In short
No. A file being taken off the list does not erase an attachment annotation that was placed. The annotation can stand separately at the land registry, at the bank, on the vehicle register, or in the employer’s deduction record. Erasure is seen by the lifting writing being entered at that place. The routes of lifting are in the article on lifting an attachment. This text does not list those routes. The condition of being taken off the list is in the article on a file taken off the list. This text does not build that condition either.
The screen line does not clear the register
The sentence on the directorate’s screen that the file was taken off the list does not treat the attachment minute as absent. If the minute is standing, it is read that the record on the property is standing. If there is no minute, there is no annotation to erase either. These two possibilities are not chosen from the screen sentence. To choose, the minute and a copy of the register are placed side by side. It is not said that it lifted before the copy is brought. Even if the date of the screen image is newer than the date of the register copy, the newer one is not treated as having erased the old annotation. Both dates stand in the file. If one of the dates is missing, the missing one is not invented.
The screen shows the file’s state of dealing at that moment. The register shows the record on the property. The two are not the same sentence. One can be silent and the other annotated. Silence does not clear the one that is annotated. The debtor does not have the annotation accepted as dropped by presenting the screen to the bank, the land registry, or the traffic registration. The institution looks at the writing in its hands. If the writing in its hands is not a lifting, the screen does not take the place of that writing.
The short note on the application printout and the directorate’s annotation may not be the same line either. If the note says the file is closed, this sentence does not mean the attachment minute was torn up. The word “closed” has which step stopped read from the annotation’s own text. If there is no text, the word is not spread as “all the property was cleared”.
An attachment that was not placed, and an annotation that is standing
Being taken off the list can also be seen as the possibility of asking for an attachment falling silent. If the possibility has fallen silent, an attachment that has not yet been placed is not accepted as placed. If there is an attachment that was placed, that record is not an annex of the sentence of silence. Asking for a new attachment, and keeping the old annotation in place, are separate lines. Deposit of the renewal fee does not release the old annotation either. The fee is not a document erasing the annotation. The amount of the fee is not in this text. Even if the amount is standing on the receipt, the receipt is not counted as a release writing.
If there is more than one minute, each looks at its own property. The record on the vehicle and the record on the immovable do not drop together with a single screen note. The vehicle line is read under attachment of a vehicle, and the immovable line under attachment of an immovable. This text does not write those two guides again. A salary deduction can continue on the employer’s payroll. The payroll does not stop of its own accord from the directorate’s screen. This sentence does not tell how the deduction is lifted. What it tells is that the screen note does not erase the payroll. Hiding the item on the payroll is not correcting the screen either.
If an attachment was asked for but a minute was not drawn up, there is no annotation in the middle to erase. Having been asked for is not having been placed. To count it as placed, the minute, or the annotation on the register, is looked for. If neither is there, the debtor does not announce that there is no attachment at all, and does not announce that all the property is under attachment either. The announcement is tied to the line in the paper.
Silence on the sale is a separate record
The creditor not asking for the sale is not the same record as the file being taken off the list. When the sale is not asked for, the dropping of the attachment can be entered separately. The period of that entering is not written into this text. The annotation is not treated as lifted before the dropping passes onto the register. A dropping that was entered and a screen note that was never entered are not mixed. Once they are mixed, the debtor thinks the property is clear while the annotation is standing. Thinking it is clear does not make a copy of the register unnecessary. If the copy is annotated, the silence on the screen does not defeat the copy.
Turning back from the request for sale does not erase the annotation at that moment either. Whether the turning back is a petition to lift the attachment stands on the sale paper’s own line. This text does not extend that line as a sale guide. A petition of waiver does not take the place of the screen note either. Waiver is under waiver of the proceedings. Before the waiver annotation is entered, the screen is not counted as the record that the proceedings were left. Even if it is entered, the waiver may not erase, at that moment, the annotation on the register of every property. Erasure is seen by the writing that goes to the register.
The creditor’s writing “we do not ask for the sale” does not take back the attachment writing in a third person’s hands either. Taking it back is a separate writing. This text does not tell how that writing is built. The distinction it tells is that silence on the sale and the record of an attachment that was placed are not the same sentence.
A message does not lift the annotation
The creditor saying in correspondence that the attachment has lifted does not change the land-registry or bank record. The record changes by the lifting writing that goes to the institution. Before the writing goes, the screen image is not treated as presented to the institution. A third person’s claim that the property is theirs is not resolved by this note either. That claim is the subject of a separate action, and it is not carried here. An ownership claim is not an annex of the sentence that the file was taken off the list. If it is thought to be an annex, the third person’s property is told as if it had been freed by the screen note. The telling does not erase the annotation on the register.
The three pieces that are read are these: the record that the file was taken off the list, the attachment minute, and a copy of the register. If the kind of property is not in the minute, it is not announced that all the assets have lifted. If the register copy and the minute show different property, both stand. One does not silently crush the other. If the minute and the register copy are in hand, the reading is made through these two records with contact. The reading does not erase the annotation. A bank statement is separate from these three pieces as well. The block on the statement is not opened by the screen note. The record of the account is under my bank account was attached.
The message coming from the creditor’s attorney does not change the result either. The attorney’s sentence does not take the place of the office’s lifting writing. The writing is not treated as forwarded to the institutions before it enters the office record. The debtor answering the message with a screen image is not an application to lift the annotation.
A notice is not taken back by the screen
An attachment writing sent to the bank, or to another third person, does not remain without effect of its own accord when the file is taken off the list. The third person can continue to hold according to the writing in hand. Taking it back is a new writing that goes to that person. If there is no new writing, the old writing stands. This text does not tell how that writing is drawn up. What it tells is that the screen note does not pull back a writing that was sent. If the date of the writing and the date of the screen note conflict, the annotation is not treated as erased because of the conflict. Both dates stand in the file.
A salary writing sent to the employer is in the same distinction. The employer does not count the screen image as a lifting writing. The deduction is not hidden by being erased from the payroll before the lifting writing arrives. A hidden item does not drop the attachment in the file. A third person not answering is not treated as having taken the writing back either. If there is no answer, the old writing stands. If there is an answer, the answer is read by which file it belongs to. If the file is not written, the answer is not accepted as having lifted the attachment of this file.
A writing that went to one institution is not treated as having gone to another institution. A lifting that went to the bank does not erase the annotation at the land registry. A writing that went to the land registry does not clear the vehicle registration. Each institution is read by its own copy. Before the copy is brought, the screen is not announced as having opened them all at once.
If the register copy is without an annotation, and the minute shows the attachment, the debtor does not count the property as clear. If the minute is standing, whether the annotation was entered on the register is asked separately. A minute that was not entered does not disappear with the screen note. An annotation that was entered does not drop with the screen note either. Whichever of the two documents is missing, the result is not built before the missing one is completed. A result that is not built is not an announcement that the property is free.
If a property was sold and the auction minute is standing in the file, the note that the file was taken off the list does not take that minute back. The order of the minute and the screen note is read from the paper. If there is no paper, the sale is not treated as not having happened because of the screen. The annotation of a sale that happened can be standing on the register separately. An annotation that is standing is not erased because it is older than the date of the note. Erasure is, again, in the lifting writing entered at the institution.
Conclusion
An attachment in a file taken off the list does not lift of its own accord. A screen note does not mean the annotation on the register was erased. The lifting writing is a separate step. A period and an amount are not written. The frame is on the enforcement and bankruptcy law page. The basis is the provisions on attachment and on removal from dealing in the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004.