I'd take a packed lunch and everything!
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Moderator: ArthurWankspittle
It's probably these two documents. They contain the exact phrasing you mentioned:NOACROSS wrote:Interestingly, on the day of 'purchase' he left some papers by mistake from when (I guess) he joined 'WeRe Stupid' that are quite funny, including general ramblings that say things like 'I AM LEGAL TENDER, and THE GAME IS FINALLY UP AND THE LIE NOW FULLY EXPOSED. THE KNOWLEDGE IN THIS DOCUMENT IS ALL YOU WILL EVER NEED TO ENABLE YOU TO WALK FREE!...'
There's clearly the knowledge supplied to him from WeRe Stupid that they won't work and all the information and paperwork to fight it are given to the new member. As I'm fairly tecno-inept I can't seem to see how to ad them here for you to see, but I guess others have posted them previously?
NOACROSS wrote: I'd take a packed lunch and everything!
Probably just more of the same material, downloaded from Peter of England's website. Sending voluminous amounts of paperwork is a common tactic of this lot.NOACROSS wrote:Yup- those examples you give are among those I had. I just wish that maybe I should have opened those two large brown envelopes he left on the doorsteps as I wonder what delights they would have produced.
Don't feel any sympathy for the tosser. He was trying to pull your pants down. He knows he does not have any money to spend. Like you say, it is very difficult to make a decent living from the motor trade these days, it is no longer a licence to print money like it was a few years ago. The last thing you need is a wine taster with a moody kite. I find it very interesting that he went for the cheapest car. It is as though he was aware that he might be biting off a bit more than he could chew and it probably wouldn't work.NOACROSS wrote:
In all seriousness though, as I think you've touched on before: you'd like to feel sorry for these gullible idiots, and maybe I should, but honestly? No. I really don't. Maybe that makes me a bad person. I don't know.
TheNewSaint wrote:It's probably these two documents. They contain the exact phrasing you mentioned:
https://www.werebank.co.uk/wp-content/u ... _SIZE1.pdf
https://www.werebank.co.uk/wp-content/u ... LTA_21.pdf
Peter the Cheater wrote:"A CHEQUE IS BOTH A “PROMISE AND AN IOU” AND IS LEGAL TENDER THEREFORE IS IT NOT?"
A check is neither a promise nor an IOU. It is an order by the Maker to the Maker's Bank to pay money to a third person. And neither a check nor an IOU is legal tender.A CHEQUE IS BOTH A “PROMISE AND AN IOU” AND IS LEGAL TENDER THEREFORE IS IT NOT?
Incredible massive fail by Peter there. All he had to do was check the dictionary:BUT THE WORD “TENDER” IS A VERB AND NOT A NOUN - IS IT NOT?
Peter, you have really shown that you are an idiot of the highest order.noun
4. the act or an instance of tendering; offer
5. (commerce) a formal offer to supply specified goods or services at a stated cost or rate
6. something, esp money, used as an official medium of payment: legal tender
I also found this comment revealing:LEGAL TENDER IS THEREFORE A PROMISE TO PAY IS IT NOT?
LEGAL TENDER IS NOT A PROMISE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OR THE US/UK TREASURIES
No, it doesn't. You can have a debt, and the ability to pay it, but choose not to do so immediately. Individuals and organizations make the conscious choice to carry debt because there are more important debts to service first; because it's not due yet; because the money that would pay off the debt can be used more profitably; or other strategic reasons. This comment betrays a very unsophisticated view of debt on Peter's part.A PROMISE ALWAYS INFERS THAT THE ACTUAL ARTICLE IN NOT PRESENT [OR NOT TO BE HANDED OVER OR CANNOT BE DELIVERED]AT THAT MOMENT OTHERWISE THE PROMISE WOULD BE IRRELEVANT WOULD IT NOT?