgage-bubble-burst “bailout” not only with impunity, but can further get away with charging the homeowner its own self-induced “legal fees” in the process.

Worse, I have to wonder about the present state of our American system of government, even to the point where local government itself can get away with deceit and fraud while violating both natural and civil law, including but not limited to:

1. violation of my natural right to privacy;
2. deceitful denial of my civil right of “Use by Right”, or “grandfathering”;
3. Fifth Amendment violation — “boardinghouse” property use rights taking (thus devaluing my property) without compensation;
4. Fifth Amendment violation — B&B property use rights taking (thus devaluing my property) without compensation (Fifth Amendment violation);
5. Fourteenth Amendment violation — unequal protection and enforcement of law.

Should such egregious tyrannical actions be tolerated by a would-be People in a so called “Land of the free, and home of the brave”?

I therefore now seek justice through peaceful and legal recourse for relief of the various damages the City of Asheville has caused me, including but not limited to financial damages (loss of credit, legal fees, short sale loss, and various property value losses) as well as health damages (over four years of extreme stress and depression), as it violated my civil and natural rights as guaranteed by the US Constitution.

bernard b carman
∞ ∞ ∞

Wednesday, April 15, 2015

Collectivist NC Republicrats Violate Natural & Civil Law

In consideration of the following issues:

House committee kills medical marijuana bill

Recapping Stimson Marijuana Trial

NC Senate bill would make childhood vaccinations mandatory

These reports perfectly exemplify the fundamental reason why people who champion the principles of liberty despise the actions of collectivist Republicans as much as collectivist Democrats for illegally voting away (usurping) the sacred natural rights granted to every individual by our Creator they personally do not agree with.

Such actions are illegal because no point of civil law can ever justly supersede any point of natural law.  While all public servants have taken an oath to obey the US Constitution which was constructed to protect the unalienable natural rights of all individuals and limit government power, they regularly elect to violate both natural law and our national supreme civil law regardless.  They don't even seem to understand that by doing so, they join company with tyrants like Hitler, Mussolini, and Nero who were all enemies of natural rights.

They also don't seem to recognize their political hypocrisy.  Such hypocrisy goes both ways, but for this example, Republicans will argue with Democrats that it's immoral to violate such sacred natural rights as self-armament by illegally voting to usurp it, but then turn around and illegally vote to usurp other sacred natural rights like personal choice of medicine and/or recreational drug use.

While these wicked tyrants are illegally sentencing innocent people to prison for merely exercising their sacred natural rights, they are simultaneously being bought off by special interests like BIG PHARMA so they can push more illegal "bipartisan" bills like forced vaccination of our children.

I wonder if these public servants think they can continue getting away with such actions of wickedness without ever being held accountable, if not by the corrupted Neo-Amerikan IN-Justice system, then by karma, or by the Creator.


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • • ∞Liberty
infinityGAMES ∞ audio/Mac specialist

∞ ∞ ∞

Friday, January 16, 2015

Exploring the Mindset of Authoritarian Collectivist Gun Control Nazis like Piers Morgan

Here’s a noteworthy piece, along with the various posted comments which follow that exemplify the mindset of authoritarian Collectivist gun control Nazis like Piers Morgan…

“Piers Morgan strangely silent about gun control laws in France”

"In true American style, you demand things in black and white terms: either all, or nothing. You can't accept that the intermediary position is by far the most realistic."

— In general, I can agree with this statement.  However, when it comes to the violation of Natural Rights, there IS NO COMPROMISE — PERIOD!

"If you exercise a modicum of control over access to guns then the crimes associated with CIVILIAN gun ownership WILL recede.”

— This statement is, of course, completely in error.

Did Alcohol Prohibition in the 20's reduce alcohol consumption in the nation?  NO.  In fact, it increased AND gave birth or organized crime.

Has the so called "War on Drugs" reduced drug usage in "Neo-Amerika"?  NO.  In fact, this UN-Constitutional and anti-liberty "War on People" more easily allowed BIG PHARMA to drug the overwhelming majority of ALL Americans, including many children (which incidentally, nearly every mass shooter tragedy was on some sort of LEGAL mood altering drug).

But the high school shootings, college massacres and other assorted carnivals of violence by legally entitled gun owners will continue too, unless steps are taken to limit access.

— This statement is also, of course, completely in error.

An armed society is a polite society.  The only reason why wicked people know they have a greatly increased chance of successfully terminating the lives of many in such a violent attack is because they KNOW where people are most likely to be disarmed.

