Timothy Alexander and the "Ancient Barony of Greenan"
JSF
who is currently offering for sale the “ancient barony of
Greenan” (www.baronyofgreenan.blogspot.com/2008/06/camelot-
barony.html). My request for information brought the following
response:
Dear Sir,
I owned the ruins of Greenan Castle for approximately 12 years. The
castle ruins and newer feudal barony were ordered sold by the Court of
Session, in a dispute with my former partners at Burke's Peerage. The
older barony was not so ordered sold and Scottish barony case law (Lt.
Col. George Jardine Kidston-Montgomeri of Southannan, 1951 S.L.T.
(Lyon Ct.) 3) clearly shows me to have retained possession of the
older barony. The baronies and all feudal rights and the castle ruins
were sold to me by the late Seventh Marquess of Ailsa and recorded in
the Registers of Scotland, General Register of Sasines, County of Ayr,
Book 8108 Folio 108, presented and recorded on 19 Jul 1988. The
ancient Barony of Greenan/Grenane was sold (and created/granted if not
previously created) by the last MacDonald Lord of the Isles on the
31st of January 1477.
If you are serious about purchasing the Barony and ready to complete a
sale, I will put you in touch with my lawyer. I will need your name,
address, telephone number, etc.
Thank you.
Stirling
I understand that the Barony of Greenan is located on the coast of
Ayrshire and is the site of a small castellated ruin. I note that the
Scottish Baronage Register records “John Robert Isabel of Greenan” as
Baron of Greenan (www.baronyregistry.com/G.htm).
Timothy Alexander’s offer seems insubstantial on its face but I
certainly stand to be corrected. Does anyone have knowledge of
Timothy Alexander, the above Court of Session case or the “ancient
barony of Greenan”?
Kind regards, Scott Ferguson
Nathaniel Taylor
<45634b96-bd9c-496b...@1g2000pre.googlegroups.com>,
JSF <ferg...@look.ca> wrote:
> I would like to bring to the listąs attention one łTimothy Alexander˛
> who is currently offering for sale the łancient barony of
> Greenan˛ (www.baronyofgreenan.blogspot.com/2008/06/camelot-
> barony.html). My request for information brought the following
> response:
>
> Dear Sir,
>
> I owned the ruins of Greenan Castle for approximately 12 years. The
> castle ruins and newer feudal barony were ordered sold by the Court of
> Session, in a dispute with my former partners at Burke's Peerage. The
> older barony was not so ordered sold and Scottish barony case law (Lt.
> Col. George Jardine Kidston-Montgomeri of Southannan, 1951 S.L.T.
> (Lyon Ct.) 3) clearly shows me to have retained possession of the
> older barony. The baronies and all feudal rights and the castle ruins
> were sold to me by the late Seventh Marquess of Ailsa and recorded in
> the Registers of Scotland, General Register of Sasines, County of Ayr,
> Book 8108 Folio 108, presented and recorded on 19 Jul 1988. The
> ancient Barony of Greenan/Grenane was sold (and created/granted if not
> previously created) by the last MacDonald Lord of the Isles on the
> 31st of January 1477.
>
> If you are serious about purchasing the Barony and ready to complete a
> sale, I will put you in touch with my lawyer. I will need your name,
> address, telephone number, etc.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Stirling
>
> I understand that the Barony of Greenan is located on the coast of
> Ayrshire and is the site of a small castellated ruin. I note that the
> Scottish Baronage Register records łJohn Robert Isabel of Greenan˛ as
> Baron of Greenan (www.baronyregistry.com/G.htm).
>
> Timothy Alexanderąs offer seems insubstantial on its face but I
> certainly stand to be corrected. Does anyone have knowledge of
> Timothy Alexander, the above Court of Session case or the łancient
> barony of Greenan˛?
