Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

Firthy2002
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:24 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Firthy2002 »

Skeleton wrote:
chris rainbow3 days ago

send a recorded letter stating your charges ,for receiving anything from equiter,ending the letter with the line " any reply will mean you have agreed my terms and conditions " . the precedent was set by steve Higgins in 2013 and your fee can be what you like. now,should they be silly enough to persue, you now have a signature of agreement of your terms,meaning you now have a contract and they will have to pay your fee. my charge would be £5000, but its up to you. hope this is helpful.
Reply 1
I responded thusly:
LOL I'd love to see how far you get with your foisted unilateral contract in court.
-=Firthy2002=-

Watching idiots dig themselves into holes since 2016.
ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 3759
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by ArthurWankspittle »

chris rainbow3 days ago

send a recorded letter stating your charges ,for receiving anything from equiter,ending the letter with the line " any reply will mean you have agreed my terms and conditions " . the precedent was set by steve Higgins in 2013 and your fee can be what you like. now,should they be silly enough to persue, you now have a signature of agreement of your terms,meaning you now have a contract and they will have to pay your fee. my charge would be £5000, but its up to you. hope this is helpful.
Reply 1
This Steve Higgins? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-22257500
He was compensated for being cold called at £10 per call (not £5000), and it was not for being called by collectors of a legitimate and legal debt. Also dealt with by Small Claims Court (therefore not a precedent IIRC) and wasn't defended.
"There is something about true madness that goes beyond mere eccentricity." Will Self
Skeleton
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 6:37 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Skeleton »

ArthurWankspittle wrote:
chris rainbow3 days ago

send a recorded letter stating your charges ,for receiving anything from equiter,ending the letter with the line " any reply will mean you have agreed my terms and conditions " . the precedent was set by steve Higgins in 2013 and your fee can be what you like. now,should they be silly enough to persue, you now have a signature of agreement of your terms,meaning you now have a contract and they will have to pay your fee. my charge would be £5000, but its up to you. hope this is helpful.
Reply 1
This Steve Higgins? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-22257500
He was compensated for being cold called at £10 per call (not £5000), and it was not for being called by collectors of a legitimate and legal debt. Also dealt with by Small Claims Court (therefore not a precedent IIRC) and wasn't defended.
Good find, he also made no freetard remarks or gave any indication he has drank their kool aid. He used the courts in the correct way and won, but these idiots still do not get it.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played. :lol: :lol:
Firthy2002
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:24 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Firthy2002 »

Yeah I remember that case, was chuffed for the guy since most of the unscrupulous cold callers are difficult to track down and pursue for damages.
I fail to see how it legitimises their foisted unilateral contracts.
-=Firthy2002=-

Watching idiots dig themselves into holes since 2016.
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Dr. Caligari »

Firthy 2002 wrote:I responded thusly:
LOL I'd love to see how far you get with your foisted unilateral contract in court.
I would have responded: "If you make another post on this thread, you agree to pay me $50,000."
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
Pox
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 6:17 pm

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Pox »

Dr. Caligari wrote:
Firthy 2002 wrote:I responded thusly:
LOL I'd love to see how far you get with your foisted unilateral contract in court.
I would have responded: "If you make another post on this thread, you agree to pay me $50,000."
$50,000 - don't sell yourself short - this guy (Tom) wants 8 million - but he doesn't specify what currency.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... 5&t=101742
Firthy2002
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2016 2:24 pm
Location: Leeds

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Firthy2002 »

Dr. Caligari wrote:
I would have responded: "If you make another post on this thread, you agree to pay me $50,000."
And of course my rebuttal: "I do not wish to create joinder with you!"
-=Firthy2002=-

Watching idiots dig themselves into holes since 2016.
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Dr. Caligari »

I would have told chris to go create joinder with himself.
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)
exiledscouser
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1322
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:01 pm

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by exiledscouser »

It seems that certain internet memes go together like Morecambe and Wise or fish and chips.

So Sov citizens and Freemen are never far away from a good conspiracy theory or several.

One perennial is the soopa sekrit mission of the lizard men/banking cabal/PTB (other villains are available) to poison everyone on the planet using chemicals released from planes high above us - Chem-trails.

Ignoring the fact for a moment that the Illuminati or whoever might be doing this would actually be poisoning themselves at the same time due to the indiscriminate nature of aerial-released chemical weapons, the accusations have stirred august scientists to finally rebut and debunk them.

https://news.uci.edu/research/surveyed- ... cy-theory/

The link takes you to an article written by those know-nothings at UCI (University of California).

