Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[Bones]

You are correct and as per the No2 judgement above it was ordered



It took Michael following his claims of victory, many months to even mention what had really happend and what the real outcome was

http://self-realisation.com/equity/bank ... f-the-end/

Posted on 06/03/2015 by Anarcho-Mission
...As I was writing the above post, I received an email affirming that the chief land registrar has written to the trustees stating clearly that the void mortgage has been removed from the register. He has also confirmed that the new void mortgage [illegally created by a retired trustee and a district judge acting ultra vires] has not been registered and is still subject to our legal objection to its registration......

..... The chief land registrar will therefore know that he will also be added as an accessory after the fact, should he foolishly register another entirely illegal disposition, especially since its senior management long ago accepted that the land registry is legally bound to compensate the trustees for all the losses incurred as a direct result of the illegal and institutionalised registration of fraudulent mortgages.

What actual losses ?

[notorial dissent]

The email from Micheal O'Wah is indeed amusing, and not at all surprising, except that he actually sort of got around to admitting that his great legal case had come to naught. I am a bit surprised that the registry has not recorded the new, now legal, action, but I don't know how that august body operates, often blaming bureaucratic sloth is as good an excuse as not, since the document was by court order, I don't think there would be any wiggle room about accepting it. Courts here don't like doing it, but that doesn't stop them when one party is recalcitrant, or just plain stupid.

[Bones]

Michael O'Bernicia
2 hrs ·
It has come to my attention because of the well-meaning honesty of a genuine supporter of The Great British Mortgage Swindle, that there is a need for certain clarification, as to the reason why the film has not yet been released, despite notices on this page and elsewhere that it would take place well before now.

In the most simplistic terms, for legal reasons beyond our control, after several months of unsuccessful attempts to solve the problems with logic and reasoning, we had no choice but to completely re-edit the entire film, which has taken the best part of the last six months to complete.

Whilst the film is still around 72 hours away from being mastered for the imminent cinematic release, after a private test screening in Newcastle last month, I received the following reviews by text message, from two notoriously opinionated intellectuals, both of whom are well-known for being hard to impress:

"Very inspiring, well-researched and meticulously accurate. What a mind-fucking legal labyrinth!"
Chris from North Shields.

"It was dramatic, powerful and compelling. A very moving experience."
Nick from Heaton.

These responses were typical of everybody else who attended the test screening, at the end of which we witnessed a spontaneous round of applause, despite the fact that the film was still incomplete and suffering from technical problems.
It is our genuine intention to use the release of the film to galvanise the grass-roots movement that arose in the summer of 2009, by gathering together people from all races, creeds and colours in cinemas across Britain, to experience an emotional roller-coaster of a film, which transcends every divide, for one unchallengable reason.

The film proves, beyond any reasonable doubt, that in excess of eleven million UK mortgages are illegal, fraudulent and void ab initio; and that the institutionalised violent enforcement of mortgage fraud by all the queen's men is tantamount to genocide under international law.

For those who wish to attend the first preview of the new version of the film at the Savoy Cinema in Nottingham next Saturday, please click on the link below to book your tickets.

Nick and Chris obviously know even less about mortgages and the law than Mickey O'Berncia and Micky O'Deria

[Bones]

Nationwide release ??

Just who do they think they are kidding ? If you call the cinema the only reason it is showing the film is because the cinema has been privately - in other words the cinema is not showing the film like any other film because they think that people want to see it. They are showing it because they have been paid to show it and they receive the same amount it 100 people turn up or 1 person turns up...

Interesting the two micheals are also charges more per ticket that the cinema does to watch other films..... I wonder as the film has been reedited can the people that previously had to gift £10 to see it can ask for a refund

[notorial dissent]

So, in other words, the cinema version of vanity press.

[Firthy2002]

Pretty much. I wonder how many tickets have been purchased.

[#six]

Prices seem to start at £150 for children's parties. I'm sure this will have been booked as a "corporate event" and therefore will cost a fair bit more. I do wonder though if the Savoy are aware that tickets are being sold for the event or if they believe it to be a proper corporate event.

http://www.savoyonline.co.uk/SavoyNotti ... e?PageID=3

[aesmith]

In the most simplistic terms, for legal reasons beyond our control, after several months of unsuccessful attempts to solve the problems with logic and reasoning, we had no choice but to completely re-edit the entire film, which has taken the best part of the last six months to complete.