Timothy 'Alexander', of Evansville, Indiana, USA, who calls himself Earl
of Stirling, describes himself thus, at --
http://www.blogger.com/profile/14736852228762202003
-- :
> Age: 57
> Gender: Male
> Astrological Sign: Capricorn
> Zodiac Year: Tiger
> Industry: Technology
> Occupation: consultant
> Location: Evansville : IN : United States
> I hold several ancient Scottish titles, Earl of Stirling, Viscount of Canada,
> Viscount of Stirling, Lord Alexander of Tulibody (1630), Lord Alexander of
> Tulibody (1633), etc., Chief of Clan Alexander, I also hold several honorific
> old Canadian great offices-of-state: Lord Lieutenant and Governor of Canada,
> Lord High Admiral of Nova Scotia, Lord Lieutenant of Nova Scotia, Lt.-Gen. of
> Nova Scotis (first Lord Stirling was founder of English speaking Canada in
> the early 1600s). I hold 3 degrees: B.Sc. in Pol. Sc. & History; M.A. in
> European Studies; B.Sc. in Education. I have worked on 3 addtional degrees:
> M.T.S. (theology); LL.B. (English Law); M.S. (Criminal Justice). I am former
> Scottish Editor at Burke's Peerage in London. I also hold several
> Scots/Canadian feudal titles. I am a widower. I have a published book, CASH
> FOR PEERAGES: THE SMOKING GUN, www.lulu.com/content/953682 . Listing for me
> as Chief of Clan Alexander at www.electricscotland.com/webclans/chiefs.htm I
> am available for public speaking engagements. Please contact me at:
> earlofs...@yahoo.com
His photograph is here:
http://bp0.blogger.com/_D4zUbcGjGYM/SG0eF-3ObxI/AAAAAAAAAOE/DN48B_TUmiE/S
220-h/Picture+4.jpg
Like David Howe of Maryland, the man who has been calling himself "King
of Mann," this Timothy tried to use Wikipedia to argue his claim. Talk
for the page 'Earl of Stirling' has a fair bit of it still, including
old press clippings (1992) on the dispute over the ownership of the
barony of Greenan. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Earl_of_Stirling
In fact Timothy's strategy in calling himself "Earl of Stirling" is very
similar to Howe's in claiming the title 'King of Man': first-come,
first-served, if one believes a statement he apparently wrote (and
sought to insert in this Wikipedia entry):
> In August 1999 an American, Timothy Alexander of Greenan, Baron of Greenan
> in Scotland and former Scottish Editor of Burke's Peerage, used the ancient
> Scots Peerage Law process of an Assumption-at-Law to assume the titles. This
> is the normal process used for succession to dormant Scottish Peerage titles
> and the holder of an assumed title remains the title holder until and unless
> successfully challenged in a proper legal venue. No such legal action has
> been undertaken, nor is one possible under current law...
What this means is that he simply began to claim the dormant title and
may have no genealogical connection whatsoever to it. The Complete
Peerage (vol. 12, part 1, appendix G) has an interesting discussion of
William Alexander, the Anglo-American who claimed the title 'Earl of
Stirling' in the 1760s, alleging male-line descent from a grandfather of
the first real earl (the various peerage titles of the first earl were
all created with remainder to 'heirs male of the surname Alexander').
It is not clear whether Timothy pretends any genealogical connection to
William Alexander (who left two daughters on his death at Albany, New
York, in 1783) or to the real 17th-century earls. It is not even clear
that this man's real surname (or original surname) is even 'Alexander';
I do not find a Timothy Alexander listed in or near Evansville, Indiana
in the standard internet people-search engines.
Nat Taylor
a genealogist's sketchbook:
http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
Nathaniel Taylor
<nltaylor-3FA7A3...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Nathaniel Taylor <nlta...@nltaylor.net> wrote:
<...>
Oh. See also --
http://www.baronage.co.uk/bphtm-01/scams4a.html
-- from Mr. Hogarth back in 1999, before he went over to the dark side.