One of their spokesmen said;

“We don’t imagine that we’re going to sway the beliefs of hardcore adherents to the chemtrails conspiracy theory with this study. But we thought it was important to go on the record with fundamental scientific facts to refute claims that the government is deliberately spreading harmful chemicals from aircraft.”

Of course, UCI are probably just part of the conspiracy.............
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by littleFred »

It was only a survey, so quite cheap, but a waste of time and money. They asked atmospheric scientists about the existence of a "secret large-scale atmospheric program" (SLAP), and -- surprise, surprise, they all said, nope, there's no evidence for that.

A clear case of, "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"

Like all good conspiracy theories, the people best qualified to refute the evil-doing are the ones accused of committing it.
JamesVincent
A Councilor of the Kabosh
Posts: 3096
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:01 am
Location: Wherever my truck goes.

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by JamesVincent »

littleFred wrote:It was only a survey, so quite cheap, but a waste of time and money. They asked atmospheric scientists about the existence of a "secret large-scale atmospheric program" (SLAP), and -- surprise, surprise, they all said, nope, there's no evidence for that.

A clear case of, "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"

Like all good conspiracy theories, the people best qualified to refute the evil-doing are the ones accused of committing it.
How do you prove a negative?

The biggest issue I've had trying to talk to chemtrail believers is that the absence of proof implies the proof. You can't prove that they don't exist? Then they must exist because you can't prove they don't and I know they do. One of my Facebook "friends" (who has since unfriended me and blocked me, shame, that) was a true believer. They were out to kill us all. When I took a picture of a beautiful, blue Kentucky sky he couldn't answer why there wasn't a single con-trail anywhere. You hardly ever see one out here, and if you do it's probably military and pretty high up. If "they" are trying to kill us all then "they" are doing a poor job of it.
Disciple of the cross and champion in suffering
Immerse yourself into the kingdom of redemption
Pardon your mind through the chains of the divine
Make way, the shepherd of fire

Avenged Sevenfold "Shepherd of Fire"
User avatar
The Observer
Further Moderator
Posts: 7559
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2003 11:48 pm
Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by The Observer »

I have a brother-in-law who I recently discovered is a chemtrail conspiracy adherent. I spent about 15 minutes trying to show him the fallacy of the belief, only to realize I had spent about 14 minutes too long on this hopeless exercise.
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff

"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff
littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 7:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by littleFred »

JamesVincent wrote:If "they" are trying to kill us all then "they" are doing a poor job of it.
Indeed. But those are gubbmuntt statistics you are using, that say populations are growing. But troofers know the troof: the gubbmunts are killing us off, actually reducing populations, and are lying about population numbers.

There are photos of aircraft full of tanks like water barrels, connected by pipes and pumps. Troofers declare, "This proves chemtrails." Someone knowledgeable explains these are ballast tanks for aircraft testing, to see what would happen if all the passengers shifted to one side or the rear of the plane or whatever. Troofers declare, "He's obviously an insider, a shill, so he would say that wouldn't he."

Any argument with a troofer is a waste of time.
FatGambit
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 429
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 1:41 pm

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by FatGambit »

I usually just say 'if TPTB were really trying to control us through mass distribution of chemicals, there are far easier and cheaoer ways to distribute it than packing a plane full of chemicals and flying it from one end of the country to the other'.

That usually gets them ranting about fluride in the water supply mind you...

Some people you just cannot have a reasonable conversation with though, my possibly soon to be brother-in-law is one of these, if you share an opposing view, be prepared for a long night, he's not in the slightest bit freetard/troofer/conspiracy nut, but you could easily mistake him for one on any given day he's so dam argumentative.
User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 4287
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 6:02 am

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by grixit »

thing about contrails is jet engines are highly efficient so there's not much there but water vapor and CO2. Plus they're up in the sky. A more reasonable conspiracy would be one to make traditional, ground level smog more toxic. But i've never seen a conspiracy theory that says that the oxygenating additives in gasoline are actually intended to poison us.
Three cheers for the Lesser Evil!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4
User avatar
Gregg
Conde de Quatloo
Posts: 5631
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 5:08 am
Location: Der Dachshundbünker

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Gregg »

JamesVincent wrote:
littleFred wrote:It was only a survey, so quite cheap, but a waste of time and money. They asked atmospheric scientists about the existence of a "secret large-scale atmospheric program" (SLAP), and -- surprise, surprise, they all said, nope, there's no evidence for that.

A clear case of, "Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?"