Gun Free Zones = Helpless Victim Zones

Of course, fanatic terrorists won’t be as deterred by an armed populace as suicide is often part of their plan, but when they’re using firearms rather than bombs they also know that their plan has a far less chance of being as successful where there is greater chance of an armed citizenry.

“… your distasteful evocation of Nazism is wrongheaded and irrelevant.

— Such reactions to those addressing the parallels between Nazism and Collectivism is almost NEVER irrelevant.  BEWARE proponents of “Godwin’s Law”: There be functioning brains here!  8-)

The Collectivist mindset of allowing a government in any way to violate our Natural Right to bear arms — equal to the tech level of military personnel — is the very same Collectivist mindset which Hitler used to gradually usurp the Natural Rights of Germany's citizens.  And contrary to typical Collectivist thinking, Hitler didn’t begin his reign of tyranny by throwing specific ethnic groups into ovens.  Rather, he began by GRADUALLY usurping the Natural Rights of the Individual, until the Right to Life was the only one remaining.  Therefore, citing Nazism with regard to matters where Natural Rights are violated is ALWAYS appropriate.

History proves without any shadow of doubt that freedom cannot be held by an unarmed populace.  Unarmed citizens will eventually be enslaved by some tyrant that rises to power, and/or terrorized by armed thugs (which largely happens only in Helpless Victim Zones).

“My point is that this article is exploitative, political point scoring trash, and utterly irrelevant to a European community directly affected by a vicious act of terrorism.”

— Says the same individual who stated the following in his post just prior:  “In a week in which a 2 year old shot child its mother in the face on your side of the pond, I know whose 'experiment' is working better.

As if this sort of horrific tragedy occurs on any regular basis, apparently this individual doesn’t realize the hypocrisy he is exemplifying here?  8-)

But I do resent your neo-imperialistic condemnation of OUR gun control laws and more viscerally, the cold-blooded capitalisation on tragedy to further an agenda that is ultimately just a paean to a capitalistic firearms industry cloaked as a means of maintaining personal security, with no moral deference to the deep and bloody individual cost.

— Comical is citing “morality” while arguing for continued or increased violations upon the Natural Rights of the Individual!  8-)

From my perspective, the article merely points out the fact that authoritarian Collectivist gun control Nazis like Piers Morgan — and his ilk — are hypocrites.  When tragic events occur involving any firearm, they call for continued/increased violations of one’s sacred, unalienable, individual Natural Right to bear arms, ignoring ALL logic and recorded history and advancing their anti-Liberty agenda.  Yet, then when such a tragic event occurs in a place where the citizens’ Natural Right to bear personal armament is entirely usurped, they are silent because their argument has yet again been proven to be flawed.

Noteworthy, those who promote the violation of Natural Rights and take NO RESPONSIBILITY for doing so are enemies of Liberty, and therefore, enemies of ANY free people.  Around the time of the Sandy Hook tragedy (which many of us who are paying attention now believe was nothing more than a false flag event), one local individual of the overly Collectivist city of Asheville, NC in which I live had a major problem with the notion of accountability being placed upon those usurping Natural Rights through the force of the STATE.  Collectivists seem to enjoy the illegitimate power of usurping Natural Rights of the Individual through the force of the STATE without taking ANY responsibility for doing so.

Also noteworthy, people who criticize "Neo-Amerika" for being a "capitalistic nation" obviously have no clue what they are talking about.  This nation has not been capitalistic since at LEAST 1913.  For a nation to be considered Capitalistic, it would have to exemplify no government intervention in the marketplace.  How many markets in “Neo-Amerika” are not regulated and/or interfered with?  I cannot really think of any, other than perhaps the “black market”.

Again and again we witness the ongoing battle of political philosophy which has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the deceptive false paradigm of “Liberal/left VS Conservative/right” and EVERYTHING to do with Collectivism VS Individualism: The REAL Political-Philosophical Battle

Let us continue to recognize and reveal the agenda of evil for what it is.


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • • ∞Liberty
infinityGAMES ∞ audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞

Wednesday, December 10, 2014

State Constitutional Mandates Officials Believe in God

“This Constitutional requirement that an office holder must believe in God is a logical and consistent protection against those who might drive our Constitutional republic in a bad direction.”
— Jake MacAulay  (

James 2:
 18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe--and tremble!
— NKJV Bible

As a follower of YHWH, I must question what so called “belief in God” really means when those who claim such “belief” violate the Natural Rights of Individuals which our Creator has granted to everyone?

Mr. MacAulay makes what sounds like a good argument for this “constitutional requirement” which some states have forced upon its People against their otherwise free will — that same free will that our Creator has granted each and every individual.