Brian G. Hamilton.
> In article
> <nltaylor-3FA7A3.14321711082...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> Nathaniel Taylor <nltay...@nltaylor.net> wrote:
>
> <...>
>
> Oh. See also --
>
> http://www.baronage.co.uk/bphtm-01/scams4a.html
>
> -- from Mr. Hogarth back in 1999, before he went over to the dark side.
>
> Nat Taylor
> a genealogist's sketchbook: http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
Mr. Hogarth's piece on the Barony of Greenan is correct. Timothy
Alexander, the late Harold Brooks-Baker and the late Gordon Kerr
entered into a joint venture to purchase and resell the barony but as
Mr. Hogarth reports Alexander would not sign the disposition when a
sale had been agreed. The court ordered that the Clerk of Court sign
the disposition and it was conveyed to the would-be purchaser. By
that disposition this gentleman got everything that was earlier
conveyed to Alexander; so even if there had been a second barony,
which there was not, Alexander has no claim to it. Any would be
purchaser should obtain an indemnity for wasted costs before they
incur legal expenses in transacting with Mr. Alexander.
Brian G. Hamilton.
Nathaniel Taylor
<794d020b-f206-4b6f...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 7:44 pm, Nathaniel Taylor <nltay...@nltaylor.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <nltaylor-3FA7A3.14321711082...@earthlink.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
> > Nathaniel Taylor <nltay...@nltaylor.net> wrote:
> >
> > <...>
> >
> > Oh. See also --
> >
> > http://www.baronage.co.uk/bphtm-01/scams4a.html
> >
> > -- from Mr. Hogarth back in 1999, before he went over to the dark side.
>
> Mr. Hogarth's piece on the Barony of Greenan is correct. Timothy
> Alexander, the late Harold Brooks-Baker and the late Gordon Kerr
> entered into a joint venture to purchase and resell the barony but as
> Mr. Hogarth reports Alexander would not sign the disposition when a
> sale had been agreed. The court ordered that the Clerk of Court sign
> the disposition and it was conveyed to the would-be purchaser. By
> that disposition this gentleman got everything that was earlier
> conveyed to Alexander; so even if there had been a second barony,
> which there was not, Alexander has no claim to it. Any would be
> purchaser should obtain an indemnity for wasted costs before they
> incur legal expenses in transacting with Mr. Alexander.
It's evident he possesses no barony. But do you happen to know anything
about the genesis of his notion of a claim to the Stirling peerage
titles? When did this happen? Among whom did he first try it out? Do
you happen to know whether his surname was originally Alexander, or did
he perhaps alter it to Alexander in order to appear to be covered by the
remainder in the original letters patent for the Stirling title?
Brian G. Hamilton.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nat, his claim to the Stirling peerage titles is fairyland stuff and I
am too busy to worry about fairies. I think the only thing genuine
about this man is his name; he was always known to me as Alexander. I
think in real life he was a chemical engineer.
BGH
JSF
Thanks for your comments. Despite all his bluster (and delusion), I
have to give credit to “Lord Stirling” (and his partners) for sourcing
and purchasing the Greenan property at what was probably a very
reasonable valuation at the time. Interesting opportunities seem
scarce.
Regards, Scott Ferguson
Nathaniel Taylor
<fc5242d8-b1da-4189...@f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I think the only thing genuine about this man is his name;
> he was always known to me as Alexander.
So you knew him or knew of him before he took up the Stirling fantasy?
Nathaniel Taylor
<a4f1aae6-cfd6-4f68...@n33g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
JSF <ferg...@look.ca> wrote:
> Dear Brian and Nat,
>
> Thanks for your comments. Despite all his bluster (and delusion), I
> have to give credit to łLord Stirling˛ (and his partners) for sourcing
> and purchasing the Greenan property at what was probably a very
> reasonable valuation at the time. Interesting opportunities seem
> scarce.
