12-28-2018 我的亲朋送礼计划 (10) ---- My online gifting idea -- 《 李家信托1967年的信托登记更改，在法律上是无效的》

1967's update in Hong Kong's Trust Registry was illegal &invalid


听说了今天早上播出的中共中央政治局常委韩正的妻子代表上海的于家人士和方家人士表达对于1948年所设立的香港李家信托的困扰。

疑问：香港的一个李家信托是在1948年由方智仁所设立，该信托登记已在1967年被更改，为何该信托还是归我所有？Question: The Li's family Trust was set up in 1948, but its registry was changed in 1967, why it is still my Trust?

回答：我所听说的，香港的一家李家信托是1948年由方智仁注资五百万大洋所设立，并由方智仁指定其长子方文海所出的女掌为唯一受益人（附有掌纹图）。作为该信托所指定的唯一受益人，我是1967年7月才出生，而该信托的设立人我爷爷方智仁是在1965年就已经去世。方智仁是中华人民共和国户籍本上所登记的我父亲方文海的父亲。我已经听说了该信托登记是在1967年被一位当时已是香港居民的于姓人士或其私人朋友所更改，这个更改登记的记录应该可以查核。按照英国法律，美国法律及中华人民共和国法律，李家信托1967年的登记更改，在法律上都是无效更改。所以该信托还是归我所有，我是在2004年继承该信托。（请看下面的举例解释说明。）I heard one of the several Li's Family Trust was set up by Fang, Zhiren in 1948 with 5Million Chinese Dayang, who specified the sole beneficiary should be the palm girl from his eldest son's palm line, attached with the illustration of the family palm birthmark. I, the sole beneficiary person, was born in 1967, while the Settler, Fang, Zhiren died in 1965. Fang, Zhiren was the recorded the birth & legal father to my birth & legal father Fang, Wenhai in People's Republic of China's city registry. I have heard the Trust registry was edited in 1967 by a Hong Kong resident Mr. Yu or his personal friend which certainly can be verified. According to the British Laws, the United States laws, and the People's Republic of China laws, such registry change was illegal & invalid. I inherited this Li's family Trust in 2004. (Please check the illustration explanation for illegal & invalid below.)

1948年信托设立时的香港受委托李姓律师，我听说前两天的播出已经说明在1950年代已经全家移民英国生活，我只是该信托的唯一受益人，所以我不是太清楚前几天播出的在香港长大的李家信托登记上的三个李姓共同律师是怎么回事。我记得几个月以前播出的某集内容里，英国司法机构对于1941-1949年期间在香港设立的七个李家信托也做过了专门解释。我记得播出的说明是其中两个是同一个受益人（我是我爷爷（1948）和我曾祖母（1941）两个李家信托的唯一受益人），还有四个李家信托多年前就已经无效也就是已经不存在了。I heard 1948's entrusting attorney has migrated to Britain in 1950 with his entire family. Being the sole beneficiary person, I don't know who the three Hong Kong grown-up co-entrusting Li's last named attorneys are, but I remembered several months ago, the British Justice Department has explained 7 Li's Family Trusts that were set up between 1941-1947. I remembered it said two of them share the same sole beneficiary person, four of them already dissolved over the years.

香港的1947年由上海的于先生注资一万大洋（？）所设立的一个于家信托，我不是太清楚，不过我有听说其当年设立后所投资的公司现在的（2018年）总规模是50万美金左右。与我所继承的李两个家信托所投资的公司都不是一家公司。我也不知该信托当年的受委托李姓律师是不是这三个香港长大的李姓律师的父亲? Regarding another Trust that was set up by a Mr. Yu in 1947 with 10,000 Chinese Dayang, I don't know much but I heard the company it invested since 1947 has its current size of $500,000 US dollar or so. It is totally a different company from the companies that my Trusts have been investing. And I don't know if that Trust's 1947 entrusting attorney Mr. Li was the father of that three HongKong grown-up co-entrusting attorneys.

我相信这些困扰都是可以通过英国或者香港的司法机关核实解答的。I think all these confusions can be resolved if check with UK's Justice Department and Hong Kong local Justice Department.

作为唯一受益人，我本人应该是由香港李家信托的现任律师出面联络，或由我本人联系美国警方协助联络香港李家信托的现任律师。我不太清楚香港李家信托的现任律师是谁，但我已经就香港的李家信托2004年按我要求所汇出的5亿美金投资款的如今下落联络了美国警方。Being the sole beneficiary person, I should be contacted by this Li's Family Trust's current entrusting attorney, or I should contact U.S. Justice Department ask for help to get in touch with the Trust's current attorney. I don't know who is the current attorney but I have contacted U.S. Justice Department regarding a $500Million U.S. dollar that was sent out to invest in the U.S. by this Trust as I requested in 2004.

----2018年12月28日。


国内国外对方敏是否继承财产事件的矛盾就在于，以李家信托的困扰为例子，中国政府似乎完全无视所有这些法律上对于该信托的法律所有权所作出的解释，其实都和中华人民共和国自己的信托及继承相关法律完全不抵触，也完全不矛盾，但中国政府似乎是根本无视李家信托1967年时期的信托登记更改，其实是一些人所实施的非法篡改法律记录以达到偷窃钱财的努力，而对于相关的于家一些人士对此所产生的困扰似乎就没有任何法律上的解释疏导，而是似乎是在企图利用中国的国家宣传机器强行通过宣布拥有而企图实质改变李家信托的法律财产拥有权。The problem that caused huge anger has been: I use today's confusion regarding Li's Family Trust as an example, the Chinese government seems completely ignore that all these explanations regarding this Trust's lawful ownership do not conflict nor violate China's own laws about Trust and its inheriting. But the Chinese government seems completely ignore the 1967's Registry change was a criminal attempt to illegally own the Trust by illegal change government Trust-registry record, and never provide legal help to those confused Yu's families but tried to use its government propaganda machine to forcefully and effectively change this Trust's lawful ownership.

举例解释：房屋产权登记的记录，如果不经过该物业的付款购屋业主的同意或者授权，而是通过在政府的房屋管理所任职的工作之便或私人朋友的工作之便，擅自更改该物业的法律所有权的法律登记记录，是否是企图非法拥有该物业的财产所有权？Illustration of this: Property Registry record. If such government property registry record was changed without any authorization from the lawful property owner nor the effort to inform the lawful property owner, but changed by a government employee's job-convenience, is this effort is attempted to illegally own this property?

包括对于美国当地一些公司法律拥有权的困扰，中国政府的努力似乎也是类似，通过国家宣传机器，完全无视当地的财产所有权是由当地法律所决定的，造成到处都是乱像，明明是法律所有权非常明确的公司财产私人财产，却被宣传成是没人要的钱而谁都可以随便拿。It is the same regarding the confusion about local American company's lawful ownership. The Chinese government seems completely ignore local wealth's lawful ownership is decided by local laws but seemed attempted to use its propaganda machines to impress the public that all these clearly lawfully owned local private wealth, company's assets or personal wealth, to be understood as no-owner money that should be so free to be announced-to-own by whoever, which has caused so criminalized-legal situations.

----2018年12月28日。