Practical Lawful Dissent FMOTL antics, continued...

[TheNewSaint]

There's not a scrap of evidence any of them were 'enforced' other than some laughable 'legal notice' https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/fadada_4 ... 26685d.pdf

Its dated June 11, 2017? Have they really been at it almost a year alrrady? Time flies. And this is what, their second session?

[Mike_p]

This could be interesting! My hobby is filming wildlife, so I've got a collection of miniature high definition wildlife cameras that are activated by noise or movement. I live just the other side of Glastonbury, so, the other night I managed to sneak into a certain field and install cameras in strategic positions. Battery life on the cameras tends to be over a week depending on how much they get activated. I've got a variety of disguises for the cameras: hollowed out fence posts, logs, boulders and one with a telephoto mounted in a tree. I don't guarantee perfect video, but we should get a good view of who turns up from at least one camera!

In the dark I didn't see any signs of portaloos or anything like that being installed. One fear is that I don't want to have to look thru any footage of any of the attendees relieving themselves in the bushes (yuk!). On a serious note, if I do capture anything like that I will delete the footage immediately.

[Siegfried Shrink]

This is truly brilliant. If, as might happen, they got wind of this, they could spend the entire time searching logs and trees for nonexistant cameras--but are they? Bluff or double bluff? Only time will tell.

[aesmith]

Its dated June 11, 2017? Have they really been at it almost a year alrrady? Time flies. And this is what, their second session?

Just looking back I see that that Court 2 was also about John Smith, and in September last he he granted himself a decree forbidding the mortgage holder from taking any action against his house in Aberdeen. Result for common law. Or "the common law"
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/fadada_9 ... 2fe027.pdf

Fast forward to May 2018 and we have the same John Smith this time granting himself a court order for return of that same house. Does this mean the September decree was ineffective?
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/fadada_5 ... eecf47.pdf

[AndyPandy]

Its dated June 11, 2017? Have they really been at it almost a year alrrady? Time flies. And this is what, their second session?

Just looking back I see that that Court 2 was also about John Smith, and in September last he he granted himself a decree forbidding the mortgage holder from taking any action against his house in Aberdeen. Result for common law. Or "the common law"
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/fadada_9 ... 2fe027.pdf

Fast forward to May 2018 and we have the same John Smith this time granting himself a court order for return of that same house. Does this mean the September decree was ineffective?
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/fadada_5 ... eecf47.pdf

Think this must be the one, notice the key indicator of an eviction- the metal shuttered door !

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/house-prices ... y=scotland

[Siegfried Shrink]

"I'll Huff and I'll Puff and I'll blow your house down", said the Big Bad Smith.

But alas, the house was made of bricks and the Big Bad Smith went home hungry.

Only to find his home had been sold and he was out in the cold.

[Hercule Parrot]

Ray St Clair -
Secondly, I feel sure that if the above is true then the real fun and games starts when 'the council' don't show up and the common law courts issue 'arrest warrants' to drag their sorry arses out of bed at 6AM to be taken into custody and be brought before the courts or held until such times as the court can be convened.

This st. clair?:
http://www.realscam.com/f11/ray-st-clair-real-story-49/

The same. A sociopathic serial huckster and fraud, this is not his first attempt to enter & monetise the UK FMOTL racket. In 2011 for example he appointed himself the leader of a mob at Roger Hayes' bankruptcy hearing (final photo,
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... judge.html).

The return of Ray St Clair is great news for us.

[aesmith]

More people questioning the Common Law Court fad ..

Robert White I am considering using the Common Court route to expose the wrongdoing of senior officers of my Local Authority but so far cannot identify a single Common Court decision which has been successfully enforced. I note the Scottish Common Court found in favour of John Smith yet John never successfully enforced that decision other than to notify the defendant she was "in dishonor".. Are you able to confirm a single enforceable success anywhere within the UK?

Robert Pickthall not at the moment mate it's early days, as I said we need to get more people involved.

[Siegfried Shrink]

It seems entirely possible to me that the more people who get involved, the more sceptical people will get involved, since it seems to me pretty hard not to see just how pointless the idea is.

[notorial dissent]

The more public it all becomes, the more laughter and ridicule it will rightly gain.

[longdog]

Robert Pickthall not at the moment mate it's early days, as I said we need to get more people involved.

More people... True enough I suppose... Another 60 million should do the job.

[longdog]

Hayley Bonnell

Perhaps we can post this Court Order in as many truther groups as possible and get them all on board as officers of the court, sheriffs etc...there are thousands of people awake now across Facebook and social media

I'm sure officers of the court and sheriffs will be falling over themselves to throw their careers down the toilet by enforcing these Fisher Price Play Court judgements.