Such a thing becomes less scarce if you attempt, as this man is doing,
to sell it twice.
Brian G. Hamilton.
>
> > I think the only thing genuine about this man is his name;
> > he was always known to me as Alexander.
>
> So you knew him or knew of him before he took up the Stirling fantasy?
>
> Nat Taylor
> a genealogist's sketchbook: http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
I knew him in the same way as I know you; perhaps 'knew of' would be
more correct.
BGH
JSF
In fact, I'm exactly who I say I am. Any purchaser would be imprudent
not to inquire into an internet seller's reputation. Good luck with
your Barony.
Regards, Scott Ferguson
> Sir, I have picked up on two very negative postings involving myself and the barony which you wrote to me about. I felt that you were not
what/who
> you claimed in your emails to me, and this appears to be correct. Be advised if your efforts continue to effect my ability to sell my
property
> that I will bring legal action against you.
>
> Stirling
Nathaniel Taylor
<04b1af40-ed5b-4ded...@25g2000prz.googlegroups.com>,
JSF <ferg...@look.ca> wrote:
The testimony given so far on this forum (particularly someone's
recollection of Mr. Alexander's past involvement in the purchase and
sale of a barony of Greenan, with related court order) would lead a
reasonable person to suspect that Mr. Alexander does not now possess any
right in any barony of Greenan.
Assuming that this suspicion is correct, we are left with an interesting
legal question: could Mr. Alexander successfully win damages from those
who have discussed this, here, for depriving him of potential revenue
from it--even if such revenue would only come as the result of fraud
perpetrated on any buyer?
If on the other hand the commentators here are wrong and Mr. Alexander
actually does possess salable right in this barony, we have another
interesting legal question: would the criticism Mr. Alexander has
received here be sufficient to win him damages? I think it would be
very difficult to prove that this online discussion deterred someone who
otherwise would have bought what Mr. Alexander has on offer. The
marketplace (particularly the online marketplace) of 'feudal titles' or
the like is so small, and so laden with obvious frauds, that there is a
reasonable expectation that anyone interested in selling one would have
to be able to make a prima facie case for the legitimacy of the item on
offer and his title to it; there is also a reasonable expectation that
those who examine such items for sale (as buyers or as disinterested
others) would begin from a position of doubt. In such a marketplace the
burden of proof of good faith and clear title is clearly on the seller,
and discussion of apparent flaws of publicly-advertised items in a forum
devoted to related topics has to be considered part of reasonable public
reaction to such offerings.
Is anyone aware of any legal parallels? Are there, for example, cases
in the United States or elsewhere in which real-estate brokers or
property sellers have won damages from people discussing (and doubting)
the clarity of title, or value, of specific real estate for sale?
Brian G. Hamilton.
> The testimony given so far on this forum (particularly someone's
> recollection of Mr. Alexander's past involvement in the purchase and
> sale of a barony of Greenan, with related court order) would lead a
> reasonable person to suspect that Mr. Alexander does not now possess any
> right in any barony of Greenan.
>
> Assuming that this suspicion is correct, we are left with an interesting
> legal question: could Mr. Alexander successfully win damages from those
> who have discussed this, here, for depriving him of potential revenue
> from it--even if such revenue would only come as the result of fraud
> perpetrated on any buyer?
As they say "Only in America!"
>
> If on the other hand the commentators here are wrong and Mr. Alexander
> actually does possess salable right in this barony, we have another
> interesting legal question: would the criticism Mr. Alexander has
> received here be sufficient to win him damages? I think it would be
> very difficult to prove that this online discussion deterred someone who
> otherwise would have bought what Mr. Alexander has on offer. The
> marketplace (particularly the online marketplace) of 'feudal titles' or
> the like is so small, and so laden with obvious frauds, that there is a
> reasonable expectation that anyone interested in selling one would have
> to be able to make a prima facie case for the legitimacy of the item on
> offer and his title to it; there is also a reasonable expectation that
> those who examine such items for sale (as buyers or as disinterested
> others) would begin from a position of doubt. In such a marketplace the
> burden of proof of good faith and clear title is clearly on the seller,
> and discussion of apparent flaws of publicly-advertised items in a forum
> devoted to related topics has to be considered part of reasonable public
> reaction to such offerings.
