International Accounting Standards Board standard 38 (IAS 38)[3] defines an intangible asset as: "an identifiable non-monetary asset without physical substance." This definition is in addition to the standard definition of an asset which requires a past event that has given rise to a resource that the entity controls and from which future economic benefits are expected to flow. Thus, the extra requirement for an intangible asset under IAS 38 is identifiability. This criterion requires that an intangible asset is separable from the entity or that it arises from a contractual or legal right.
The above concerns the asset evaluation related to the;
past event and expectations of future economic benefits.
In the first case HELSAR interpretation of the (IAS) standard
stems from the copyrights protecting a future technology as
an advertisement asset, given that HELSAR is the company
that is, in the category of aviation concepts that
represent advantages in the
SAR Emergency Response product fields World Wide.
This
updating concerns the need to establish legal grounds to reposition, recount,
protect and defend the financial legitimacies of the asset assessments and
debts incurred, during the time that I was involved in the business venture,
known as the Survival Gear Company, later to become HELSAR
Started in 1999, in
the state of New Jersey SG was in the business of developing new equipment
concepts and products for helicopter, sea search and rescue technologies. The
business plan forecasted these product developments for production
manufacturing.
I borrowed apx. 150,000
and worked apx. 5 yrs building SG, and brought it to what appeared to be a successful venture, before the credit failure occurred.
The
financial failure occurred as a business statistic, when in fact it is my
belief that conveniently these statistics were used to obscure the actual
facts, ones that stemmed from the appropriation of one of my credit lines, A Financial Corporation, Textron some how purchased
or otherwise appropriated one of my credit lines. I later found out that Textron is owned by
Bell Helicopter, and that they also own, Bell Helmets.
This adversary or competitor, may not
have created the debt but very well may have caused it.
That's
where the intentions concerning the appropriation of my credit line becomes questionable.
When financing
helicopter technologies one should be somewhat careful about who to trust,
especially if they happen to be another helicopter company.
I counted on and trusted a ten billion dollar company,
resulting in a financial failure and the overall collapse of my credit.
Textron Financial Corporation, which later became, "the third party", in question,
made refinancing impossible.
During
the start-up I used
several bank loans, credit cards and credit lines, to keep
the business
moving forward. In 2002 -2003 the plan was to raise capital
or
refinance the debt because the need for more money was becoming obvious, while
at the same time the technical productivity seemed reliable and the viability visible.
The business plan
was created to project 3 to 5 million in profits in three to five years. This
concerned small but novel products that were designed to precede larger more
sophisticated industrial products such as, "in-flight rescue line equipment".
One such small
product was a, "buoyant water-proof cell phone", to be marketed to the, "out-of-doors", sports market, world wide.
Now thirteen years later the HELSAR company, adds technologies to the improvement of the, SG Cell Phone Model. It is a twin ensemble, with one model kept in a specialized, "On Board Life Jacket", where it remains on full charge when not in use. It's twin is used as a carry on person, hand held communicator, replacing the use of the everyday cell phone, when the user is on or near the water.
A power supply is built into vest, both communicators use an activated switch that signals when it is in the water so that it can be seen at night, GPS and radio capability features are the uniform plan in development. GPS Mayday Signaling and broadcast and power storage systems are presently being researched for technical development. The present feasibility plan is that communications technology a system in the event of a sinking craft can be used to boost broadcast to a "Satellite Mayday", this will operate with a built in drift location indication that calculates separate from GPS location. This is also a technology that is needed for lost at sea aircraft whereby the GPS Location device signals from the surface rather then below the surface.
I have
always questioned the legal aspects surrounding the circumstances, of a third party involvement, that concerned the financial failure. and debt. I was
under the impression, (when I learned that Textron was a BELL helicopter company), that I had a friend in the business, and
that somehow they had learned that I was a designer in helicopter search and
rescue and were interested in supporting me.
I continually updated the progress of the Survival Gear Company by reporting
the developing technologies as they occurred to Textron asking them to file the
progress reports so that it would serve as a, "due-diligence", back up, in the developing business plan.
The credit failure occurred after l decided to refinance through the relationship I thought I had with Textron. When the
need arose and refinancing was apparently on the table, Textron reacted to my request by
giving me a phone contact for their small business support office, as stated by
this time I had already submitted the plan and various parts of the plan as it
was being developed, therefore the main office of Textron had already on file a
description of the products and technologies comprising the plan. According to
the advice of the account management, the plan was also sent to the small
business support office that Textron provided. Communications with Textron and
their small business support office failed because they ignored messages to
make reply for the next three months, there was no communication with any of
Textron's Office's to or with Survival Gear, many attempts were made to contact
their offices. My credit collapsed and I became the subject to a domino effect, but remained faithful that the progression would allow the truth to surface.