The irony here is that our so called “constitutional republic” has been driven in a bad direction from the near onset of America’s founding by so called “believers”.

For example, these same states which have such mandates in their constitutions were the very states which interfered in private contracts between individuals in marriage — a matter of CHURCH rather than STATE, thus violating the US Constitution.  In the early 1800’s, these states prohibited marriage between blacks & whites, thus violating their sacred Natural Rights.  Later on some of these states began granting “marriage licenses” allowing certain couples to bypass the prohibition.  Then of course the Federal Government violated the Natural Rights of ALL Americans by passing a national marriage act in the mid-20th century making STATE “licensing” a secular norm for this private matter of CHURCH.

And that’s just ONE example of how so called “believers” holding office have blatantly violated the sacred Natural Rights granted to every individual by their Creator — whatever “Creator” means to each individual.

The Word of God, the Bible, plainly states that even the demons believe in God, yet they engage in endless Godless acts.  As a matter of fact, this is certainly likewise for humans — both so called “believers” and “unbelievers”.

So what is more important: offices held by individuals who SAY they believe in a Supreme Being or by individuals who ACT as such?

Americans know full well the kind of people who SAY they are “believers” yet ACT against the sacred Natural Rights granted by our Creator.  We even have a name for such folk: “Hypocrites”.

We humans generally despise hypocrisy, and from my studies of the Bible God does too.  Hypocrisy of this particular type is often exhibited by the so called “Conservatives” within the Republican Party, which is why so many people today loathe it.  Likewise with the so called “Liberals” and their Democratic Party regarding a variety of other issues, an old native American might say, “American politicians speak with a forked tongue.”

But of course, these two “sides” have yet to recognize the fact that they’ve been deceived into believing the false political dichotomy which has been indoctrinated into the psyche of nearly every individual on the planet.  This amazingly powerful deception perpetuates an endless battle resultant only in tyranny, division, and failure through various adaptations of the Collectivist philosophy, into an otherwise Individualist nation exemplifying Liberty.  To learn more about this browse to my blogpost: Collectivism VS Individualism: The REAL Political-Philosophical Battle (

The Colonial settlers escaping the British monarchy knew full well the tyranny exhibited by nations whose governments were mixed with certain authoritarian aspects of religion.  Such is why the American founders penned the Declaration of Independence by using the term “Creator” rather than “God” or “Jesus”.

Consider that the term “Creator” is far more inclusive and non-suggestive than the terms “God” & “Jesus”, which are even considered inaccurate at best and sinful at worst to many followers of YHWH.  “Creator” allows for the individual in a free secular society to consider individual perspectives regarding either a Supreme Being or nature itself in accordance with their own free will.

Also as a matter of fact, the Bible teaches that God gives free will to ALL so that they might choose blessing or cursing resultant from the WAY in which one walks.  One’s individual relationship with the Creator is personal and only governed by one’s own free will — it is not subject to the will of any other human being, although the vast majority of human-made churches would have one believe otherwise.

In the founding of America, the true concept that every individual of the human race — regardless of ethnicity, culture, or creed (aka: beliefs) — has Natural Rights was historically for the first time in such a way codified into its legal documents.  Further, the sole purpose for the establishment of such a government for this new nation of America was so that it would be under the Rule of Law to Protect Individual Natural Rights:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”  — Declaration of Independence

So in TRUTH, these states which attempt to make it a requirement that a public servant of any kind believe in a Supreme Being do so by blatantly stepping beyond its legal US Constitutional limits and are in direct violation of our sacred Individual and Unalienable Natural Rights which were granted by our Creator.

Those who teach otherwise by either deception or ignorance do so in opposition to the will of our Creator, and therefore should give serious consideration to their own actions which are at enmity with our Creator.


bernard baruch carman

∞ ∞ ∞

Friday, November 21, 2014

Collectivism VS Individualism: The REAL Political-Philosophical Battle

After years of emersion into the study of Liberty, I am convinced that the entire “Liberal/Left — Conservative/Right" political dichotomy is a completely deceptive paradigm, and one I now refer to as the Great Political Deception.  It is designed so to divide people into two false sides who would otherwise perhaps find common ground to solving problems through being rooted in the concept of the Protection of Unalienable Individual Natural Rights by Rule of Law.

Consider that the talking heads within the current political landscape use a host of terms like Socialism, Fascism, Authoritarianism, Statism, Corporatism, Nazisim, and every other kind of evil "ism”.  However the one “ism” which is almost never mentioned is Collectivism, which is the philosophy in which all of these evil “isms” are rooted.