This point is well worth considering for all who post on forums
(forae?) such as rec.heraldry. If someone needlessly causes another
financial loss he ought to be liable for that loss. If we call into
question someone's honesty (for instance attempting to sell something
he does not have) and we are wrong then we will be liable at the very
least for damages for defamation. This place has been described as a
bit of a bear pit and if you venture in you can expect all sorts of
dog's abuse thrown at you. However, we really should be prepared to
defend our position, in court if necessary, or not make accusitive
posts. I am the only broker/dealer/seller of Scottish Barony titles
and I accept that a potential purchaser has a right to ask questions
related to the provenance of the title. Normally I will only answer
detailed questions through the medium of the purchaser's solicitor and
I do not sell unless the purchaser has independent legal advise.
>
> Is anyone aware of any legal parallels? Are there, for example, cases
> in the United States or elsewhere in which real-estate brokers or
> property sellers have won damages from people discussing (and doubting)
> the clarity of title, or value, of specific real estate for sale?
I know that a potential purchaser of a barony title and a castle once
won damages for wasted costs from the seller of a barony due to a
defect in the title offered.
Brian G. Hamilton
Lindsays WS will accept service of any writ.
Nathaniel Taylor
<3b7c24e5-40cb-4475...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> This point is well worth considering for all who post on forums
> (forae?) such as rec.heraldry. If someone needlessly causes another
> financial loss he ought to be liable for that loss. If we call into
> question someone's honesty (for instance attempting to sell something
> he does not have) and we are wrong then we will be liable at the very
> least for damages for defamation. This place has been described as a
> bit of a bear pit and if you venture in you can expect all sorts of
> dog's abuse thrown at you. However, we really should be prepared to
> defend our position, in court if necessary, or not make accusitive
> posts. I am the only broker/dealer/seller of Scottish Barony titles
> and I accept that a potential purchaser has a right to ask questions
> related to the provenance of the title. Normally I will only answer
> detailed questions through the medium of the purchaser's solicitor and
> I do not sell unless the purchaser has independent legal advise.
Your statement that you are the only person who sells Scottish 'barony
titles' implies that anyone else who is attempting to do so (e.g. Mr.
Alexander) is somehow illegitimate. Then you seek to restrain people
here from calling such people into question?
On the other hand, I think it's a legitimate opinion to hold that anyone
engaged in the business of selling the arguable entity sometimes known
as a 'barony title', or any similar purported feudal vestige, is in some
way dishonest.
Brian G. Hamilton.
> Your statement that you are the only person who sells Scottish 'barony
> titles' implies that anyone else who is attempting to do so (e.g. Mr.
> Alexander) is somehow illegitimate. Then you seek to restrain people
> here from calling such people into question?
>
> On the other hand, I think it's a legitimate opinion to hold that anyone
> engaged in the business of selling the arguable entity sometimes known
> as a 'barony title', or any similar purported feudal vestige, is in some
> way dishonest.
>
> Nat Taylor
Perhaps if I had left out 'seller' I would have been more precise.
The fact of the matter is that since AFT 25 barony titles have been
sold and I arranged 24 of those sales. So, almost the only person. I
do not suggest that anyone, other than myself, who offers a barony
title for sale is 'somehow illegitamate'; just Mr. Alexander. I do
not seek to restrain anyone asking questions; what I call for is for
people not to make statements they know, or ought to know, are
untrue.
I could make the same remarks as you make about those engaged in the
peddling of dubious genealogies but then I know as much about your
business as you know about mine.
BGH
Nathaniel Taylor
<0d4adc83-1107-43a8...@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Since AFT 25 barony titles have been sold and I arranged 24 of those
> sales.
Is there some new governmental registry for such transactions, or are
they now admitted in the land register? I had thought that there was no
registration post AFT and this was one of the stated reasons for Lyon's
reluctance to award the apparent purchasers of such things with baronial
additaments.
> I could make the same remarks as you make about those engaged in the
> peddling of dubious genealogies but then I know as much about your
> business as you know about mine.
There has been a fair amount aired in this forum about your business.
Of course I will admit that I'm not sure all of it is true.
Brian G. Hamilton.
"Is there some new governmental registry for such transactions, or
are
they now admitted in the land register? I had thought that there was
no
registration post AFT and this was one of the stated reasons for
Lyon's
reluctance to award the apparent purchasers of such things with
baronial
additaments."
The AFT Act made it incompetent to register the change of ownership in
the public land registers (Sasine and Land Register). Immediately
after AFT coming into force a private register was set up, run by the
former Deputy Keeper of the Registers of Scotland. It has no legal
status although the requirments for registration are far more strict
than the Sasine Register. Lyon Blair's real reason was not the lack
of a register but that he did not like the concept behind the terms of
S. 63 of AFT. He could, if he was minded have permitted recording of
barony title transfer in the Books of the Lyon Court.
You wrote earlier "On the other hand, I think it's a legitimate
opinion to hold that anyone
engaged in the business of selling the arguable entity sometimes
known
as a 'barony title', or any similar purported feudal vestige, is in
some
way dishonest." and in reply to me "There has been a fair amount
aired in this forum about your business.
Of course I will admit that I'm not sure all of it is true." That
says a lot about your own attitude to your work.
Brian G. Hamilton
Nathaniel Taylor
<a5c6f247-e822-404e...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> The AFT Act made it incompetent to register the change of ownership in
> the public land registers (Sasine and Land Register). Immediately
> after AFT coming into force a private register was set up, run by the
> former Deputy Keeper of the Registers of Scotland. It has no legal
> status ...
So your data come from a private, voluntary register and therefore may
not reflect the actual number of transactions in this time frame.
Brian G. Hamilton.
> In article
> <a5c6f247-e822-404e-9c11-6d7cdbd79...@f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
> "Brian G. Hamilton." <bghrockh...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > The AFT Act made it incompetent to register the change of ownership in
> > the public land registers (Sasine and Land Register). Immediately
> > after AFT coming into force a private register was set up, run by the
> > former Deputy Keeper of the Registers of Scotland. It has no legal
> > status ...
>
> So your data come from a private, voluntary register and therefore may
> not reflect the actual number of transactions in this time frame.
>
> Nat Taylor
> a genealogist's sketchbook: http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
No, my information comes from an indepth knowledge of the barony
market.
BGH
Nathaniel Taylor
<adcccc97-8358-4b5a...@r66g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
"Brian G. Hamilton." <bghro...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> No, my information comes from an indepth knowledge of the barony
> market.
Now the 'barony title' market.
Brian G. Hamilton.
> "Brian G. Hamilton." <bghrockh...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > No, my information comes from an indepth knowledge of the barony
> > market.
>
> Now the 'barony title' market.
>
> Nat Taylor
> a genealogist's sketchbook: http://www.nltaylor.net/sketchbook/
Correct! Precisely the position as envisaged by the authors of the
AFT Act (see Section 63 and explanatory notes).
BGH
JSF
> > The marketplace (particularly the online marketplace) of 'feudal titles' or
> > the like is so small, and so laden with obvious frauds, that there is a
> > reasonable expectation that anyone interested in selling one would have
> > to be able to make a prima facie case for the legitimacy of the item on
> > offer and his title to it; there is also a reasonable expectation that
> > those who examine such items for sale (as buyers or as disinterested
> > others) would begin from a position of doubt. In such a marketplace the
> > burden of proof of good faith and clear title is clearly on the seller,
> > and discussion of apparent flaws of publicly-advertised items in a forum
> > devoted to related topics has to be considered part of reasonable public
> > reaction to such offerings.