They simply ignored
communications, it is my opinion that if a request for refinancing were based
on the business plan, than they did not want provide an answer to accept or
decline, since acceptance would then have them supporting helmets and helicopter
equipment that they wanted possession of, and if they declined they would need
to explain why, since they would not want to comment and commit themselves to
acknowledge the existence of new equipment technologies, they chose to simply
ignore further communications.
I believe in
acquiring my account the Textron Financial Corporation and its close
association with BELL were motivated to purchase a credit portfolio that
included my credit line from the Sun Trust, as a way to conduct
espionage to compete with my developing designs and technologies.
It is also my
contention that a closer examination of all these facts would be more revealing
as to the time line and activities of all the parties concerned.
Textron was the only creditor that did not seek collection of the debt that
transpired, I see this as a way to shelter themselves from being
actively involved in the conduction of business with Survival Gear, whereby the
limit of stature after seven yrs. would exclude them from involvement. This
would seem worth their efforts, since the technologies being referred to could
easily be used to create hundreds of millions of dollars in profitable assets for their
company and associates. It is reasonable to suspect that these activities would
provide these insiders with illegitimate assets that could be hidden and
laundered or converted into viable cash accounts proposing assets within the
treasury of their company(s) and their associates, or to be
used for future Defense Department contracts.
I believe that there is little known, or mentioned, about the
limitations
concerning the, “legal limit of
statures”.
Legal ground beyond, the, “legal
limit of stature”, would constitute a defense for or against this stature and would be attributable
to certain facts;
Of which one of
importance is the, “legal limit of stature”, defined as a
ruling that makes void the use of any legal obligations for all involved parties, past
or present. Question is, since the court may justify when a period of time has
lapsed from on set or start to a time after seven years and since legal applications are pertinent in resolving a decision, it would seem that after seven years it is over for the creditor, who in some cases may sell your debt to another collector,
but it is not over for the debtor who has only begun to pay for the law that no longer protects him, but instead oppresses him, while the creditor has no longer a concern to answer justice.
A seven year period
begins and ends, where?
At that time of the first suit against me, I made a request to vacate the
charge and requested a trial by jury, but was denied, on grounds that a 3rd
party involvement was not a valid reason, an attorney involved in the
collection decided to prevent my trial.
The court
here first scheduled a trial, then after the attorney denied me to the Civil
court, the court sent me a notice not to appear and there would be no appeal ,
since I did not check a little box requesting an oral argument resulting in no
trial by jury for me.
Conversely
this may not be justifiable grounds for denial, but also, since
the debt pertains to out of state financial business and is
about intangible
proprietaries, can be defined as being in the domain of a federal
jurisdiction.
Therefore
it is reasonable to assume questionable, as it would be to think that
conspiracy to commit a crime if not recorded or uncovered in seven
years, would be questionable, if ever discovered, at the time of discovery
would then provide no defense for the victim. In especially that the law does not now
allow the debtor clemency after seven years.
The debtor who
is paying a debt that has been the result of an illegal act after seven years,
also includes the question of the constitutionality.The seven year stature protects one but not the other and
this seems to be done without just cause.
The constitutionality of the, "legal limit of stature", as a
protection, to any of the parties, in this case, since it should be determined
that the business of finance has never expired because the debt whether negligent
or criminal is still actively perpetrated against the victim, who in this
case has been prevented from his right to a trial by jury, and therefore
prevented from making a statement on record, in this case, disclosing the value
of his assets at that time, and what may be defined as a federal crime and
or a conspiracy to fraudulently or otherwise illegally appropriate and or to make
use of valuable technologies and information that is the debtor's property, deemed
and defined as ,”intellectual property”, and can only be defended in
a timely manner based on time limitation imposed by law. This then would allow
the law to be used to attack rather then defend the rights of a citizen. I
think that most would agree that many technology innovations are still in
development twenty years after it is discovered or invented, and that twenty
years, is the length of a career and at times the length of a patent license, and or
the time it takes to turn around and look back.
Financial
crime can be perpetrated at the stroke of a pen, especially when
a trial by jury has been denied to the debtor, while cunningness to use
the law against the rights of a citizen and to attack him, he who is defenseless, he who bears on a
day to day basis for decades, financial hardship, has a credit score but is a one sided story, there is no place for a statement in his "Dun and Bradstreet Rating" by the creditor concerning his explanation of his poor credit.
The events of this
ambitious if not criminal oversight, where one must consider the sophistication's of, “white collar crime”, as investigative grounds in the
defense of all parties involved.
In my case, after seven years it would seem
that I have no legal limit of stature protecting me from a debt surrounded by suspicion, while I am still responsible for
and suffer the consequences of this debt.
Conversely,
after seven years, the legal limit of stature, could actually protect a 3rd
party who may have been instrumental in intentionally and or illegally causing
the debt to occur, while afterwards the debtor is still paying, as a
consequence of his denial of a fair trial, and because there is a need to check a
little box, to request an oral argument.
An act of
competitive sabotage is not beyond the scope of understanding the nature of
some financial crimes that constitute criminal intention in everyday business.
My
perspective, and point of view regarding my legal grounds and financial
position has been met with poor or no results from a variety of
government offices including the Federal Trade Commission and the Inspector
Generals Office.
In the case that it is acknowledged that the legal limit of stature
does not leave exempt, in this case, the third party, from its legitimate
disposition, for example;
to conspire a
means to use the, “legal limit of stature”, to render the victim of a
felony crime defenseless, he who doesn't know what hit him may find many years will go by quickly, especially when he is the victim of a cross fire and gets hit not only by a "defense department contractor, but others who share in the profits of his un-justice.
While the victim debtor pays and suffers the debt and loss
of credit for years beyond the “legal limit of stature”, possibly for the rest
of his life.",
There remains the facts of property rights, which in
the case of patents or “patents to be”,
when they are “financial information”,
of value such as assets and or the development of assets, will come under a
Federal Jurisdiction, and therefore a legal limit of stature would be pertinent
in defending, properties acquired by criminal acts, especially when this ruling
leaves the defendant defenseless, whereby the proprietaries would be protected
by the laws governing ownership by virtue of documents such as those pertaining
to patent licensing and intellectual property rights.
The rightfulness or
fairness and legitimacy in question, concerns the past, present and future of,
fair defense for all, including the individual and his credit worthiness, in
this case mine, that has been and now is and will be jeopardized and deprived.
When, at the time
of the credit line appropriation by Textron, Bell had prior knowledge of the my
business, Survival Gear, and that I had designs on Rescue Helmets, these were
previously disclosed to BELL, (the helmet company), in an email and telephone
exchange, however, at that time Textron appropriated my line of credit, I had
no idea that Textron was a company belonging to BELL, nor knew that BELL the
helicopter company was also BELL the Helmet company, further , I was under the
impression when first realizing that
Textron was a BELL company and had become my creditor, that I had a friend in
the business" and sought the benefits of this association, trusted and
submitted various technology developments and progress reports that concerned
the advent of Helicopter Rescue Equipment.
The true value of
the equipment is that it allows the helicopter to make the maneuvers as seen in
the video.
The helicopter
rescue as illustrated in the Ocean Rescue Video is involved in maneuvers that
are not possible without the use of equipment that originated from the Survival
Gear Company,
This technology, (a
conceptualization was conceived by me at that time and therefore expected to be
used as material for filing a patent or patents), the technology, although is
not known to be a prior art in its use for aerodynamically
engineered advantages in helicopter rescue or line use, is a proven
mechanical technology, that can be relied upon for manufacturing and is
patentable, for use
as an aviation equipment that can improve the present function or use as an
efficient means to save lives and create certain measures of safety for the
helicopter rescue mission.
This information of
a new concept or technology was described to Textron in the various reports
submitted to them. To the best of my knowledge no other helicopters have this
equipment and in my opinion is an essential necessity that concerns the future
of the helicopter industry.
Further,
updated technical developments are now established or disclosed by the
conception of the inventor, as to have advantages over the known or previously
existing technologies, created and introduced by him.
One such advantage
is the advent of water and land delivery equipment for the advantages over
mid-air refueling technologies.
In my association
with Textron, I requested contact with Textron's, "in house small business
support", since Textron sent me advertisements, that they were there to
support small business.
As previously stated
I desired to benefit by an association with a Helicopter company who now held
my line of credit, an association that I trusted, I sent Textron progress reports so that my
association with them would also be trusted.
Further, I
prepared a business plan to be submitted to their small business office, . . I
eventually spent a good deal of time with a SCORE representative who guided
me through to a satisfactory plan introduction, which made reference the need to finance and my plan and intentions to make the company’s business
profitable, while giving BELL a chance to make economy for themselves and support
purchase, and or otherwise share in the futures of SAR developments as an industry.