Like all good conspiracy theories, the people best qualified to refute the evil-doing are the ones accused of committing it.
How do you prove a negative?

The biggest issue I've had trying to talk to chemtrail believers is that the absence of proof implies the proof. You can't prove that they don't exist? Then they must exist because you can't prove they don't and I know they do. One of my Facebook "friends" (who has since unfriended me and blocked me, shame, that) was a true believer. They were out to kill us all. When I took a picture of a beautiful, blue Kentucky sky he couldn't answer why there wasn't a single con-trail anywhere. You hardly ever see one out here, and if you do it's probably military and pretty high up. If "they" are trying to kill us all then "they" are doing a poor job of it.
The reason your picture is so pristine is because you're basically next door to Illuminati World Domination Headquarters in downtown Argillite. Go over a few counties and it looks like planes are playing tic-tac-do. Chem-Trails, my early favorite conspiracy and as my best friends know, the real reason I learned to fly in the first place.


(its also well established that weiner dogs are totally immune to chem-trails)
Supreme Commander of The Imperial Illuminati Air Force
Your concern is duly noted, filed, folded, stamped, sealed with wax and affixed with a thumbprint in red ink, forgotten, recalled, considered, reconsidered, appealed, denied and quietly ignored.
Skeleton
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2015 6:37 am
Location: Thailand

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Skeleton »

Heard of taking the piss....
ppi against statute barred debts
Postby Essential » Wed Aug 24, 2016 10:17 am

Hello

I have just passed the 6 year mark with bad debt. Are these now statute barred, as I am confused by the exact process.

I have read that if the debts are still being chased they are not statute barred, is this correct. Or is it correct that if the debtors have not managed to secure a payment in 6 years - the debt is statute barred?

Either way, if the debt is past 6 years and has just dropped off the CRA's files, can one chase PPI payments or if a ppi claim is made and the credit cards then take the payment against the card debt (even after 6 years if this is possible), does this then reset the clock and leave one with 6 years to deal with?

Many years ago I had an Abbey National mortgage. 6 years ago I had a santander CC and an overdraft both of which are not past the 6 year mark. If I were to claim PPI against the old Abbey National mortgage would any proceeds be seized against the bad OD and or CC debts, hence resetting the 6 years period?

Thanks

Essential
Essential
New Recruit
New Recruit

Posts: 19
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 12:18 pm
So they want to know if they can claim back any Payment Protection Insurance on a statute barred debt they have avoided paying. ActingLikeABanker likes this idea and sagely advises that they should be treated as two separate issues. Well he would if it means the door to some more free money opens. How he can advise that you should avoid admitting liability and avoid making any payment's but then be able to claim PPI on a debt you are refusing to admit liability for is a bit beyond me.
Hi,

Treat them as separate things, just because you did not fully pay an alleged debt you may still have paid PPI on the payments you did make.

As far as I am aware claiming PPI will not reset any statue barred clocks.

Kind of ironic that if you were paying PPI and then became unable to pay why did said payment protection insurance not kick in (well it did really just not for you ;) ).

They can chase them but as long as you neither accept liability or make a payment then the statue barred clock keeps ticking.

Certain ypes of debt can not be statue barred such as court fines, CCJ's etc.
Search the Certificated Enforcement Agent (Bailiff) Register
http://certificatedbailiffs.justice.gov ... dBailiffs/

Search the Financial Services (Debt Collection Agency) Register
https://register.fca.org.uk/
User avatar
actinglikeabanker
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Posts: 3069
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:55 pm
My understanding is you can indeed claim PPI on a debt, but it will be used to pay off any outstanding balance, and you would certainly have to admit liability.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played. :lol: :lol:
rumpelstilzchen
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2249
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Soho London

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by rumpelstilzchen »

"I do not recognise this debt but I do recognise the PPI payments."
How could that possibly fail? :shrug:
BHF wrote:
It shows your mentality to think someone would make the effort to post something on the internet that was untrue.
Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Normal Wisdom »

Last year I met a chap who wanted to reclaim the PPI premiums supporting a personal loan even though he admitted that he had asked the bank to include PPI and had made a claim on the policy when he lost his job!
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 8246
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: Random Freemanesque Babblings from idiots unable to sustain their own thread

Post by Burnaby49 »

Normal Wisdom wrote:Last year I met a chap who wanted to reclaim the PPI premiums supporting a personal loan even though he admitted that he had asked the bank to include PPI and had made a claim on the policy when he lost his job!
Could you explain to we non-British what you are talking about with this PPI/Liability stuff?
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs