Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

A voided claim


Recommended Posts

Chris without knowing the filing mistake it is not possible to give any real opinion.

If the blanket claims were filed,after he filed ,he is sol if his claim never was valid,from the start

as in,an uncurable filing defect. Also this is just stating the obvious,but if the blanket claims were

there before he filed, he doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Here is the problem, if the BLM discovers ,a curable mistake at the time of filing,they will notify the

claimant,and give them a chance to fix it,before processing the papers. But if it is a fatal mistake with

no cure they will just declare ,the filing null,and void,period.

Without knowing the whole story ,any opinion would just be a guess. :idunno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply,

The blanket load was filed before the mistake, over valid placer.

He failed to file proof of assessment in 2011 year.

BLM did not notify him till now. They accepted the next two years filings in 2012, 13.

The sad part is we told the person that filed for him to include a notice of intent to hold (in 13), he insisted that this was a waste of time an needless.

Here is parts of the letter,



Edited by nvchris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is your friend sure that he did not file an assessment?

I have filed before and had BLM void all of my claims(8) for not filing. Sure caused my heart to skip a beat!

They had misplaced the papers.

Luckily, I had kept copies, proof of mailing and proof of receipt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris unless your friend can produce a copy of his filings,as LipCa said ,it doesn't look

too good. Sometimes the BLM does misplace paperwork or make a mistake too.

Has he checked to see if the blanket lode claims are still active?

Here is another thing,if his placer claim was valid and active,at the time the lode was

filed over him,the lode is void too. You can't gain rights by squatting on a valid claim.

If that is the case,then the only way that the lode would be valid is for the lode claimant

to relocate ,after your friend failed to file his paper work. If the lode claimant did not relocate,

then the ground is still open for your friend to relocate.

At the least,it does look like ,he has a worth while argument,and needs to consult with a

good mining lawyer,before giving up. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did he pay insipid rental or file a annual labor-hence no intent needed unless he paid rent. BLM regs most specific as defects can be fixed on some things BUT once filed over tough as nails. BUT since claim was valid at the time of illegal filings he has PRIOR standing in the eyes of the law and it does NOT escheat to other folks as a illegal filing over a prior legal existing claim. A court of law cannot enforce a illegal act---oops dredging illegal so that is out the window sorry. One LL of a mess to be sure. Why don't folks listen to experienced miners???? This is why I file annual labors,pay property taxes and miners exemptions all at the same time so nuttn' gets missed.sad sic mess-John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've spent a few hours reading more law during rain storms yesterday as intrigued with this mess and this is indeed a convaluted mess. Court of arbitration is good way to go as lawyer not required. But thats kalif,don't know about AZ. I'll still go by above statement as claimjumping cannot be legitimized through your failure to file. You must wait till the next calender year to refile though,that much is plainly said when a defect is present and a NEW claim filed over. Check that your claim was still legal when claimjumped. Lotza luck-John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I understand, the original paperwork should be attached to the "discovery monument".

MIne are.

You must wait till the next calender year to refile though,that much is plainly said when a defect is present and a NEW claim filed over. Check that your claim was still legal when claimjumped. Lotza luck-John

John, are you talking about the normal yearly filing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regs state specifically"under california state law a claim may be relocated by other claimanants unless the original locator,his heirs,or legal representatives have resumed work after a failure to perform assesment work and before a NEW location by other claimants is made-cfr 3851.3 LR-10 pages 305-308--as long as the lands remain open for the location of mining claims.It can be difficult for a new locator ro show that an original locator did not perform the regular improvements or work during the "assessment" year. Relocation cannot be made until the "end of the assessment year in question". Direct quote and where from so I don't screw up and misrepresent any pertinent info. AZ laws mirror calif last time I looked but been awhile and they do love to play games. WE need homogeneous application of law from state to stae as all other is pure folly at our peril-- Don't give up-John

Edited by Hoser John
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I had to deal with construction inspectors we had a saying:

"The most restrictive restiction restricts." :old:

They can't take away from fed rules, but they can sure add to them. :grr01:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...