The nature
of the apparent deceptions would also allow me to suspect without blame, that
there was political involvement within the State of New Jersey, as I was denied
a trial by jury, under skeptical circumstances and I sight this occurred during
the time when,"Nex-Gen" an aviation venture was in progress,
originating in the FAA, whereby this Federal and State business could be used
to promote Aviation ventures under the guise of “Advanced Radar Technologies”, and
that it could easily have been used to convert or launder assets and proposed contracting
into its future such as, "Defense Department", contracts for the
designs and manufacturing of aviation technologies, and that any suspected in
such crimes of deception would lead complaints to federal statutes, and
therefore go unrecorded in court, where and when a citizen is deprived by
trickery treachery and fraudulent con versions, including a
political private sector misplacement of funds amounting in this case a
billion dollar enterprise, that can be explained away when
the criminal element and intention looses technical ground as you now see,
in the case of the disclosure of new technical elements such as the
refueling technology claims. The sum of a billion dollars of lost
money that may have only been a bookies promise to one of his customers and
entered into reinvestment books, in other words the billion in cash actually
never was it was only an entry on the books as part of a knowledge that the
helicopter industry would become there ace in the hole, a cash cow, try to figure of the rest of this.
When the time came for it
to conveniently be found after the demise of the inventor,
after this money would be found where it could be again posted to its
profit making asset at which time the economic leaders would be having the
finest times, political celebrations would take place, celebrating
the political spirit and headlines would read of, " no
scandal attached to missing billion", and " politician
vindicated", “State scores jobs”, “the governor is headed for the White
House”, while flying our flag honorably over another soldiers grave.
I site a previous dilemma concerning the SBA Small Business Disadvantage
Status, in the years after 1982, I started a business in the state of New
Jersey, was in freeze dried bait, I needed a commercial freezer to store bait,
I visited the Industrial Park nearby and Inquired about a Commercial Freezer
lockers, but it did not exist there.
Someone made a
federal loan to build one, I then went to another bank to make a loan to keep
things going, I went there on Friday the Banker at the Doylestown Federal was
out to lunch, I told the Secretary I will come back on Monday, the banker died
over the weekend.
During this time I sent for collateral reasons an automated parking technology to
a Bank in the Center of the small city of Cape May, that was in the 80's, I am now finding out
that that design structure is manufactured in Germany. And the banker who received the letter, is gone and so is the bank.
Soon after the freezer burnt down before it was built, and the man there who
was the American Economic Development Council died. Actually I have not looked
into a small disadvantage business status but am now wondering if I qualify, .
. if I do they may want one half of the loan down, which before crowd lending
would have been impossible.
I now have another
enemy Cancer, been through surgery, chemo and radiation, (my medical surgeries- ID 509-57-51 Massachusetts
General Hospital) also chemo and radiation at Shore Memorial Cancer Center.
What I'd like to do is what I think is the American thing to do and that is sue Textron of Bell
for damages, people who do things the way they do are not good for the defense department, if you can't fight crime then you can't defend freedom.
Personally, . .
I
think this is a fertile ground for the creation of investments with copyrights and the technical details
that concern the various mechanical elements of the equipment products
and capabilities. For now the plan is to build the HELSAR of
the future is in selling
securities and letting those monies put a capable and dependable management into place.
Possibly a company like, Boeing or Sikorsky, will want to buy a lions share, if so they will
be free to do so, if the U.S. Government, somehow has the Procurement Solicitation for
these technologies, then possibly those departments of concern will have the established
interest levels where the future developments might be managed in a reliable way, if that does not materialize then the company will seek a broader world wide market, possibly by acquiring the services of qualified aviation, machine and production engineers who have track records, and the patent attorneys to work with them to carry the work load of the
Enterprise of Freedom, the true mark of success.
On the Other Hand
I want to sell a company that I created.
I would be willing to answer any questions
you may have. What I am selling is the company
and all of it's, (proprietaries) that it legally
possesses, both referred and inferred,
including the art and the copyrights,
whether they be commercial or technical.
This includes copyrights, that are pertinent
originally derived from the associated technology
that it illustrates.Therefore a buyer who knows
what he is looking at will appreciate, the saying;
"what you see is what you get", .
If a person were to buy this company whether he be an
industrialist or a investment person might have the founding
of what in these days might be termed a, "billion dollar
business". I am not saying that it is but I am also not
saying that it isn't.
That is usually by a management
I must admit that the technologies described
and illustrated are a solid ground future.
The refueling project was created in 2015
The crafts mechanical technologies and controls
for this are essential and clearly defined as
an equipment that clearly illustrate the
advantages.
"Success is a result, not a goal"
In the case you want to donate, please
Funds are needed for the legal ground,
And A Professional assessment can be
conducted,
To see my work record for last
25 yrs. see these blogs;
LIST OF WORKS
Asset-Ventures
Next Generation Helicopters
Book In Progress
Invention and Design Illustrations