To briefly digress, the economic system of Capitalism doesn’t fall under the philosophy of Collectivism.  A true free market is a byproduct of Individualism.  However, “Neo-Amerika” is NOT an example of a capitalistic economic system because there is little to no free market here.  Every market (except perhaps for the “black market”) is regulated to some degree by the STATE, and therefore, cannot be categorized as “Capitalism”.

However, most Americans still believe the false assumption that America is a Capitalistic nation regardless of how untrue this really is.  Likewise is the situation regarding the mass false assumption that the political “left — right” paradigm is actually true.

The terms “Liberal” & “Conservative” have been over time falsely crafted so that they appear as philosophies or ideologies, when in actuality they are not.  This deception distracts from the real battle of philosophies, which is Collectivism (leading to tyranny) VS Individualism (leading to liberty).

Unfortunately, both "sides" of the false political paradigm most often embrace the tenants of Collectivism without even knowing it.  Let’s explore these diametrically opposed philosophies that are rarely discussed in the contemporary deception political landscape.

• the practice or principle of giving a group priority over each individual in it.
• the theory and practice of the ownership of land and the means of production by the people or the state.

The philosophy of Collectivism includes the social-political economic constructs of both socialism and fascism, though the grand political deception would have us believe that socialism is of the so called political “left” and fascism is of the so called political “right” in order to have the masses support one of two supposedly diametric paths of Collectivism which can only lead to slavery/tyranny.

• the habit or principle of being independent and self-reliant.
• a social theory favoring freedom of action for individuals over collective or state control.

The philosophy of Individualism is that in which the fundamental principles of liberty reside, and upon whose foundation the United States of America was built.  But of course, this is not taught in the government schools and why would it be, for doing so might challenge the status quo power of the STATE.

The philosophy of Individualism champions the free will of the individual endowed by our Creator (regardless of individual viewpoint).  By contrast, the philosophy of Collectivism prohibits the exercise of that free will which is displaced by the will of some collective.

Therefore: Collectivism leads to slavery/tyranny — Individualism leads to liberty.

This is not to say that every collective is at enmity with liberty.   However, a collective is at enmity with liberty to the degree it embraces and practices the philosophy of collectivism.

In considering the true meaning of the deceptive words “liberal” and “conservative”, it becomes clearer that no one can actually BE a “liberal” or “conservative”.  Correctly used, the words “liberal” and “conservative” are never nouns, but rather adjectives or adverbs.  Neither legitimate word meaning is rooted in any philosophy whatsoever.  Therefore, no one can be a “liberal” or be a “conservative” — on the contrary, one can only act liberally or conservatively with regard to a specific matter.

Simply put, “liberal” refers to being either more apt to change existing conditions of an institution or tradition, OR dealing abundantly in proportioning; “conservative” refers to being either more apt to preserve existing conditions of an institution or tradition, OR dealing cautiously moderate in proportioning.

However, the masses of recent centuries have been deceived into believing that there is a “liberal” VS a “conservative” philosophy or ideology, and that everyone must subscribe to either one or the other.

As a result, we are most often presented with two supposedly opposite sides of an issue having only two options, both most often being either inaccurate, immoral/unethical, illegal, or in violation of liberty, and neither of which actually solve the problem at hand.

One noteworthy example of this is the matter of “same sex marriage”.  Here the masses are presented with two opposing sides of this issue of which neither side will ever reach agreement or find any harmony, and BOTH sides’ positions are rooted in the philosophy of Collectivism.

The libertarian solution to the matter based in the philosophy of Individualism is simply to remove the STATE from the issue.  The STATE has no business — no just authority nor jurisdiction — interfering in contracts between free individuals, which includes the contract of marriage.  Marital status should NOT be any factor in tax legislation or anything else for that matter.

However, how often is THIS concept considered by the mainstream media, or the duopoly partisan talking heads?  The collectivists who run this nation do not really desire Americans to actually figure out how to solve problems, because that would unite us as individuals against them and their collectivist agenda which is at enmity with maximizing Liberty for all.

To most people such talk about political philosophies & ideologies seems unimportant.  However, I am convinced that understanding this Great Political Deception is paramount to re-uniting Americans around the goal of advancing Liberty through the Protection of Unalienable Individual Natural Rights by Rule of Law.

If we Americans who have come to understand this truth do not make a concerted effort to reveal this deception for what it is to the masses, then it will be nearly impossible for our younger generations to break out of the continued perpetuation of the various problems which plague our nation.