Not by any chance because someone told them it was all nonsense from beginning to end?

[rumpelstilzchen]

Amanda Pike wrote:

when peoples homes are unlawfully stolen

As opposed to being lawfully stolen?

[grixit]

Can't they just find a sympathizer with a 40" screen in their living room? Say $15 "donation" per showing * 20 attendees is $300 a week, give $50 to the host, you've got a source income. Maybe franchise the whole thing and combine it with Tupperware or one of those AMAZING NATURAL HEALTH SUPPLEMENTS and you've got a solid business model.

[The Observer]

Can't they just find a sympathizer with a 40" screen in their living room? Say $15 "donation" per showing * 20 attendees is $300 a week, give $50 to the host, you've got a source income. Maybe franchise the whole thing and combine it with Tupperware or one of those AMAZING NATURAL HEALTH SUPPLEMENTS and you've got a solid business model.

Seriously, would you invite a crowd of FOTLs into your home for $50? The legal costs to get them removed after they decide your house is theirs would far exceed the gained income. Heck, the cleaning fees alone to remove all of those unsightly stains is going to be more than $50.

[TheNewSaint]

This distribution pattern reminds me of Aaron Russo's America: Freedom to Fascism. The only screenings it ever saw were in privately rented theaters, where there was a local community of like-minded people to promote it, and buy enough tickets to offset the cost. And Russo had bonafide Hollywood credits, unlike these bozos. I can only imagine the UK cinema industry's indifference to this "release."

[exiledscouser]

Second only to the UK cinema going audience and their insatiable appetite for overpriced shite about mortgages - it'll run and run. In South Shields FFS.

Geordies being well known for their deep desire to sit through two hours of made-up ranty bollocks without even a tab break. And of course their lengthy attention spans.

This has been pedalled for years to universal indifference - didn't it get shown in Cannes? It's going to bomb.

[mufc1959]

In the most simplistic terms, for legal reasons beyond our control, after several months of unsuccessful attempts to solve the problems with logic and reasoning, we had no choice but to completely re-edit the entire film, which has taken the best part of the last six months to complete.

In other words, he was threatened with a libel suit if he didn't take something out of the film.

[littleFred]

Yes, but for "something" read "the entire film".

[Bones]

Oh Dear

Looks like the film is far from being a sell out. The day before the film is going to be shown, they are going hell for leather on EFOTB to promote it.







Will be funny if the ticket sales don't cover the cost of hiring the cinema

[hucknallred]

I'll be watching Forest lose to QPR otherwise I'd have gone for the amusement value. Surely we must have someone local who could pay a visit.

On a side note, the Savoy is one of very few independent Cinemas left & very good it is too, far cheaper than the multiplexes, the only problem was the old seats in Screen 1 which have now been upgraded.

[TheNewSaint]

Looks like the film is far from being a sell out. The day before the film is going to be shown, they are goinghell for leather on EFOTB to promote it.

Will be funny if the ticket sales don't cover the cost of hiring the cinema

Yeah, but IMHO, there's nothing unusual about any of that. All films are promoted aggressively on the eve of their release. They're promoting it to an audience likely to be interested. I'm sure they still have many tickets left to sell, but that's true of any movie not in the Star Wars class. And even if the showing is a net loss, they will likely see intangible benefits in the form of media attention, social media chatter, promotion for future screenings, etc.

[rumpelstilzchen]

I could be wrong but my guess is that the only people who are going to pay to watch this "epic step forward" will be people who have had their homes repossessed. At the end of the film what happens then?

[aesmith]

I could be wrong but my guess is that the only people who are going to pay to watch this "epic step forward" will be people who have had their homes repossessed. At the end of the film what happens then?

Either (a) They'll all go to the pub, try to avoid buying a round, and tell each other how badly they've been treated.
Or (b) the entire banking, mortgage and conveyancing system collapses, we all stop paying mortgages and get a free house.

I'm guessing (a).