ninety day window that document it wrote back one or more of the requirements are missing and your assistance is needed and additional sixty dollars is still needed before you can process your title in order to complete your request we need to perfect a different security interest in the home in the mobile home between march eighteenth in may thirteenth that is after the application was filed but  before the payment was made and it was processed when the third party checked title what they would they see any interest of honda our argument is that it were the documents of show and if you know well arguably if the person making the inquiry did not go to the clerk who was holding the file in abeyance and tell another act occurred then i don't think they find anything but there's a more important point and that is the standards here is whether a judgment creditor on a simple contract judgment go research the files in that it gives notice of the cell and it gets noticed anyone that may be on title the marshal doesn't have to have the actual title itself now i understand that that's where the bankruptcy law years but when i went to law school one would have to show the world that some notice of the answers it's a little bit of a circular argument in that well when was form which has the profession act and fails to collect the fee you're arguing would be it's not perfected but i think clearly that would show notice to the world of the city security interest so if we use a u c c analogy i don't think you or your reasoning worse is the motor vehicle title and is always an odd circumstance because it takes a while to process the papers so it's just you know we don't have much oregon guidance on this with the clerk can just recorded it without accepting payment and in that in the timely fashion within the then i'm not sure you have much of an argument because it's constructive notice to the world i would agree but that's not what happened in this case literal statutory language argument but how can one say that a lien is for fact that when the world doesn't have notice of it so like you have some other person who wanted to claim a security interest in the home made in korea and that march retained i'm a thirteen period as far as i can tell there's nothing of record that would give the actual title itself provided stamped receipt date of march eighteenth it seems to mean that the facts are clear that the the poor guy and administrative regulation required the application and the title and both of them were stamped with that march date i don't see how any person or entity for that matter could then go to the d is in the language of the jesuits which educated me and that's where the question to your honor no one else can process you know you know certificate a title for their car because one is already there well i think that's true but but in language of the statute the statute says that the receipt stamp is the day to perfection in your oregon law i know what the statute says but my concern in my question has been whether another creditor would give notice of that before the application process if i can address the court's question by answering a mr hansen's hypothetical with sheriff goes  picks up the vehicle it still has to be sold and that doesn't change security interests that are already perfect if they pick up a vehicle now i understand there's no scientific talk but if there's a judgment lien on all juggling creditor under that scenario then if that happens before your title is recorded don't you lose your interest i would i would say no your honor because of the language of the oregon statute it's not  were possible scenario is and i can say this across the board certainly is certainly real property law there's inquiry i sure you know the times are always been a little bit difficult to  because it only affects you in this case but it does affect thousands of people in oregon and creditors and so forth to have the answer to the question well i don't know your honor obviously if the questions come up i can actual title which is in the record bears the at stamp as does the application that was submitted with the title but but does the record tell us when that stamp was put on that title i can only is not the correct analysis because there's another statute that deals the statute says it covers all transfers of anything of any title transaction in a motor vehicle so we know payment of a filing both statutes and that would be saying yes you do need these two documents are required but you need to pay the filing fee also the only other thing or produce a we're going to comply with this interpret this one is a yes we have to submit two documents but we're going to ignore the other statute completely that's not the proper i would suggest interpretation when two statutes conflict