PER BRIAN:
> I am the only broker/dealer/seller of Scottish Barony titles
> and I accept that a potential purchaser has a right to ask questions
> related to the provenance of the title. Normally I will only answer
> detailed questions through the medium of the purchaser's solicitor and
> I do not sell unless the purchaser has independent legal advise.
Dear Brian,
The barony market does seem to be rife with dubious offers – from
English, Irish and French baronies to pure “fairy tale” stuff. In an
environment this, Nat's observations above seem reasonable. Indeed,
with titles now incompetent for registration, the situation may only
get worse with time.
I’m slow to understand why a confident seller would hesitate to offer
firm covenants as to existence and ownership, and share with a
purchaser the full basis on which existence and ownership is claimed
(including, perhaps, a supporting legal opinion). I suppose my point
is that bona fide purchasers should not have to spend a lot of
(unrecoverable) legal fees to understand whether they’re being sold
something substantial.
What can a purchaser expect from a seller by way of covenants,
representations and warranties? Appreciate your thoughts.
Regards, Scott
Brian G. Hamilton.
> Dear Brian,
>
> The barony market does seem to be rife with dubious offers – from
> English, Irish and French baronies to pure “fairy tale” stuff. In an
> environment this, Nat's observations above seem reasonable. Indeed,
> with titles now incompetent for registration, the situation may only
> get worse with time.
>
> I’m slow to understand why a confident seller would hesitate to offer
> firm covenants as to existence and ownership, and share with a
> purchaser the full basis on which existence and ownership is claimed
> (including, perhaps, a supporting legal opinion). I suppose my point
> is that bona fide purchasers should not have to spend a lot of
> (unrecoverable) legal fees to understand whether they’re being sold
> something substantial.
>
> What can a purchaser expect from a seller by way of covenants,
> representations and warranties? Appreciate your thoughts.
>
> Regards, Scott
The first point to note is that the legal systems of the three
countries you mention are different from Scotland although as a result
of the AFT, in respect of baronial dignities, the law is now slightly
weaker. The Scottish system of recording deeds in a public register
allows absolute determination of ownership of baronies up until
28/11/2004. This cannot be done for other jurisdictions where sellers
often rely on statutory declarations. One of the problems with the
title trade in the jurisdictions you mention is that purchasers, for
some reason, are prepared to buy without the benefit of legal advise.
The sale of anything implies that the offerer has 'a good and
marketable title' to that which he offers and clearly he, in the
Scottish market, will have to exhibit a clear trail of ownership back
to the latest Crown Charter. If he is unable to do this there is
little point him or her offering a baronial dignity for sale. As I
said in my earlier posting I am for all intents and purposes the only
broker of Scottish baronial dignities and if you look at my Terms of
Business on my web-site you will see the undertaking I give in
relation to any wasted costs related to defiency in title.
If you, or anyone else, are serious about purchasing a baronial
dignity you can start the process in the knowledge that if your
solicitor reports a defiency in the title offered you will be
reinbursed your wasted costs. There will be no pressure on you to
work outside your own time scale and I will do everything I can to
answer your questions.
Once you have purchased you will received a sworn notarised
assignation of the dignity. Your protection is no less than it was
before the AFT Act. Ultimately if your solicitor had missed something
he ought to have seen you have the protection of knowing that every
Scottish solicitor has to be covered by a professioal indemnity
insurance policy but we are beginging to enter fairyland supposition
now; there has never been a situation where a solicitor has parted
with his/her client's money for a dud title. Solicitors are a
cautious lot and it is just as easy for them to say no as it is to say
yes.
