Baron David Ward

[grixit]

Misrepresentation is an example of fraud because you *don't* have a contract to act on someone's part.

Liability arises if you use someone else's copyrighted or trademarked work because you *don't* have a contract to do so.

[SteveUK]

Whilst we could nitpick BDWs legal advice for an eternity, I find the simplest way is thus - do you now live in a DIY camper van?

[TheNewSaint]

Wow, its like he's trying to relive his glorious victories against Warrington Council.

[Wakeman52]

Wow, its like he's trying to relive his glorious victories against Warrington Council.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

There's also the question of implied terms in contracts of employment.

And from my days as a union work place rep, your employer can vary the terms of a contract as long as those changes are made known to you by posting those variations and making them available. Within certain safeguards. one's acceptance of an ongoing pay cheque amounts to acceptance of that variation. No further signature, wet or or otherwise, is required.

[longdog]

There's also the question of implied terms in contracts of employment.

And from my days as a union work place rep, your employer can vary the terms of a contract as long as those changes are made known to you by posting those variations and making them available. Within certain safeguards. one's acceptance of an ongoing pay cheque amounts to acceptance of that variation. No further signature, wet or or otherwise, is required.

As I understand it employers can make any changes they like but massive changes, like changing somebody from 9-to-5 shifts to night-shifts would be a fundamental breach conceivably leaving the employer open to legal action. In that example anybody who could not or would not change to night-shifts would have to be treated as being made redundant with all of the notice and redundancy pay that the law provides.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

As I understand it employers can make any changes they like but massive changes, like changing somebody from 9-to-5 shifts to night-shifts would be a fundamental breach conceivably leaving the employer open to legal action.

Yep. And it's what constitutes that substantive change that makes employment law so much fun! It's not all one way. Unwritten established customs and practices can also form part of the implied contract.

Note: In the interests of full disclosure, I am not claiming to be an expert in employment law. I did a work place rep refresher, had a copy of the union work place rep handbook and have been to two employment tribunals.

[John Uskglass]

And from my days as a union work place rep, your employer can vary the terms of a contract as long as those changes are made known to you by posting those variations and making them available. Within certain safeguards. one's acceptance of an ongoing pay cheque amounts to acceptance of that variation. No further signature, wet or or otherwise, is required.

Indeed. As a fellow former union rep, I can recall substantial contractual changes made by the employer that were deemed to be accepted by you turning up for work after they came into effect.

[TheNewSaint]

Predictably the great legal genius goes wrong immediately...

OBLIGATION: There is only one kind of obligation. An obligation is something you have agreed to do.

It takes him 50,000 words to get there, but Ward's screed boils down to the standard "everything is a contract" sovcit argument. Oh, and laws are null and void unless they are personally approved by all 64,000,000 UK citizens.

[He Who Knows]

Baron von Trampbeard cannot have written this anyway. It only has 2 spelling mistakes.

[Dr. Caligari]

OBLIGATION: There is only one kind of obligation. An obligation is something you have agreed to do. It is contract.

Not where I live:

1427. An obligation is a legal duty, by which a person is bound to do or not to do a certain thing.

(Enacted 1872.)

1428. An obligation arises either from:

One—The contract of the parties; or,

Two—The operation of law. An obligation arising from operation of law may be enforced in the manner provided by law, or by civil action or proceeding.

(Amended by Code Amendments 1873-74, Ch. 612.)

[longdog]

OBLIGATION: There is only one kind of obligation. An obligation is something you have agreed to do. It is contract.

Not where I live:

1427. An obligation is a legal duty, by which a person is bound to do or not to do a certain thing.

(Enacted 1872.)

1428. An obligation arises either from:

One—The contract of the parties; or,

Two—The operation of law. An obligation arising from operation of law may be enforced in the manner provided by law, or by civil action or proceeding.

(Amended by Code Amendments 1873-74, Ch. 612.)

You have to remember this a FMOTL of sorts and therefore selecting only the meaning you want for a word and discarding all the others is entirely normal

[NYGman]

OBLIGATION: There is only one kind of obligation. An obligation is something you have agreed to do. It is contract.

Not where I live:

1427. An obligation is a legal duty, by which a person is bound to do or not to do a certain thing.

(Enacted 1872.)

1428. An obligation arises either from:

One—The contract of the parties; or,

Two—The operation of law. An obligation arising from operation of law may be enforced in the manner provided by law, or by civil action or proceeding.

(Amended by Code Amendments 1873-74, Ch. 612.)

You have to remember this a FMOTL of sorts and therefore selecting only the meaning you want for a word and discarding all the others is entirely normal

No, no, no! You must know "or" means optional, and allow you to pick which is actually applicable. The "or" after One, means that two does not have to apply, as long as you have one, one is all that is needed. Don't you know the true power of a Freeman "or" and it isn't to row a boat.

[longdog]

No, no, no! You must know "or" means optional, and allow you to pick which is actually applicable. The "or" after One, means that two does not have to apply, as long as you have one, one is all that is needed. Don't you know the true power of a Freeman "or" and it isn't to row a boat.

You make it all so clear now... I've been a fool

[SteveUK]

Things not going well for ex home owner BDW.

A Day of devastation.

Two and a half years ago, knowing that the gov would steel my house. I took the precautions of removing a 30 year collection of tools. As most know I am an Engineer of multiple disciplines and you can imagine a garage full of tools of every description. Sockets and spanners in a role cab. Plumbing, Electrical. Electronics, Power tools, Welding sets, pedestal drill, Compressor. If you can think of it I had it. An Engineer is not an engineer without his tools.

I hired a Truck at a cost of £600 plus the fuel to do this. To keep my tools safe.

I spent best part of a year sorting my own Truck and haemorrhaging cash in the process to go and get my tools.
Buying more tools to sort the Truck and the Caravan. Tools that I know I have 250 miles away in a lockup garage. You can imagine how much that pissed me off.
Time turns and the big day comes where I can finally go and get my tools. It’s a 500 mile round trip. 10 hrs driving. Two tanks of fuel and this is what you find.

Devastation. The locks have been cut with a grinder, All my tools are gone.

Of course, he has to weave his paranoia into it.

We have to think of the Why. We know the reason why. We are all being screwed over for 85% £Gross by the Gove Bandits and thieves

[Siegfried Shrink]

Is it possible that he neglected to pay the rent on his lockup and the owners treated it as abandoned?

[SteveUK]

He surely couldn't be that stupid. Could he?

[longdog]

He surely couldn't be that stupid. Could he?

Rhetorical question?

[NYGman]

I would agree with non-payment as the root cause of the missing tools, 2 1/2 years is a long time to store something, and I am guessing he didn't pay for that length of time.

[longdog]

His tools weren't a 'person' so they had squatter's rights and etcetera.