It is my goal to continue educating my fellow humans about this Great Political Deception in hopes that enough individuals will see through the deception for what it is and embrace the true ideology of Liberty, which is rooted in the philosophy of Individualism.

One good place to begin this educational process is by watching this very good & short video entitled “The Philosophy of Liberty”:

If you think I’m entirely off base with what I’m sharing here, then perhaps consider bending an ear to this gent:  G. Edward Griffen - Discusses the False Left Right Paradigm

In Liberty… 


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • • ∞Liberty
infinityGAMES ∞ audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Is NC ready for Health, Prosperity & LIBERTY?

Greetings NC Legislators!

Receiving a recent email from John Dudley of Americans for Prosperity caused me to consider a few thoughts that I am compelled to share with you all.

In regards to his concerns, I certainly hope this move toward extracting natural gas in NC will be done in a way that is safe for all of us.  Being a libertarian, I'm a proponent of maximizing the free market — but not at the expense of violating the natural rights of others to do so, and pollution is one form of doing so.  I have a difficult time believing that there is no safe and effective method of extracting natural gas.

But I have a major problem with both special interest groups and certainly with our elected officials with regard to playing the "blame game" in this so called "left" VS "right" nonsensical paradigm.  I continue to find that both "sides" of the political duopoly are often perfectly willing to violate the natural rights of individuals.

Case in point:  Why does it seem that thus far there are only Democrats stepping up to the plate in support of H1161 (the medical marijuana bill)?

It would seem that there would be at least a handful of Republicans in our NC State Legislature who might be a proponent of:

• Creating new jobs in non-government markets;

• Fostering new small businesses;

• Raising revenue without raising taxes;

• Keeping NC from economically falling further behind other states (like SC, for example) whose legislatures have recently voted to RE-legalized both industrial hemp AND medical marijuana;

• RE-etablishing the individual natural right to seek health remedies outside of Obamacare and the "Medical Industrial Complex";

• Taking a step toward Ending the War on Drugs People who find marijuana as enjoyable as alcohol yet far safer.

And Democrats reading this message, please don't think you're off the hook in any of this.  Why have you given your supporters such hope during election times, yet sat idly by doing absolutely nothing to move the medical marijuana initiative forward for what, 70+ years that you've been in power over the NC Legislature?

Only now that Republicans have gained control in NC do SOME Democrats finally make any effort to support the health, prosperity and LIBERTY of NC residents through such an initiative — and those who are doing so, THANK YOU!

But being privy to political gaming I also have to wonder... knowing that by and large Republicans have been seemingly more pro-prohibition (in recent years anyway, in spite that the Democrats instituted Prohibition in the 20's), might these recent actions be merely yet another example of such a political stunt whereby Democrats are wagering they might be able to point their collectivist finger at Republicans for not caring about our health, prosperity and liberty, in hopes of regaining their helm of control over the NC Legislature over future elections?  As if We North Carolinians are completely ignorant of the fact that the Democrats have done nothing in this effort all these decades.

I certainly hope this is not the case, because I have two friends now that have been diagnosed with terminal cancer – one pancreatic and one brain cancer.  I also just became privy to the information about Simpson-cannabis oil ( and how it has served to cure thousands of people who were diagnosed with terminal cancer.  In fact, a friend of mine knows someone who upon being diagnosed as such with brain cancer, began the Simpson treatment and after only months his brain tumors were gone and is still living to this day with his family.

Make no mistake, to the extent NC Legislators resist the RE-legalization of medical marijuana, is the degree to which they are sealing the fate of terminal cancer patients.  It's as if these legislators DESIRE for North Carolinians to be unhealthy, and I cannot understand how such people can even sleep at night knowing that they are part of the cause for so many people's death without giving them their natural right to seek alternatives to the barbaric corporation/government mandated method of cancer (and other) treatments.

Further, to the extent NC Legislators resist the RE-legalization of marijuana and industrial hemp in general, is the degree to which they are stifling prosperity and liberty in NC.

What will it take to remedy this Draconian situation?  Must North Carolinians create an unaffiliated PAC which will be a watchdog for all legislators who refuse to improve the health, prosperity and liberty of those who reside in our state?

Because if it takes replacing those among the NC Legislature with representatives who actually care about the well being of North Carolinians, then we will easily do so at the ballot box, because we all know that there are far more people in NC — Unaffiliated, Republicans, Democrats, & Libertarians — who are for health, prosperity & liberty, than there are against.

The proverbial ball is now in your court...


bernard baruch carman
* * *
- truth seeker/seeder • • ∞Liberty
infinityGAMES ∞ audio/Mac specialist
∞ ∞ ∞