If you just want information about barony titles to increase your own
store of knowledge then I say to you everything I know about a title
is on the public register so go and find out for yourself.
Brian G. Hamilton
www.baronytitles.com
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
As one of the long standing posters to rec.heraldry individuals,
including myself, have been threatened with legal action in the past,
but nothing has ever come of it.
I recall Atkins of that Ilk (whatever happened to him?) and the
so-called Duke of Maxalla both became agitated and threatened to sue
all and sundry when exposed as frauds on rec.heraldry. Yet what have
they done about it? Nothing.
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
Editor - Cracroft's Peerage
The Complete Guide to the British Peerage & Baronetage
www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk
======================================================
Nathaniel Taylor
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <hme...@heraldicmedia.com> wrote:
> As one of the long standing posters to rec.heraldry individuals,
> including myself, have been threatened with legal action in the past,
> but nothing has ever come of it.
>
> I recall Atkins of that Ilk (whatever happened to him?) and the
> so-called Duke of Maxalla both became agitated and threatened to sue
> all and sundry when exposed as frauds on rec.heraldry. Yet what have
> they done about it? Nothing.
I think there are two types of issues with fantasists. Those who merely
claim titles for themselves have no obvious basis for financial loss
against public naysayers. On the other hand those who are attempting to
sell a title, stated here to be either nonexistent or not legitimately
theirs, could claim loss of business revenues. In order to succeed they
would have to convince a court both of the validity (and value) of the
title on sale, and also that legitimate commerce was deliberately
sabotaged by the doubts sown here. I expect that has never been done
and would be very unlikely to succeed at least in any US or UK civil
court.
StephenP
that they had suffered a quantifiable loss. I’m sure that any court
action would require an inspection of the title/business that would be
more detailed than we could hope to conduct here at rec.heraldry.
The loss of a court case would not only kill off the disputed title
sale but also impact upon any future sales. The safest course is just
to hope that any mug tempted to buy the title does not frequent one
very minor bulletin board.
Yours aye
Stephen
Joseph McMillan
> In order to succeed they
> would have to convince a court both of the validity (and value) of the
> title on sale, and also that legitimate commerce was deliberately
> sabotaged by the doubts sown here. I expect that has never been done
> and would be very unlikely to succeed at least in any US or UK civil
> court.
>
In the US, they'd also have to overcome a fairly strong presumption
that discussion in this kind of forum, unless shown to be maliciously
motivated, is protected by the First Amendment. "So-and-so is a
scurrilous charlatan" might be actionable, but "I have looked into the
title to the barony of X and find that it was sold by N.N. and M.M. on
such-and-such a date," etc., probably would not be.
Joseph McMillan
Brian G. Hamilton.
for $68,000; about £37,800. Since the average price for a Scottish
barony (dignity of baron) is in the region of £60,000 that tells us
something about this particular title.
BGH
Brian G. Hamilton.
wrote:
Once again Timothy Alexander reduces his price for the purported
Barony of Greenan; see http://baronyofgreenan.blogspot.com/2008/09/title-of-baron-for-sale_24.html.
When the price drops to $1.00 (one dollar) I suggest you buy for a bit
of fun.
BGH
Brian G. Hamilton.
Brian G. Hamilton.
http://baronyofgreenan.blogspot.com/2008/10/title-of-baron-for-sale.html
BGH
Brian G. Hamilton.
For those of you waiting for the price demanded for the Barony of
Greenan to fall I regret to say you may have lost your chance of
purchasing. Due to the rarity of this title (and I cannot think of
another with quite the same provenance) the price has been raised to
$100,000.
http://europebusines.blogspot.com/2008/10/scottish-title-baron-of-greenan-for.html
As they say in Scotland "you've missed yourself".
Regards,
BGH
StephenP
the entries at Electric Scotland and The Standing Council of Scottish
Chiefs seem to differ.
I gather that the list used by ES was supplied some time ago.
Yours aye
Stephen