[longdog]

Things not going well these days with fraudulent Direct Debit refunds...

Brian Varney

Ok, the banks are closing ranks and are also ignoring the Lawful as well as their own legal shit.
I am unlawfully forced and bullied into paying a tax for using my car on the public highways, highway robbery at its best. I have had to pay it via direct debit for the last 14 month as this was the way I thought I could use their system against them as I have previously done it with TV licence.
The direct debit indemnity guarantee quotes the following:

Direct Debit Guarantee

Your rights

Organisations using the Direct Debit Scheme go through a careful vetting process before they're authorised, and are closely monitored by the banking industry. The efficiency and security of Direct Debit is monitored and protected by your own bank or building society.

<snip>


If you receive a refund you are not entitled to, you must pay it back when the organisation asks you to

You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by simply contacting your bank or building society. Written confirmation may be required. Please also notify the organisation.

So, Lloyds Bank required me to give them the information as to why the direct debit was "incorrect". According to our guarantee, they only need to be told that it is incorrect and no other information need be divulged. Lloyds say they have a list of criteria that we have to divulge to them so they may simply be judge jury and executioner. This is not what the direct debit guarantee says.

They lie and cheat and make up their own rules. Rules that have clearly been manufactured to close ranks and stop us fighting back.

Jacqueline Wray
Debbie Smiley
Ross (no surname)

Will be put on notice of aiding and abetting a treasonous tyrannical "government"

TAX IS THEFT............

It's nice to see the banks are starting to get wise to these thieving fuckwits and clamping down on their bullshit. Brian probably doesn't realise it but Lloyds may well have saved him from serious criminal charges.

I'm sure Jacqueline, Debbie and Ross Nosurname will be quaking in their boots at the treason notice... File under B.

[Siegfried Shrink]

They lie and cheat and make up their own rules.

This from someone who admits he intended to lie and cheat about the DD payments.

This is irony with a brass neck.

[longdog]

I wonder how many of these people have children and for those who do have offspring then I wonder what sort of moral code they teach them.

My old man was nothing if not a pragmatist and he taught me that lying, cheating and deceiving were tools that a wise man used very sparingly and a fool used all the time. What of the poor sods raised by a Footler?

[The Seventh String]

So the unlawful nasty evil bank is preventing him from rendering his car untaxed, to be followed by the state seizing and crushing said untaxed car sorry “private personal conveyance” and fining him lots of money?

What an unreasonable, anti-social bunch of bankers they are.

[ArthurWankspittle]

The direct debit indemnity guarantee quotes the following:

Direct Debit Guarantee

Your rights

<snip>


If you receive a refund you are not entitled to, you must pay it back when the organisation asks you to

You can cancel a Direct Debit at any time by simply contacting your bank or building society. Written confirmation may be required. Please also notify the organisation.

So, Lloyds Bank required me to give them the information as to why the direct debit was "incorrect". According to our guarantee, they only need to be told that it is incorrect and no other information need be divulged. Lloyds say they have a list of criteria that we have to divulge to them so they may simply be judge jury and executioner. This is not what the direct debit guarantee says.

To be correct in this interpretation you would have to prove that it is an absolute right to get your DD payment back under any circumstances on your own say so. Banks would argue that they are just saving the effort of giving you back your DD payments only to collect them back the next nanosecond. Also there is no definition of "when" in "when the organisation asks you to" so they could ask in advance if you want to be pedantic.

[Hercule Parrot]

Brian Varney needs to read the Direct Debit Guarantee more carefully. The key sentence is.... "If an error is made in the payment of your Direct Debit, by the organisation or your bank or building society, you are entitled to a full and immediate refund...."

Brian thinks that the sending bank only had to be told by their customer that a payment was incorrect and no other information needed to be divulged in order to carry out a fraudulent clawback. Perhaps that was previously true, but the FMOTL freeloaders have abused this trust too often.

Nothing in the Direct Debit Guarantee prevents the sending bank from reaching their own view of whether an error has actually been made, or to decline refund if they are not satisfied of this. We'll be seeing another harvest of failed Ombudsman cases soon.

[notorial dissent]

It comes under the heading of "if you gave the authorization" then it is hard for it to be a mistake. That seems to be the bit they don't get. These things just usually don't spontaneously happen. Fraud is one thing, you giving signing an authorization ISN'T!!

[longdog]

What we need is a widely publicised fraud conviction for one of these DD reclaimers... Something with a nice long jail sentence.