arayder wrote:Peter is in the "muddy the water" stage of the failed freeman scam.
It's called deflection and blaming someone else, otherwise known in the parlance as lying your ass off.
The bit about conspiring to twart the guru "by wrapping the system up in laws, regulations and red tape" would maybe have better traction if he'd actually tried to follow the rules and procedures, which he didn't of course, and instead just jumped in to the last part with no working framework.
So of course the dim and gullible will swallow that lie, just like they swallowed the original because they are too stupid and/or ignorant to know any better. Doesn't speak well of the English education system, but then we have the same issues here, so kind of pot - kettle.
Definitely coming on full on popcorn time me thinks.
Paypal has been used before for money laundering and other illegal activities, not on their part mind you, but as the facilitator, and the last thing they want if more official attention, so they are real cranky about any appearance of impropriety.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
littleFred wrote: [Peter's] been fraud-flagged. . .His personal accounts will likely be frozen, and anyone who has had a pattern of transactions with him will be investigated too. It's possible that weremembers who have attempted major or multiple frauds will have their own banking facilities withdrawn or suspended until it's all sorted out.
We might entertain being really helpful by suggesting to recently f'ed over WeRe bank clients what they might do to keep themselves out of court, restore their credit rantings and keep the lights and the water running.
My suggestion would be that they email Peter to sever the WeRe bank/sucker relationship, then contact the companies and municipalities to whom they have written bad checks (yes, they are bad checks) to tell them they intend to make good on all their accounts.
That would be the simple, logical, reasonable, and honorable thing to do, so of course it won't happen with that bunch of fenderheads.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.
arayder wrote:... to tell them they intend to make good on all their accounts.
That sounds suspiciously like sending a promissory note!
Certainly, making their peace with creditors would be a good thing. But creditors want their debts paid, they want the accounts actually made good. Sadly, suckers who fell for Peter's scam probably can't pay their debts, and sending bad checks often annoys creditors. But sending what they can might go some way to repairing the damage.
wanglepin wrote:
That said Pof E has been invited to speak at a goofer meeting next weekend. Looking forward to all the back peddling and excuses.
It looks like we have already seen some of the backpedaling and excuses.. I do hope this will be one of Mark Haining Ceylon's epic in depth fully investigated documentaries.
I know its hectic with the launch etc but would you please advise on following.
I joined Re-Movement by logging into my PayPal account, clicking on send funds to email under 'Friends and Families' as instructed and sent £10 subscription
PayPal: You sent an automatic payment
1 May 2015
Transaction ID:
Amount:£10.00 GBPTo:WeReFor: Re Movement Membership
I then tried to send £25 for chequebook, clicked on the pay link but then realised it was to pay for Re-Movement on a monthly subscription. So I paid £10 again to make sure it went through correct channel and subscription was enabled.
PayPal: You set up an automatic payment profile
Oh oh. Peter told his customers to send their payments using the "Friends and Family" option. The tight git has obviously done this because there are no fees involved. But, I believe I am correct in saying this, from the buyer's point of view, when you send funds via "Friends and Family" you do not get PayPal's buyer protection. If I am right that would mean Peter's customers cannot demand a refund by claiming they have not received the goods. I would imagine their money, for now, is in limbo.
BHF wrote: It shows your mentality to think someone would make the effort to post something on the internet that was untrue.
rumpelstilzchen wrote: If I am right that would mean Peter's customers cannot demand a refund by claiming they have not received the goods. I would imagine their money, for now, is in limbo.
It appears he understood this would to be the case. What a bastard!
ANYONE WHO HAS JOINED RECENTLY WILL THEREFORE FIND THEM SELF IN LIMBO AND THEIR RE-DRESS WILL FOLLOW........ Thanks for your patience,
I can’t help but grin at some of the statements put out by Peter of England and bertiebert that have come back to bite them.This one for instance;
Peter Of England
1 May at 16:23 •
We had a call at 14;50hrs on 1st May from John May of Bromley District Council asking procedure on a cheque drawn by one Emily Davies for £ 1,766.10p. If this is you then hear up.He quoted the cheque number amount and name and asked how to clear it, He was told how to and said he would conform.
We confirmed funds available. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Peter-Of ... 68?fref=nf
You may remember I phoned that council and Justin Smith of accounts told me she “was in for a surprise”.
maybe it could have been worded a little tamer, but all the information you need is there on the WeRe site, the allonge you use are all pre printed with all the info you need, also the notary if needed is there, I think the main thing for Peter is people not filling out the cheque properly, not sending in the allonge attatched to the cheque, ie not following the instructions, then complaining .. you can go one step further if you like,, "paying "water gas electric, without using any cheques or "payment" of your own.. this also works.. PAYING BY ENDORSEMENT, where you dont even put a WeRe cheque in as "payment" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foL_Fzx66Mk
Even though this won't work either, why pay £25 for a cheque book if in the mind of the loonies you can pay a bill without using a cheqye and this comes from WeRe banks chief cheerleader Bertie "i will post any old shit" Bert
I feel that Bertie and Peter have a point. The allonges were sent to the suckers for good reason: because Peter knew his cheques would be rejected. The "notarial protest" information was given for the same reason. If the suckers couldn't take the hint that the cheques would be rejected, and follow simple instructions ...
Except that the instructions were garbage, and guaranteed not to work. If the payee rejects a bad cheque, he has no recourse against the drawer? That statement was false. In my view, Peter knew it to be false.
I'm uncertain about Bertie Bert. He often posts links on GOODF to SovCit videos, without comment. Maybe he is Peter's sock-puppet.
by landlubber » Sat May 09, 2015 2:31 pm
I have never comprehended why Peter used Paypal in the first place. .......It could be that Peter wants to minimize the Re Movement income to being non profit making..
None profit making?! Is he unbalanced? This banking venturescam has cost Peter nothing to set up (maybe a bit of time) all cost has been handed to thecustomer sucker. So where or who does this idiot think the cash sterling has gone to ? http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... U4U5jTF98E
Bones wrote:Bertie has just posted this (as if it happened today)
I would imagine that Bertie is starting to feel a bit exposed and embarrassed. Weeks of cheerleading for the werebank, pandering to PoE's weird ideas and reassuring everyone that it's a watertight deal, and now that it's all falling apart he's on the pitch by himself.
I wonder how many private messages and calls he's getting from worried GoofyGoobers? And all he can say is "I don't know where Peter is, I don't know what's happening, I don't know of any werecheques which have been accepted by creditors, and PayPal have cut off our capacity for electronic transfer. Apart from that it's all going really well, and you have nothing to worry about"
"don't be hubris ever..." Steve Mccrae, noted legal ExpertInFuckAll.
What about, in absence of PayPal, sending a conventional cheque to WeRe and setting up a standing order or direct debit?
Have to send in PN anyway, so could send cheque at same time?
Anyone in contact with Peter who can check this idea out?
Oh, I would love it if someone sent Peter of England a cheque drawn on their (real) current account and made out to WeRe Bank. He couldn't really refuse to accept it, could he? After all, it's the same as a WeRe cheque... it's as good as cash.
But he wouldn't be able to pay it in anywhere, as there's no such entity as WeRe Bank. He'd need to have an account in his own name, t/a WeRe Bank. And we all know he's not going to be opening any new bank or building society accounts in the foreseeable future.
On FB, David Wellington links to a video, saying "Hope it helps".
The video is a woman who claims to be a notary in California. She explains the protest mechanism by reading badly from UCC which doesn't apply in the UK and interjecting her own commentary. However, she gets "drawer" and "drawee" the wrong way round. This makes a big difference.
